（英语语言文学专业论文）“输入输出假说”在外语教学中的理解和验证.pdf

descriptive chinese abstract i 摘 要 摘 要 二语习得理论针对二语习得环境而提出，对外语教学具有一定的指导意义，在我国 外语教学中影响较大的当属 krashen 的“监控理论” （monitor theory） 。 “监控理论” 中的五个假说习得学得假说、 自然顺序假说、 监控假说、 输入假说和情感过滤假说， 从不同层面解释了二语习得的过程及情况。其中“输入假说”强调可理解的语言输入在 语言习得中起着至关重要的作用，对我国外语教学产生了积极的影响。但“输入假说” 未能涉及语言输出在二语习得中的作用，输入后的语言吸入（intake）情况必然从输出 的语言中得到反应和验证。swain 对“输入假说”做出了补充，提出了“输出假说” 。她 认为单凭语言输入不能保证语言的成功习得， 语言学习者在接受语言输入的同时应进行 语言输出活动，两者交互作用才能确保语言习得的成功发生。语言输入、输出具有语言 学和认知心理学基础，输入、输出的行为可从语言学和认知心理学角度做出解说。 基于以上认识，本研究通过比较二语习得和外语学习的差异，探讨了“输入假说” 和“输出假说”作用于二语习得和外语学习效率的异同，重点讨论了外语教学中的输入 和输出的操作原理，并依据“输入输出假说” ，提出一种“输入输出”外语教学模 式。这一模式强调输入和输出在外语学习中的相互作用，论及怎样实现语言输入渠道的 多样化，怎样优化输入的语言，怎样通过分层次的语言输出，才能达到熟练运用目的语 的目的。本研究论及的语言输出既包括口头输出，也包括笔头输出，前者一般可在课内 完成，而后者多在课外实现。为检验该模式在外语教学实践中的运行情况和实际效应， 作者使用构想模式在大学英语教学中进行了为期一个学期的教学实验，验证了：优化输 入的语言，实施分层次的语言输出，可改变输出的语言的质量。本研究还对实验班与平 行班进行了检测，通过对比证实了该模式有利于提高学生的整体语言水平，增强他们运 用语言的能力。 本研究的结论是：二语习得和外语学习之间存在种种联系，更存在着本质差别，我 们在外语教学中应客观地对待二者，科学地处理二者的关系。 “输入输出假说”针对 二语习得环境而提出，但对我国的外语教学具有积极意义。外语教师在借鉴输入输出 理论来指导我国的外语教学时， 应根据外语学习与二语习得之间的差别及我国外语教学 的实际，探索适合我国外语教学的方法和模式。教师在教学中既要重视为学生提供足够 的语言输入，更要重视学生的语言输出，充分发挥输入与输出之间的交互作用。为保证 descriptive chinese abstract ii 学生得到足够的语言输入，外语教师应改善语言输入的环境，增加语言输入的数量，精 选输入的语言材料， 精心设计教学语言， 强化语言的加工过程。 为保证学生的语言输出， 应在课堂上实施互动式教学，创造真实的交际环境，提供语言交际的最佳话题，加强师 生之间和学生之间的交流，以此来保证和提高目的语语言输出的质量，达到提高教学效 果的目的。 关键词：输入输出假说；外语教学； “输入输出”教学模式关键词：输入输出假说；外语教学； “输入输出”教学模式 english abstract iii abstract theories of second language acquisition (sla) are presented to describe the nature of the linguistic categories that constitute the learners interlanguage at any point in development and explain why the learner develops the particular linguistic categories that he does. they have also played certain roles in foreign language teaching and learning. krashens monitor theory (mt) is the most influential in the foreign language teaching (flt) in china. krashen emphasizes that comprehensible input plays a key role in language acquisition, but he does not address the role of output in language acquisition. the intake of input needs to be reflected and testified in output, so swain puts forward the output hypothesis as a complement to krashens claim. in the output hypothesis, comprehensible output is regarded as an essential factor to language acquisition. swain states that both comprehensible input and output can guarantee successful language acquisition. the objective of this study is to explore the different roles of input and output hypotheses in second language acquisition and foreign language learning, with the focus on the operational principle of input and output in foreign language teaching. taking place in different settings, foreign language learning (fll) differs a great deal from second language acquisition in quite a few ways. based on the knowledge of input-output hypothesis and the particular conditions for foreign language learning in china, the author presents an input-output model for foreign language teaching. in this model, the interaction between input and output is emphasized in foreign language learning. learners output includes oral production and written production, and involves output in class and after class. the author carried out an experiment in college english teaching to test the operation and effectiveness of the model. the results show that the proposed model is conducive to improving learners overall proficiency of the target language. it is concluded that there are great differences between second language acquisition and foreign language learning. we must deal with the relationship between them in an objective and scientific way. although input and output hypotheses have positive effects on chinas foreign language teaching, we cannot apply the theories of input and output to foreign language teaching directly. but we can draw implications for the foreign language teaching in china. in the practice of teaching, both input and output should be emphasized. we should try to increase the quantity and improve the quality of input, and provide more opportunities of english abstract iv input and output for learners. thus, we should create interactive classrooms, in which natural environment of communication and suitable communicative topics for interaction are offered. isnteractions between the teacher and the students and interactions between the students are also strongly recommended. consequently, the quality of learners production and the efficiency of foreign language teaching can be improved. key words: input-output hypothesis; foreign language teaching and learning; input-output model of flt chapter 1 introduction 1 chapter 1 introduction 1.1 background of the study second language acquisition research began to be recognized as an independent discipline during the 1970s, the point at which the technique grammatical morphemes research was used to work for sla by dulay and burt (1973). with the development of the sla research, a plethora of theories have been proposed. they describe and explain language acquisition from different perspectives and also exert some influences on second and foreign language teaching. among the theories of sla, krashens monitor theory (krashen 1981, 1982, 1985; krashen and terrell 1983), especially the input hypothesis, has been the most widely studied and applied in second and foreign language teaching. enlightened by mt, language educators have created a variety of approaches and techniques to facilitate second language acquisition and foreign language learning. however, among the recent methods and techniques proposed in the literature to potentially facilitate second and foreign language learning, increasing attention has been paid to the role of output (swain, 1995; izumi et al., 1999; izumi and bigelow, 2000). the foreign language teaching in china has a history of more than 140 years, and the efficiency of foreign language teaching have always been a hot issue in the circle of foreign language teaching. traditional theories and approaches of foreign language teaching in china attached great importance to the study on how to teach and the result of learning. researchers and language educators paid much attention to the design of teaching methods and models and the compilation of textbooks, but neglected the effect of learners internal and external factors in the process of learning. as a result, the foreign language teaching in china was characterized as time-consuming and ineffective. in recent years, with the guidance of sla theories and other disciplines, researchers and language educators have shifted their focus from the study on how to teach to the study on how to teach learners to learn. they pay more attention to learners internal and external factors in the process of learning. the cultivation of learners communicative competence is also emphasized in the circle of foreign language teaching. in order to improve the efficiency of language teaching, researchers and language educators have introduced the theories of sla from abroad, and drawn implications from chapter 1 introduction 2 them for the foreign language teaching in china (e.g. 胡文仲，1984；靳洪刚，1997；蒋祖 康，1999；etc.). however, there are some abnormal phenomena in the research concerning sla theories and the foreign language teaching in china. some researchers and language educators completely accept sla theories and try to utilize them to explain the foreign language learning and guide the foreign language teaching in china. they expect learners to reach the native-like proficiency of the target language as second language (l2) learners do. whereas some researchers and language educators totally reject sla theories and deny any role of sla theories in chinas foreign language teaching. as a result, they fail to achieve their teaching objectives. it is necessary to contrast foreign language learning with second language acquisition and list the differences between them. only in this way can we utilize the theories of sla to guide the foreign language teaching in china. 1.2 objectives and methods this study aims to explore krashens input hypothesis and swains output hypothesis and their interpretation and verification in the foreign language teaching in china. the research questions to be addressed in the study are the following: (1) do input and output have the same roles in second language acquisition and foreign language learning? (2) what are the implications of input-output hypothesis on foreign language teaching? (3) what are the roles of input and output in foreign language learning? (4) how will foreign language teachers increase the quantity and improve the quality of both input and output? to achieve these objectives, the author uses such methods as retrospect, contrast, experiment, and interview to make the study. 1.3 overall structure of the thesis the current chapter is a general introduction to the whole thesis. it introduces the background, motivations, objectives and methods of the study. the remaining chapters are as follows: chapter 2, literature review, establishes the theoretical framework of the study through reviewing the relevant literature. chapter 3, contrasts between sla and fll, elaborates on the differences between l2 acquisition and foreign language learning by way of contrasting from learners internal and chapter 1 introduction 3 external factors. chapter 4, principles of flt, addresses the principles of foreign language teaching which are required to follow in the practice of teaching. in chapter 5, an experimental study of the roles of input and output in flt, the author presents an input-output model of foreign language teaching and examines the effectiveness of the model in an experimental way. in the last part of the thesis, conclusion, the author concludes the study and makes some suggestions for future research. chapter 2 literature review 4 chapter 2 literature review 2.1 a general introduction to krashens monitor theory krashens monitor theory (a full account is available in krashen, 1981, 1982, 1985; krashen and terrell, 1983) has enjoyed considerable prominence in sla research. in so far as it is probably the most comprehensive of existing theories. it is composed of five hypotheses: acquisition-learning, natural order, monitor, input and affective filter hypotheses. the acquisition-learning hypothesis states that there are two independent ways of learning a second language (l2): acquisition and learning. “acquisition” refers to the subconscious process used by children developing their first language; “learning” is a conscious process, which results in a separate system of simple grammar rules, or knowledge about the l2. the natural order hypothesis affirms that l2 rules are acquired in a predicable order, one apparently not determined solely by linguistic complexity, and certainly not by the order in which the items appear in teaching syllabuses. acquisition orders, that is, do not reflect instructional sequences. the monitor hypothesis encapsulates the relationship posited between the acquired and learned systems during l2 performance. the acquired system is the utterance initiator, with the learned system acting in a planning, editing and correcting function when three conditions are met: (1) when there is time (i.e. a task is unspeeded), (2) when the learner is focused on form (usually, during a discrete-point grammar test), and (3) (obviously) when the learner knows the rule. the input hypothesis attempts to explain how a learner acquires a l2. krashen calls it the central claim of mt. it maintains that a l2 is acquired through processing comprehensible input (ci), i.e. language that is heard or read and understood. language that is not understood does not help; it is too advanced, just noise in the system. the affective filter hypothesis embodies krashens view that various affective factors, including motivation, self-confidence and anxiety, play a facilitative, but non-causal role in sla. lack of motivation, low self-confidence, debilitating anxiety, and so on, krashen (1982:31) claims, can combine to “raise the filter”, to form a “mental block”, which prevents ci from reaching the language acquisition device (lad), and thereby from being used for chapter 2 literature review 5 acquisition. a negative affective disposition (a filter that is “up”) constitutes a constraint on the successful workings of ci. put it another way, positive affect is necessary, but not sufficient, for sla. krashen (1985) states that people acquire languages only if they obtain comprehensible input and if their affective filters are low enough to allow the input “in”. in other words, ci, plus a “low affective filter”, is necessary and sufficient for sla. krashen recognizes this when he asserts “comprehensible input is the essential ingredient for sla, all other factors thought to encourage or cause sla to work only when they contribute to comprehensible input and /or a low filter” (krashen, 1985:4). 2.2 swains output hypothesis krashen emphasizes the contribution of input to the success of language acquisition, but denies the role of output in language acquisition. as a complement to the input hypothesis, swain put forward the output hypothesis, in which the learner production (i.e. output) is regarded as a key factor to language acquisition. the output hypothesis was first proposed in 1985 (swain, 1985). swain argues that learners need the opportunity for meaningful use of their linguistic resources to achieve full grammatical competence. she states that when learners experience communicative failure, they are pushed into making their output more precise, coherent, and appropriate. she also argues that production may encourage learners to move from semantic (top-down) to syntactic (bottom-up) processing. whereas comprehension of a message can take place with little syntactic analysis of the input, production forces the learner to pay attention to the forms with which intended messages are expressed. in this process, output is hypothesized to promote language acquisition by making learners recognize problems in their interlanguage (il) and promoting learners to do something about those problems. for example, the learners will seek out relevant input with more focused attention, search for alternative means to express the given intention and stretch their il capacity, formulate and test a hypothesis, and modify it upon receiving feedback (izumi and bigelow, 2000). it is important to recognize that the output hypothesis by no means negates the importance of input. its intention is to complement and reinforce, rather than replace, input-based approaches to language acquisition so that learners will gain more than what is required for comprehension. chapter 2 literature review 6 2.3 the role of input in sla ellis (1985: 127) uses input to refer to the language that is addressed to the l2 learner either by a native speaker or by another l2 learner. it is a common sense that if l2 acquisition is to take place, the learner need to have access to the input in the target language. although the role of input in language acquisition is a controversial question, “all theories of l2 acquisition acknowledge the need of input” (ellis, 1994: 243). 2.3.1 different views on the role of input in sla ellis (1985: 127-129) distinguished three different views about the role of input: the behaviorist, the mentalist, and the interactionist. the behaviorist theorists emphasize the importance of the linguistic environment, which is treated in terms of stimuli and feedback. they hold that the whole process of acquisition can be controlled by presenting learners with input in the right amount and encouraging them to practice the target language forms in it. the mentalist accounts of l2 acquisition emphasize the importance of the learners black box. although input is still seen as essential for l2 acquisition, it is seen as only a trigger that activates the learners internal mechanisms. the interactionist view sees language development as the result of both input factors and innate mechanisms. language acquisition derives from the collaborative efforts of the learner and his interlocutors and involves a dynamic interplay between external and internal factors. the third view proved more tenable and acceptable. 2.3.2 comprehensible input and sla comprehensible input was regarded as a major causative factor in l2 acquisition by many researchers. the most influential theoretical views are those proposed by krashen and long (ellis, 1994). krashen (1982; 1985) postulates that, development from a learners current stage of il, i, to the next stage, i1, is achieved through the learner comprehending language which contains linguistic items at i1. comprehension is of prime importance in order for the input to become intake, i.e. data taken in or assimilated by the learner and used by the learner to promote il development. in order to understand the items in the input not yet in the il grammar, the learner makes use of simplification, and contextual and extralinguistic clues. krashen stresses that the learners focus of attention during the process is not on the new forms, but on the message being communicated. there is some evidence that global linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers improve comprehensibility. chapter 2 literature review 7 krashen (1985) indicates that, with consideration of first language acquisition, people speak to children in special ways such as motherese or caretaker talk, which gives them the qualities of comprehensible input; similarly, people speak to l2 learners in special ways such as teacher talk and foreigner talk, wh