英语硕士毕业论文开题报告参考格式.doc

四川外语学院2008级硕士研究生毕业暨学位论文计划姓名专业方向导师题目 语块的背诵与模仿对英语专业学生口语流利性提高的实证研究Using Memorization and Imitation of Formulaic Chunks to Enhance Oral English Fluency for English Majors：an Empirical Study主要论点：The practice of teaching formulaic chunks through memorization and imitation is helpful in enhancing students oral English fluency. 文献综述、主要内容、研究方法、难点重点：Literature Review:1. The Concepts1.1. Defining Oral FluencyEnglish teachers have often claimed that fluency is a difficult concept to define. According to Derwing et al. (2004), the difficulty in achieving a definition lies in the fact that fluency encompasses many aspects of language. Hartmann & Stork (1976) suggest that “a person is said to be a fluent speaker of a language when he can use its structures accurately whilst concentrating on content rather than form, using the units and patterns automatically at normal conversational speed when they are needed.” Brumfit (1984) feels that fluency is “to be regarded as natural language use.” Richard et al. (1985) maintain that fluency is “the features which give speech the qualities of being natural and normal, including native-like use of pausing, rhythm, intonation, stress, rate of speaking, and use of interjections and interruptions.” Considering native speakers oral production, Fillmores (1979) identifies four abilities that might be subsumed under the term fluency, the first of which is the ability to talk at length with few pauses. The three other abilities include the ability to talk in coherent, reasoned, and “semantically dense sentences”, the ability to have appropriate things to say in a wide range of contexts, and finally the ability to be creative and imaginative in language use (p. 93). To give oral fluency a definition, we need to take two issues into consideration. How fast must speech be to be considered fluent? To what extent can formal accuracy affect fluency? With these issues in mind, we arrive at the working definition in this study: Fluency is the ability to talk at length with few pauses with a certain degree of formal accuracy. 1.2. Defining Formulaic ChunksWray (2000) describes formulaic chunks as sequences, continuous or discontinuous, of words or other meaning elements, which are, or appear to be, prefabricated that are, stored and retrieve whole from memory at the time of use, rather than being subject to generation or analysis by the language grammar. Although formulaic sequences are prefabricated in nature, they include tightly idiomatic patterns, such as Rolling stone gathers no moss and more flexible patterns containing slots for open class items such as have a wonderful evening; wonderful can be substituted with pleasant or nice. There are different models of categorizing formulaic chunks. The widely accepted one is Lewiss and Moons taxonomy Lewiss (1997) taxonomy includes four categories namely: polywords, collocations, institutionalized utterances and sentences frames.1.3. Defining Meme Memes are self-replicating units of culture such as tunes, ideas, catchphrases, fashions and so forth. Memes dont only leap from mind to mind by imitation. They thrive, multiply, and compete within our minds (Dawkins, 1976). A meme is a unit of imitation. Anything that can be passed from one person to another through imitation is an example of a meme (Blackmore, 1999). Language is the principal medium used for spreading memes from one person to another. In human society, almost any cultural entity can be seen as a meme, language is no exception (Blackmore, 1999). A group of memes can work together and be transferred together to reinforce each other. Such a group of memes is called memeplex (Dawkins, 1976). As a replicator, meme has three qualities: longevity, fecundity and copying fidelity (Dawkins, 1976). The meme replication consists of four stages: assimilation, retention, expression and transmission. In order to be successful, a meme must meet the selection criteria and pass through all four stages. 2. Research on Oral Fluency from Different Perspectives2.1. Fluency and Automatic Processing: the Psychological PerspectiveThere is a great deal of literature which focuses on the distinction between automatic and controlled processing. Anderson posits that automatic processing causes certain nodes of memory to activate every time certain appropriate types of input occur. Consistent activation in a particular pattern by the same type of input leads over time to a learned, automatic process (Anderson, 1983). This process is extremely rapid and requires little or no effort or attention. It also helps to compensate for the limitations of short-term memory capacity by allowing direct access to and retrieval from long-term memory. On the other hand, controlled processing is described as a response in which attention by the speaker is required. Fluency research has determined that automatic and controlled processing is a vital part of an explanation of how fluent speech occurs. Specifically, it appears that automatization of elements of language enables speakers to achieve the speed and pause patterns which characterize fluent speech. Research into fluent performance in other language abilities, such as reading, also indicates that automatic processing is key (Segalowitz, 2000). 2.2. Fluency and Formulaic Chunks: the Corpus-based Psycholinguistic PerspectiveHow do speakers manage, in much less than a second, to retrieve appropriate words from a vocabulary of 30,000 items and to slot them into a syntactic structure? Corpus-based psycholinguistic studies have thus far demonstrated that the speaker is assisted by storing recurrent strings of words in the form of preassembled chunks, in which the syntax is ready-made (Ellis, N, 2008). They play an aiding role in controlling the nature and flow of information, allowing time for a continuing flow of speech to occur while the conscious mind is focused elsewhere in the communication process (Wood, 2007). Wood (2001) points out that the pervasive nature of formulaic language units has been documented extensively. He cites Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992) who propose that formulaic units called lexical phrases can provide frames and strings to help build sentences and increase speed of speech. Wood also mentions Chambers (1998) who suggests that formulaic language units are what allow L2 learners to increase the length of fluent runs between pauses. This knowledge can take us far in the direction of teaching fluency. Wood suggests that given the considerable importance of formulaic language units in speech, it follows that teaching must somehow work to facilitate the acquisition of formulaic competence, including automatization. Nattinger also argues that our teaching would center on the formulaic patterns and the ways they can be pieced together. 2.3. Fluency and Exemplar Models: the psycholinguistic perspectiveExemplar models or instance-based theories propose that we acquire our L1 by assembling multiple traces of the encounters we have had with speakers. For example, a child learns to place and ing form after enjoy, a to infinitive after want and a simple stem after can because multiple exposures to these patterns are recorded in the childs mind. Exemplar theory views second language acquisition as potentially implicit and incidental, emergentist, example based, and sensitive to relative frequency (Field, 2008). Logan (1988), Robinson and Ha (1993) regard fluency is based on contextually-coded exemplars. These exemplars can function as units, which are now stored in exemplar form, and which require far less processing capacity, since such exemplars are retrieved and used as a whole. 3. Pedagogical Approaches to Formulaic Chunks3.1. Lexical-phrase approachThe book Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching by Nattinger and DeCarrico focuses on lexical chunks role in language and its applications for pedagogy. Particularly, it illustrates how a lexical-phrase approach offers efficient solutions to teach speaking, reading and writing in the language classroom. According to Nattinger and DeCarrico(1992), instruction should center on these lexical phrases and the ways they can be assembled together, along with the ways they vary and the situations in which they occur. Besides, the functions associated with common lexical phrases should be emphasized, and hence, teachers should use a functional schema for organizing instruction. Nattinger and DeCarrico emphasize that “teaching speaking means teaching conversation rather than teaching isolated pieces of phonics and syntax, and that conversation is discourse that is formed through social interaction” (Nattinger& DeCarrico, 1992, p.113). Thus, lexical phrases with interactional functions are very helpful in teaching conversation. Context is emphasized while teaching conversation.In addition, Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992,p.116) also propose the following teaching steps:1) Pattern practice drills using fixed routines to develop oral fluency.2)Controlled variation using substitution drills to demonstrate that the chunks learned previously are not invariable routines, but are instead patterns with open slots3) Increased variation allowing learners to analyze the pattern further.3.2. Lexical ApproachMichael Lewis lexical approach, which challenges the traditional view of dividing language into grammar and vocabulary. Lewis believes that language is grammaticalised lexis, not lexicalized grammar (Lewis, 1993). In other words, lexis plays central part in creating meaning,while grammar plays a subservient role. Thus, teachers should spend most time helping learners develop their stock of lexical chunks, instead of paying much attention to grammatical structures. In his book Lexical Approach and Implementing Lexical Approach: Theory and Practice, Lewis provides teachers with many sample activities. Most activities are receptive, and Lewis argues that the primary purpose of teaching activities is to raise students awareness of lexical chunks and develop learnersability to produce multi-word lexical chunks as unanalyzed wholes. Additionally, The teachers role is to select appropriate input and create a low-anxiety learning circumstance. Lewis also uses the Observe-Hypothesis-Experiment teaching paradigm to replace the traditional Present-Practice-Produce paradigm. Under this new paradigm, learners are encouraged to learn independently.4. Theoretical Foundation of this Study4.1. Memorization & Imitation and Successful English LearnersGood language learner studies form an important part of second language acquisition research. Through observations, interviews, questionnaire surveys and other methods, researchers try to identify successful learners and the learning strategies can be introduced to all learners. Ellis (1994) points out these studies do provide good insights into the kinds of behavior associated with successful language learning. Yanren Ding (2007) reports interviews with three successful learners. All three learners mentioned they had benefited a lot from the practice of memorization and imitation. A similar study conducted by Tun-Whei Chuo points out that the participants, representatives of good English learners in Taiwanese EFL context, engaged constantly in formal practicing, especially repeating and imitation. (Chuo, 2008)4.2. ACT ModelsAndersons ACT model of skill learning tries to provide an explanation for the way that immediate experience may be converted to automatic long-term memory routines ( The underlying purpose of repetition in WM) (Anderson, 1983). It proposes two types of long term memory, the declarative and the procedural. Andersons ACT models postulate that a novice in any form of expertise starts out with a form of declarative knowledge (knowledge that) with becomes transformed through practice into procedural knowledge (knowledge how). Anderson treats L2 proficiency as a form of expertise that has to be developed over time. In the ACT models, practice brings two particular benefits, which serve to reduce the demands on a language users working memory. Firstly, single steps within a larger operation become combined. One way of representing this in language learning is in terms of building discrete lexical items into chunks. Secondly, and very importantly, the steps become increasingly automatic until they make minimal demands on the attention of the performer (Field, 2008). For the conversion of declarative knowledge into procedural knowledge to occur, repetition in one form or another is needed. Studies on psychology has suggested that the repetition of language in the WM either through exposure to large amounts of naturally occurring data as happens in language acquisition or to selected data in targeted language instruction, is one of the principle ways that material is passed to LTM and stored ( Randall, 2007). As such, to teach second language learners in an oral English classroom rather than a naturalistic setting, we need to give them a targeted rehearsal task in which sufficient repetition can be provided. Memorization and imitation, which characterizes traditional Chinese learning approach, functions to provide the repetition needed for procedualization to take place.3. Formulaic MemesMemetics has provoked a rethinking of our current EFL teaching methods, bringing the practice of memorization and imitation back into our view. He Ziran (2007) points out: The materials learnt by heart in his childhood, Chinese or English can still replicate in mind and be put to use in communication now. Today, when people are overenthusiastic about using analytical, more inspirational teaching approaches, memorization, this time-honored teaching method has been abandoned. We need to consider now whether we are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. From the memetic perspective, formulaic chunks as the basic units of language are memes per se. As mentioned in the concept part, they are multi-word units which work together, are transferred together, stored and retrieved together. They are memeplexes or formulaic memes. The classroom teaching of formulaic chunks then can be regarded as the process during which formulaic memes replicate and are transferred among teachers and students. To make the formulaic memes successful, our task is to facilitate their replication and help them survive the selection. It goes without saying then memorization and imitation is the teaching method of choice. 主要内容This paper addresses the issue: Why is it that English is so difficult to learn well at school in the Chinese context since a language is learnable by a baby? Although this issue has been discussed by researchers from different perspectives such as the Universal Grammar, we are not anywhere nearer the answer thus far. UG seems to create more controversies than solutions with respect to L2 learning and has little to say about EFL teaching. In this paper, I would like to argue that, if one wants to learn EFL well, a good beginning is crucial, as is determined the nature of language learning.Two outstanding features of language learning are illuminating. First, achievement in L2 learning depends largely on learners affective state. Pronunciation, which is the first thing to learn, bears a close relationship with affect. Second, the single most important motivation behind the need for a language is its use for communication and language use is context-dependent. Fluent and accurate use of the L2 presupposes that L2 forms need be contextually marked. Mismatch between form and context in the mental representation would render language use ineffective. The crux of the matter is that pronunciation learning and form-contex-t matching inexorably occur in learners first experience of a foreign language.To support the above arguments, empirical research has been conducted to adduce evidence for the role of pronunciation and context in EFL learning. For the pronunciation learning issue, a summary is given of five studies that have looked into the relationships between English pronunciation, self-concept, and English achievements. The participants in the studies varied in their levels of English proficiency and came from different high schools that were located in four provinces in China. Despite these differences, consistently high correlations were found between the pronunciation self-concept and English achievement scores. The correlation was the highest in the beginning stage of English learning, suggesting that, although pronunciation appears to constitute a small part of L2 learning, the underlying affective factor plays a crucial role in motivating further learning.For the context issue, an investigation was made into how Chinese EFL learners used the English present perfect, an area that poses considerable learning difficulty. Results showed that the difficulty arose mainly from an inability to visualize an appropriate context that matches the present perfect. Further, the participants in the study were frequently found to bring their LI contextual. knowledge to bear on their interpretation of the linguistic subsystem. These results suggest that, in - the absence of an authentic context in which an L2 structure is learned, LI contextual knowledge1 woiikTinevitably take its place, leading to likely interference and misuse of the L2. Thus, to ensure | correct use, L2 forms ought to be properly contextualized in the beginning stage of learning.The above findings not only lend support to the good-beginning argument but also shed light on the English learning process and suggest ways to improve EFL classroom practice in the Chinese context.实验方法Research DesignResearch Questions1. Is the practice of teaching formulaic language through memorization and imitation helpful in enha