二语习得理论.ppt

Theoretical Approaches toSecond Language LearningnDifferences in Learning L1 & L2nBehaviorismnInnatismnInformation ProcessingnConnectionismnThe Interactionist Position2024/7/271二语习得理论Differences in Learning L1 & L2nA child or adult learning a second language is different from a child acquiring a first language in terms of both1) learner characteristicsand2) learning conditions2024/7/272二语习得理论Differences in Learning L1 & L2Learner Characteristics1. Knowledge of another language2. Cognitive maturity3. Metalinguistic awareness4. Knowledge of the world5. Nervousness about speaking2024/7/273二语习得理论Differences in Learning L1 & L2Learning Conditions6. Freedom to be silent7. Ample time & contact8. Corrective feedback: (form) grammar and pronunciation9. Corrective feedback: (meaning) word choice10. Modified input2024/7/274二语习得理论Differences in Learning L1 & L2nSummary:SLA (Second Language Acquisition) theories need to account for language acquisition by learners with a variety of characteristics and learning in a variety of contexts. 2024/7/275二语习得理论 Theoretical Approaches to Language Acquisition 2024/7/276二语习得理论BehaviorismnSkinner: language behavior is the production of correct responses to stimuli through reinforcement. nFour characteristics of behaviorism:1) imitation, 2) practice, 3) reinforcement, and 4) habit information nLado (1964): CAA person learning an L2 starts off with the habits formed in the L1 and these habits interfere with the new ones needed for the L2.2024/7/277二语习得理论American Structurism and BehaviorismnDominant theories in linguistics and psychology within the USA throughout the 1940s and 1950s.nIt’s psychological base is behaviorism and linguistic base is structuralism. nThe goal of CA: to discover the problems that foreign language students would encounter in the learning process. And to increase the efficiency in L2 teaching and testing.2024/7/278二语习得理论Negative TransfernLado proclaimed that most of the difficulties originated from the differences between L1 and L2. He believed that the more different the two languages are, the more difficult learning would be, and by knowing this, we could predict what errors would appear. 2024/7/279二语习得理论a strong and a weak form of CAnLado and his followers even provided the degree of differences between two languages. There existed a strong and a weak form of Contrastive Analysis (Wardhaugh 1970). The strong form claims that all L2 errors can be predicated by identifying the differences between the target language and the learner’s L1. The weak form of the hypothesis claims to be diagnostic. (To check where could be erroneous). 2024/7/2710二语习得理论Contrastive Analysis (CA)nContrastive Analysis was rooted in the practical need to teach a L2 in the most effective way possible. It’s psychological base is behaviorism and linguistic base is structuralism. nRobert Lado: advocated the approach of Contrastive Analysis in his first Book, Linguistics Across Culture(1957) 2024/7/2711二语习得理论BehaviorismnBehaviorism was often linked to the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH):It predicts that where there are similarities between the L1 and the target language, the learner will acquire target-language structures with ease; where there are differences, the learner will have difficulty.2024/7/2712二语习得理论More Definition of CA nCA: is an approach to the study of SLA which involve predicting and explaining learner problems based on a comparison of L1 and L2 to determine similarities and differences.n It was heavily influenced by theories which is dominant in linguistics and psychology within the USA throughout the 1940s and 1950s.2024/7/2713二语习得理论BehaviorismnCriticisms about the CAH:Though a learner’s L1 influences the acquisition of an L2,1.Not all errors predicted by the CAH are actually made. 2.Many of the errors which learners make are not predictable on the basis of the CAH.3.Some errors are similar across learners from a variety of L1 backgrounds. 2024/7/2714二语习得理论BehaviorismnSummary:The L1 influence may not simply be a matter of the transfer of habits, but a more subtle and complex process of identifying points of similarity, weighing the evidence in support of some particular feature, and even reflecting about whether a certain feature seems to ‘belong’ in the structure of the L2. 2024/7/2715二语习得理论InnatismnCompetence vs. Performance nUniversal Grammar (UG) in relation to second language developmentnKrashen’s “monitor model” 2024/7/2716二语习得理论Innatism: Competence vs. Performance语言能力对语言运用nCompetence语言能力:It refers to the knowledge which underlies our ability to use language. nPerformance语言运用:It refers to the way a person actually uses language in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Performance is subject to variations due to inattention or fatigue whereas competence (at least for the mature native speaker) is more stable.2024/7/2717二语习得理论Innatism: Competence vs. PerformancenSLA (second language acquisition) researchers from the UG perspective are more interested in the language competence (i.e., knowledge of complex syntax) of advanced learners rather than in the simple language of early stage learners. Their investigations often involve comparing the judgments of grammaticality（合乎语法性） made by L2 and L1 learners, rather than observations of actual language performance (i.e., use of language). 2024/7/2718二语习得理论Innatism: Universal GrammarnHow UG works in L2 development:Two different views -1) The nature and availability of UG in L2 acquisition is no different from that which is hypothesized to guide L1 learners.Adult L2 learners neither need nor benefit from error correction and metalinguistic information(元语言信息). These things change only the superficial appearance of language performance and do not affect the underlying competence of the new language.2024/7/2719二语习得理论Innatism: Universal GrammarnHow UG works in L2 development:Two different views -2) UG may be present and available to L2 learners, but its exact nature has been altered by the prior acquisition of the first language.L2 learners need to be given some explicit information about what is not grammatical（不符合语法规则的） in the L2. Otherwise, they may assume that some structures of the L1 have equivalents in the L2 when, in fact, they do not. 2024/7/2720二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe acquisition-learning hypothesisnThe monitor hypothesisnThe natural order hypothesisnThe input hypothesisnThe affective filter hypothesis2024/7/2721二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe acquisition-learning hypothesis (1)nAcquisition: we acquire L2 knowledge as we are exposed to samples of the L2 which we understand with no conscious attention to language form. It is a subconscious and intuitive（凭直觉获知的） process. nLearning: we learn the L2 via a conscious process of study and attention to form and rule learning. 2024/7/2722二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe acquisition-learning hypothesis (2)1.Krashen argues that “acquisition” is a more important process of constructing the system of a language than “learning” because fluency in L2 performance is due to what we have acquired, not what we have learned.2.Learning cannot turn into acquisition. Many learners may “know” rules but fail to apply them. Learners need to do as much acquiring as possible in order to achieve communicative fluency.2024/7/2723二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe monitor hypothesis (1)nThe acquired system acts to initiate the speaker’s utterances and is responsible for fluency and intuitive judgments about correctness, whereas the learned system acts only as a monitor, making minor changes and polishing what the acquired system has produced.2024/7/2724二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe monitor hypothesis (2)nLearners use the monitor only when they are focused more on being ‘correct’ than on what they have to say, when they have sufficient time to search their memory for the relevant rules, and when they actually know those rules. nSince knowing the rules only helps the speaker supplement what has been acquired, the focus of language teaching should be on creating conditions for ‘acquisition’ rather than ‘learning’. 2024/7/2725二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe monitor hypothesis (3)Criticisms:nIt is very difficult to show evidence of “monitor” use. It is impossible to determine what has been produced by the acquired system and what is the result of monitor use. nKrashen’s claim that language which is produced quickly and apparently spontaneously must have been acquired rather than learned leaves us with a somewhat circular definition. 2024/7/2726二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe natural order hypothesis (1)nL2 learners acquire the features of the TL in predictable sequences. Contrary to intuition, the rules which are easiest to state (and thus to ‘learn’) are not necessarily the first to be acquired.e.g. the rule for adding an –s to third person singular verbs in the present tense 2024/7/2727二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe natural order hypothesis (2)nThe natural order is independent of the order in which rules have been learned in language classes (based on Krashen’s studies of grammatical morphemes). nSubsequent research has confirmed that learners pass through sequences or stages in L2 development.2024/7/2728二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe input hypothesis (1)The learner acquires language in only one way – by exposure to comprehensible input. If the input contains forms and structures just beyond the learner’s current level of competence in the language (“i +1”), then both comprehension and acquisition will occur. 2024/7/2729二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe input hypothesis (2)The comprehensible input (“i +1”) hypothesis appeals to intuition, but has not been substantiated by empirical studies.e.g. undirected pleasure reading as a source of comprehensible input.2024/7/2730二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe affective filter hypothesis (1)n“Affect” refers to such things as motives, needs, attitudes, and emotional states.nThe “affective filter” is an imaginary barrier, which prevents learners from acquiring language from the available input.nDepending on the learner’s state of mind or disposition, the filter limits what is noticed and what is acquired. A learner who is stressed, upset, anxious, self-conscious, or unmotivated may “filter out” input, making it unavailable for acquisition.2024/7/2731二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”nThe affective filter hypothesis (2)nIt appears to have immediate implications for classroom practice. Teachers should help students to lower the affective filter in language learning. nIt also appeals intuitively to those who have tried unsuccessfully to learn a language in conditions where they felt stressed or uncomfortable.nHowever, it is difficult to be sure that affective factors cause the differences in language acquisition.2024/7/2732二语习得理论Innatism: Krashen’s “monitor model”/ “hypothesis / theory”nSummarynKrashen’s “monitor model” (i.e., acquisition vs. learning, monitor, natural order, comprehensible input, and affective filter) has been very influential in supporting communicative language teaching (CLT), which focuses on using language for meaningful interaction and for accomplishing tasks, rather than on learning rules.nMost teachers and researchers see Krashen’s hypotheses intuitively appealing, but those hypotheses are hard to be tested by empirical evidence.2024/7/2733二语习得理论Information processingnCognitive psychologists working in this model see L2 acquisition as the building up of knowledge systems that enables the learner to use the language automatically. nThey do not assume that there is a difference between acquisition and learning. nTwo important models:attention-processing (noticing) model and restructuring Model2024/7/2734二语习得理论Information processingnAttention-processing (noticing) model:nIt is assumed that there is a limit to the amount of information a human can pay attention to and learn at one time. Gradually, through experience and practice, learners become able to use certain parts of the language automatically. nAutomatic language performance may originate from intentional or conscious learning; i.e., noticing (McLaughlin & Schmidt).nEverything we come to know about the language was first “noticed” consciously before we learn it.2024/7/2735二语习得理论Information processingnRestructuring Model:nSometimes things which we know and use automatically may not be explainable in terms of a gradual build-up of automaticity through practice. nThey seem rather to be based on the interaction of knowledge we already have, or on the acquisition of new knowledge (without extensive practice) which fits into an existing system and causes it to be restructured. This can lead to a positive or negative outcome.e.g. “I saw” → “I seed” or “I sawed” – overapplying the general rule.2024/7/2736二语习得理论ConnectionismnConnectionists argue that what is innate is simply the ability to learn, not any specifically linguistic structure. nThey attribute greater importance to the role of the environment in language learning, and see the input as the principal source of linguistic knowledge.nEventually, a learner develops stronger mental ‘connections’ between the elements s/he has learned, and thus one situational or linguistic element will activate the other(s) in the learner’s mind. 2024/7/2737二语习得理论ConnectionismnFindings of connectionist Research :nA learning mechanism can not only learn what it hears but can also generalize, even to the point of making overgeneralization （过分概括）errors.nThese studies have dealt almost exclusively with the acquisition of vocabulary and grammatical morphemes（词素）, that is, aspects of the language which innatists will grant may be acquired largely through memorization and simple generalization.2024/7/2738二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnSLA takes place through conversational interaction (Hatch, Pica, and Long).nLong sees modified interaction as the necessary mechanism for the L2 acquisition. What learners need is not necessarily simplification of the linguistic forms but rather an opportunity to interact with other speakers.nResearch shows that native speakers consistently modify their speech in sustained conversation with non-native speakers.2024/7/2739二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnThe relationship between modified interaction and SLA (Long):1. Interactional modification makes input comprehensible;2. Comprehensible input promotes acquisition; Therefore,3. Interactional modification promotes acquisition.2024/7/2740二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnModified interaction involves linguistic simplifications and conversational modifications.nExamples of conversational modifications:elaboration, slower speech rate, gesture, additional contextual cues, comprehension checks, clarification requests, and self-repetition or paraphrase.nResearch has demonstrated that conversational adjustments can aid comprehension in the L2.2024/7/2741二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnVygotsky’s sociocultural theorynLanguage development takes place in the social interactions between individuals.nL2 learners advance to higher levels of linguistic knowledge when they collaborate and interact with speakers of the L2 who are more knowledgeable than they are (Lantolf).nA learner is capable to learn in the zone of proximal development (ZPD) when there is support from interaction with a more advanced interlocutor.2024/7/2742二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnThe difference between Vygotsky’s socialcultural theory and other interactionist theories:2024/7/2743二语习得理论SummarynThere is no agreement on a “complete” theory of second language acquisition yet.nEach theoretical framework has a different focus and its limitations. 1.Behaviorism: emphasizing stimuli and responses, but ignoring the mental processes that are involved in learning.2.Innatism: innate LAD, based on intuitions3.Information processing and connectionism: involving controlled laboratory experiments where human learning is similar to computer processing.4.Interactionist position: modification of interaction promotes language acquisition and development.2024/7/2744二语习得理论45Theoretical Approaches toL1 AcquisitionnBehaviorism: Say what I saynInnatism: It’s all in your mindnInteractionist/Developmental perspectives: Learning from inside and out2024/7/2745二语习得理论46Behaviorism: Say what I saynSkinner: language behavior is the production of correct responses to stimuli through reinforcement. nLanguage learning is the result of 1) imitation (word-for-word repetition), 2) practice (repetitive manipulation of form), 3) feedback on success (positive reinforcement), and 4) habit formation.nThe quality and quantity of the language that the child hears, as well as the consistency of the reinforcement offered by others in the environment, would shape the child’s language behavior. 2024/7/2746二语习得理论47Behaviorism: Say what I saynChildren’s imitations are not random:Their imitation is selective and based on what they are currently learning. They choose to imitate something they have already begun to understand, rather than simply imitating what is available in the environment. Children’s practice of new language forms nThe way they practice new forms is very similar to the way foreign language students do substitution drills. nTheir practice of language forms is also selective and reflects what they would like to learn. They are often in charge of the conversation with adults. 2024/7/2747二语习得理论48Behaviorism: Say what I saynHowever, imitation and practice alone cannot explain some of the forms created by children. Children do pick out patterns/rules and then generalize or overgeneralize them to new contexts. (see examples on pp. 13-14)n“So he can doc my little bump?”: showing the understanding of the suffix ‘er/or’n“I’m hiccing up”: showing the understanding of two-word verbs such as ‘standing up’ and ‘picking up’nFather:I’d like to propose a toast.Child:I’d like to propose a piece of bread.nMother:I love you to pieces.Child:I love you three pieces.nAre dogs can wiggle their tails?Are this is hot?nYou took all the towels away because I can’t dry my hands.2024/7/2748二语习得理论49Innatism: It’s all in your mindnChomsky argues that behaviorism cannot provide sufficient explanations for children’s language acquisition for the following reasons:1.Children come to know more about the structure of their language than they could be expected to learn on the basis of the samples of language they hear.2.The language children are exposed to includes false starts, incomplete sentences and slips of the tongue, and yet they learn to distinguish between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences. 3.Children are by no means systematically corrected or instructed on language by parents.2024/7/2749二语习得理论50Innatism: It’s all in your mindnLAD (an imaginary “black box” existing somewhere in the brain):nLAD contains all and only the principles which are universal to all human languages (i.e.. Universal Grammar – UG). nFor the LAD to work, children need access only to samples of a natural language, which serve as a trigger to activate the device.nOnce the LAD is activated, children are able to discover the structure of the language to be learned by matching the innate knowledge of basic grammatical principles (UG) to the structures of the particular language in the environment. 2024/7/2750二语习得理论51Innatism: It’s all in your mindnEvidence used to support Chomsky’s innatist position:1.Virtually all children successfully learn their native language at a time in life when they would not be expected to learn anything else so complicated (i.e. biologically programmed). 2.Language is separate from other aspects of cognitive developments (e.g., creativity and social grace) and may be located in a different “module" of the brain. 3.The language children are exposed to does not contain examples of all the linguistic rules and patterns.4.Animals cannot learn to manipulate a symbol system as complicated as the natural language of a 3- or 4-year-old child. 5.Children acquire grammatical rules without getting explicit instruction. Therefore, children’s acquisition of grammatical rules is probably guided by principle of an innate UG which could apply to all languages. 2024/7/2751二语习得理论52Innatism: It’s all in your mindnThe biological basis for the innatist position:nThe Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) –Lenneberg: There is a specific and limited time period (i.e., “critical period”) for the LAD to work successfully. The best evidence for the CPH is that virtually every child learns language on a similar schedule in spite of different environments.2024/7/2752二语习得理论53Innatism: It’s all in your mindnThree case studies of abnormal language development - evidence of the CPH (Read the case studies on pp. 19-21).1.Victor – a boy of about 12 years old (1799)2.Genie – a girl of 13 years old (1970)3.Deaf signers (native signers, early learners, vs. late learners)2024/7/2753二语习得理论54Interactionist/developmental Perspectives: Learning from inside and outnProblems of Innatism:nThe innatists placed too much emphasis on the “final state” (i.e. the linguistic competence of adult native speakers), but not enough on the developmental aspects of language acquisition. nLanguage acquisition is an example of children’s ability to learn from experience. What children need to know is essentially available in the language they are exposed to.2024/7/2754二语习得理论55Interactionist/developmental Perspectives: Learning from inside and outnThis position views that language develops as a result of the interplay between the innate learning ability of children and the environment in which they develop. nDevelopmental psychologists attribute more importance to the environment than the innatists, though they also recognize a powerful learning mechanism in the human brain.nThey see language acquisition as similar to and influenced by the acquisition of other kinds of skill and knowledge, rather than as something that is largely independent of the child’s experience and cognitive development. 2024/7/2755二语习得理论56The Interactionist PositionnPiaget: Language is dependent upon and springs from cognitive development. That is, children’s cognitive development determines their language development.(e.g., the use of words as “bigger” or “more” depends on children’s understanding of the concepts they represent.)nHe argued that the developing cognitive understanding is built on the interaction between the child and the things which can be observed, touched, and manipulated.nFor him, language was one of a number of symbol systems developed in childhood, rather than a separate module of the mind. Language can be used to represent knowledge that children have acquired through physical interaction with the environment.2024/7/2756二语习得理论57The Interactionist PositionnVygotsky: sociocultural theory of human mental processing. He argued that language develops primarily from social interaction. nZone of proximal development (ZPD): a level that a child is able to do when there is support from interaction with a more advanced interlocutor. That is, a supportive interactive environment enables children to advance to a higher level of knowledge and performance than s/he would be able to do independently. nHe observed the importance of conversations which children have with adults and with other children and saw in these conversations the origins of both language and thought.2024/7/2757二语习得理论58The Interactionist PositionnHow Piaget’s view differs from Vygotsky’s:nPiaget hypothesized that language developed as a symbol system to express knowledge acquired through interaction with the physical world.nVygotsky hypothesized that thought was essentially internalized speech, and speech emerged in social interaction. 2024/7/2758二语习得理论59The Interactionist PositionnLanguage socialization framework: observed from childrearing patterns (parent-child interaction)nChild-directed Speech (modified language interaction):nPhonological modification: a slower rate of delivery, higher pitch, more varied intonationnSyntactical modification: shorter, simpler sentence patterns, frequent repetition, and paraphrase.nLimited conversation topics: e.g., the ‘here and now’ and topics related to the child’s experiences.nMore important than modification is the conversational give-and-take. 2024/7/2759二语习得理论The Interactionist PositionnThe interaction between a language-learning child and an interlocutor who responds in some way to the child is important (Jim’s case). nExposure to impersonal sources of language such as television or radio alone are not sufficient for children to learn the structure of a particular language.nOne-on-one interaction gives children access to language that is adjusted to their level of comprehension.nOnce children have acquired some language, however, television can be a source of language and cultural information.602024/7/2760二语习得理论61ConnectionismnThough both innatism and connectionism look at the cognitive aspect of language acquisition, yet they differ in the following:nConnectionists hypothesize that language acquisition dose not require a separate “module of the mind” but can be explained in terms of learning in general.nConnectionists argue that what children need to know is essentially available in the language they are exposed to. They attribute greater importance to the role of the environment than to any innate knowledge in the learner. 2024/7/2761二语习得理论ConnectionismnConnectionism views language as a complex system of units which become interconnected in the mind as they are encountered together. The more often units are heard or seen together, the more likely it is that the presence of one will lead to the activation of the other.nLanguage acquisition is not just a process of associating words with elements of external reality. It is also a process of associating words and phrases with the other words and phrases that occur with them, or words with grammatical morphemes that occur with them.622024/7/2762二语习得理论63The Interactionist PositionnWatch the video clip “Baby Talk” from the Interactionist position. Read the following questions first:1.According to Bruner, in what ways do children learn syntax, semantics, and pragmatics?2.Why do many researchers think Chomsky’s innatism is not sufficient?3.According to Berko-Gleason, how do parents or caretakers help children with their verbal development?4.What is the purpose for parents to play the ‘thank-you’ game with children?5.Interactionists stress that language use is not only referential but it can be used for social purposes. Can you give examples for these two types of purposes?6.Why is it too simplistic to think children either memorize or analyze things they hear and then they produce language? What example did Berko-Gleason give to support her points?7.How do children learn ‘routinized’ phrases? 2024/7/2763二语习得理论64Childhood bilingualismn“Simultaneous bilinguals”nChildren who learn more than one language from birth.n“Sequential bilinguals”nChildren who begin to learn a second language after they have acquired the first language. 2024/7/2764二语习得理论65Childhood bilingualismnIs it difficult for children to cope with 2 language?1.There is little support for the myth that learning more than one language in early childhood slows down the child’s linguistic development or interferes with cognitive and academic development. 2.Bilingualism can have positive effects on abilities that are related to academic success, such as metalinguistic awareness. 3.The learning of languages for bilingual children is more related to the circumstances in which each language is learned than to any limitation in the human capacity to learn more than one language.2024/7/2765二语习得理论66Childhood bilingualismnLanguage attrition for bilinguals -“Subtractive bilingualism” (Lambert, 1987)§When children are “submerged” in a second language for long periods in early schooling, they may begin to lose their native language (L1) before they have developed an age-appropriate mastery of the L2.§It can have negative consequences for children’s self-esteem.§In some cases, children continue to be caught between two languages; not having mastered the L2, but not having continued to develop the L1.2024/7/2766二语习得理论67Childhood bilingualismnSolution for “subtractive bilingualism”: to strive for “additive bilingualism”nParents should continue speaking the L1 to their children to maintain the home language, while the L2 is being learned at school. nMaintaining the family language also creates opportunities for the children to continue both cognitive and affective development in a language they understand easily while they are still learning the L2. 2024/7/2767二语习得理论68SummarynEach of the three theoretical approaches explains a different aspect of first language acquisition.1.Behaviorists (learning through imitation, practice, reinforcement, habit-formation) – the acquisition of vocabulary and grammatical morphemes.2.Innatists (LAD/UG/CPH) – the acquisition of complex grammar (structure of the language).3.Interactionists (social interaction) – the acquisition of how form and meaning are related, how communicative functions are carried out, and how language is used appropriately. 2024/7/2768二语习得理论Learning StyleField-independence vs. field-dependenceRight-brain dominance vs. left-brain dominanceTolerance of ambiguityReflectivity vs. ImpulsivityVisual, Aural/auditory, and Haptic (Kinesthetic & Tactile)2024/7/2769二语习得理论二语习得理论Field-independence vs. field-dependence-1Field-independence: to perceive a particular, relevant item or factor in a field of distracting item.-Advantages: to distinguish parts from wholeto concentrate on sth.to analyze separate variables-Disadvantages:“Tunnel vision”“You can’t see the forest for the trees.” Field-dependence: the tendency to be dependant on the total field-Advantages:whole picturelarger viewgeneral configuration-Disadvantages:“You may miss your lover in crowd.”“It is hard to read in a noisy enviroment.” 2024/7/2770二语习得理论二语习得理论Right-brain vs. left-brain dominance-1Right-brain:- to perceive and remember visual, tactile, and auditory images- process holistic, integrative, and emotional informationLeft-brain:- logical, analytical thought, with mathematical and linear processing of information.Both of them work together as a team2024/7/2771二语习得理论二语习得理论Right-brain vs. left-brain dominance-2THE Right Brain vs Left Brain test ... do you see the dancer turning clockwise or anti-clockwise?2024/7/2772二语习得理论二语习得理论Right-brain vs. left-brain dominance-3If clockwise, then you use more of the right side of the brain and vice versa. Most of us would see the dancer turning anti-clockwise though you can try to focus and change the direction; see if you can do it.2024/7/2773二语习得理论二语习得理论Tolerance of ambiguityAdvantages:to accept innovative and creative possibilities and not be cognitively or affectively disturbed by ambiguity and uncertainty. In second language learning a great amount of apparently contradictory or ambiguous information is encountered Successful language learning requires tolerance of such ambiguities, at least for interim periodsDisadvantages:too much tolerance of ambiguity can have a detrimental effect. People can become “wishy-washy” and may make many mistakes without awareness when using the second language.2024/7/2774二语习得理论二语习得理论Impulsivity vs. ReflectivityImpulsivity (intuitive):To make a quicker or gambling guess at an answer “ faster learner”Reflectivity (systematic):-to make a slower, more calculated decision- “make fewer mistakes”2024/7/2775二语习得理论二语习得理论Implications of learning styleThere is no particular teaching or learning method that can suit the needs of all learners.Learning styles exist on wide continuums, although they are often described as opposites.No one style is better than others.Very little research has examined the interaction between different learning styles and success in L2 learning; however, students should be encouraged to “stretch” their learning styles so that they will be more empowered in a variety of leaning situations.2024/7/2776二语习得理论二语习得理论Second Language Second Language Learning in the Learning in the ClassroomClassroom7/27/202477二语习得理论Comparing instructional and natural settings for language learning78二语习得理论Comparing instructional and natural settings for language learning79二语习得理论Comparing instructional and natural settings for language learning80二语习得理论Activity: Analyzing an ESL Class You’ll watch a video clip showing an adult ESL class doing a problem-solving activity. Pay attention to the following features:–Focus of instruction: form-based or meaning-based–Source and nature of the input–Questions asked by the teacher (display or genuine questions / yes-no or wh- questions)–Feedback / Error correction –Conversational modifications (comprehension checks, clarification requests, self-repetition or paraphrase)–Metalinguistic comments–Teacher-student interaction (negotiation of meaning)–Student-student interaction (negotiation of meaning)81二语习得理论Five Proposals for Classroom TeachingWhich theoretical proposal holds the greatest promise for improving language learning in classroom settings?1. Get it right from the beginning2. Say what you mean and mean what you say3. Just listen… and read4. Teach what is teachable5. Get it right in the end82二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Introduction–This proposal emphasizes the importance of accuracy in second language teaching and the use of structure-based or form-based approaches. –It includes the two most common traditional approaches to second language teaching: grammar translation and audiolingual approaches.83二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Grammar-Translation approach–It is characterized by giving the explicit instruction of grammatical rules and lists of vocabulary with their translation equivalents in the L1, and then getting students to apply this knowledge to translation and to language analysis. –It uses deductive method of language teaching, based on classical studies of dead languages, and often ignores the communicative aspect of language use. 84二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Audiolingual approach (1)–It is based on the behaviorist theory of language learning and assumes that language learning can be broken down into a series of individual habits, which can be formed by reinforcement of correct response.–It emphasizes habit formation through the practice (e.g., pattern drilling), memorization, and rote repetition of grammatical structures and lexical items usually in isolation from contexts of meaningful use. –It places emphasis on the ordering of the four skills – listening, speaking, reading, writing – and the need for maximum error prevention. 85二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Audiolingual approach (2) –Teachers avoid letting beginning learners speak freely because this would allow them to make errors. Therefore, it consists of all controlled practice to prevent these bad habits.–This approach was used successfully only with highly motivated adult learners in training programs for government personnel in the U.S. –Though it emphasizes the learning of oral language, students rarely use the language spontaneously for genuine communicative purposes (but it can help students improve their pronunciation) –There is little classroom research to support this approach for students in ordinary school L2 programs (study 1).86二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Communicative language teaching (CLT) approaches argue that –Language is not learned by the gradual accumulation of one item after another.–Errors are a natural and valuable part of the language learning process.–The motivation of learners is often stifled by an insistence on correctness and by rote learning. –It is better to encourage learners to develop fluency before accuracy. They need to develop communicative abilities right from the beginning.87二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Limitation of Communicative language teaching (CLT) approaches:–Allowing learners too much ‘freedom’ without correction and explicit instruction is likely to lead to early fossilization of errors.•However, little research has been done to test the hypothesis that form-based instruction in the early stages of L2 learning will, in the long run, lead to higher levels of linguistic performance and knowledge than meaning-based instruction in the early stages. 88二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Grammar plus communicative practice (study 2) –Learners: 48 college students enrolled in French language courses at an American university–Methods: 3 groups•G1: ALM + CLT (an additional hour)•G2: ALM + culture (an additional hour)•G3: ALM + ALM (an additional hour)–Results:•On the linguistic competence measures, no significant differences between groups•On the communicative competence measures, G1 scored significantly higher than the other two groups–Conclusion: L2 programs which focus only on accuracy and form do not give students sufficient opportunity to develop communication abilities in L2.89二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Grammar plus communicative practice (study 3) –Learners: ESL adult students–Methods: 2 groups•G1: grammar-based •G2: grammar-based + communicative component–Results: •Beginner and intermediate-level learners engaging in communicative activities in addition to their regular grammar course made greater improvements in accent, vocabulary, grammar, and comprehension than did learners who received only the grammar course.•The area of greatest improvement for the learners getting ‘real world’ communicative practice was in grammatical accuracy.90二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Conclusions (I)–The proposal “Get it right from the beginning” has important limitations. L2 learners receiving audiolingual or grammar-based instruction are often unable to communicate their messages and intentions effectively. –Primarily or exclusively grammar-based approaches to teaching do not guarantee that learners develop high levels of accuracy and linguistic knowledge.–The classroom emphasis on accuracy usually results in learners who are inhibited and will not take chances in using their knowledge for communication. 91二语习得理论Proposal 1. Get it right from the beginning•Conclusions (II)–Learners benefit more from opportunities for communicative practice in contexts where the emphasis is on understanding and expressing meaning. –It is important to be aware that meaning-based instruction is advantageous, but it does not mean that form-based instruction is not. In fact, L2 learners need to develop both accuracy and fluency in order to use the language effectively.92二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Introduction (I)–This proposal emphasizes the necessity for learners to have access to meaningful and comprehensible input through conversational interactions with teachers and other students. –It is based on the interactionists’ hypothesis. When learners are given the opportunity to use the TL to interact with others, they are compelled to “negotiate for meaning”, that is, to express and clarify their intentions, thought, opinions, etc., in a way which allows them to arrive at a mutual understanding. 93二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Introduction (II)–Negotiation for meaning can be achieved in communicative language teaching (CLT) and task- based instruction (e.g., students are asked to work together to accomplish a particular goal using the TL).–Negotiation enables learners to use a variety of modifications that naturally arise in interaction, for example, clarification, confirmation, repetition, and other kinds of information as they attempt to negotiate meaning.–Through negotiation, learners can acquire the language forms more naturally – the words and the grammatical structures – which carry the meaning they are attending to (see examples 3-7).94二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Group work and learner language (study 4)–Learners produced not only a greater quantity but also a greater variety of speech in learner- centered (group-work) activities than in teacher-centered activities. In addition, the learner-centered activities led to a much greater variety of language functions (e.g., disagreeing, hypothesizing, requesting, clarifying, and defining). –In contrast, in the teacher-centered activities, the students primarily responded to the teacher’s questions and rarely initiated speech on their own.95二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Learners talking to learners (study 5) –Learners talked more with other learners than they did with native speakers. Though they cannot always provide each other with the accurate grammatical input, they can offer each other genuine communicative practice.–Also, learners produced more talk with advanced-level than with intermediate-level partners.–However, their errors showed no differences across contexts. That is, intermediate-level learners did not make any more errors with another intermediate-level speaker than they did with an advanced or native speaker.96二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Learner language and proficiency level (study 6)–When different proficiency-level learners interact with each other, the result showed that when low-proficiency learners were in the ‘sender’ role, the interactions were longer and more varied than when high-proficiency learners were the ‘senders’.–The explanation was that high-proficiency ‘senders’ tended to act as if the lower-level ‘receiver’ had very little contribution to make in the completion of the task. Therefore, the lower-level ‘receivers’ played a very passive role and had very little negotiation for meaning.97二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Interaction and comprehensibility (study 7)–Modified interaction led to higher levels of comprehension than modified input. –Learners who had the opportunity to engage in interaction (e.g., asking clarification questions and seeking verbal assistance as they were listening to the instructions) comprehended much more than those who received simplified input (e.g., repetition, paraphrasing, simple grammatical constructions, and simple vocabulary) but had no opportunity to interact while listening.98二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Interaction and L2 development (study 8)–Learners who engaged in conversational interactions with native speakers produced more advanced question forms than 1) learners who had no interaction with native speakers and 2) learners who received pre-modified input (i.e., the native speakers use language which had been simplified and scripted to match a level of language which was comprehensible to the learners) but had no negotiation of meaning with native speakers. 99二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Interaction with recasts (study 9)–Learners who were at more advanced stages of question development benefited more from interaction with recasts than they did from interaction without recasts. However, learners who were at less advanced stages of question development did not differ according to the type of interaction they were exposed to (study 9). * “Recasts” are paraphrases of a learner’s utterance which involve changing one or more components of the utterance while maintaining the meaning (see examples on p. 104).100二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Conclusions (I)–The research described above has contributed to a better understanding of how to organize group and pair work more effectively in the classroom.–Limitations:1.The measure of L2 learning in these studies was often the learners’ immediate production following the interactions. It is therefore difficult to draw any conclusions as to the long-term benefits of conversational interaction.2.These studies were designed as one-on-one pair-work activities between trained native speakers and learners focusing on a single grammatical feature. Therefore, it is also difficult to relate the findings to classroom interactions.101二语习得理论Proposal 2. Say what you mean and mean what you say•Conclusions (II)–Limitations:3. Recasts may be more salient in pair work, particularly if only one form is recast consistently. However, in the L2 classroom, teachers’ recasts are less likely to be effective in regular L2 classrooms. For one reason, teachers’ recasts are not usually focused on only one form; for the other, they may not be perceived by the learners as an attempt to correct their language form but rather as just another way of saying the same thing.102二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Introduction (I)–This proposal emphasizes providing learners with comprehensible input through listening and/or reading activities. It is believed that hearing and understanding the TL is sufficient for L2 learning.–It is based on the assumption that it is not necessary to drill and memorize language forms in order to learn them. It is particularly associated with Krashen’s Input hypothesis that one essential requirement for SLA is the availability of comprehensible input.(see example 8)103二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Introduction (II)–This approach is very controversial because it not only says that L2 learners need not drill and practice language, but also that they do not need to speak at all in their learning process.–The material that the students read and listen to is not graded in any rigid way according to a sequence of linguistic simplicity. Rather, the material is graded on the basis of what teachers consider intuitively to be comprehensible for the learners, because a given text has shorter sentences, clearer illustrations, or is based on a theme or topic that is familiar to the learners. 104二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Comprehension-based instruction (study 10)–Learners received native-speaker input from tapes and books but virtually no interaction with the teacher or other learners. There was no oral practice or interaction in English at all.–The result showed that learners in the comprehension-based program learned English as well as learners in the regular program (from grade 3 through grade 5). This was true not only for their comprehension skills but also for their speaking skills.–However, a follow-up study in grade 8 showed that students who continued in the comprehension-only program were not doing as well as students in a program that included speaking and writing components, teacher feedback, and classroom interaction.105二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Total physical response (TPR) (study 11)–In TPR class, students (children or adults) participate in activities in which they hear a series of commands in the TL. They simply listen and show their comprehension by their actions but are not required to say anything. –The vocabulary and structures are carefully graded and organized so that learners deal with material which gradually increases in complexity and each new lesson builds on the ones before. This position differs from Krashen’s input hypothesis.106二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Total physical response (TPR)–Research showed that students can develop quite advanced levels of comprehension in the TL without engaging in oral practice.–When students begin to speak, they take over the role of the teacher and give commands as well as following them. However, the kind of language students can learn in such an environment is quite limited.–This approach gives learners a good start. It allows them to build up a considerable knowledge of the language without feeling the nervousness that often accompanies the attempts to speak the TL.107二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Immersion programs (study 12)–In an immersion program, a second language is taught via content-based instruction. The emphasis is on subject matter learning through rich, comprehensible input, and little time is spent focusing on the formal aspects of the L2. –Canadian French immersion programs provide excellent examples. The findings show convincing evidence that these programs are among the most successful large-scale L2 programs in existence. Learners developed not only good comprehension, but also fluency, functional abilities, and confidence in using their L2. 108二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Limitations of immersion programs –However, learners failed to achieve high levels of performance in some aspects of French grammar after several years of the study in the immersion programs.–Some researchers think that learners engage in too little language production in these programs and do not get sufficient form-focused instruction. Students just use their incomplete TL knowledge because they are rarely pushed to be more precise or more accurate.–Also, because students share the same interlanguage, they have no difficulty understanding each other. Therefore, there is little need for them to use appropriate TL form to negotiate for meaning.109二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Input flood (study 13)–Learners were given high-frequency exposure to a particular form in the instructional input (e.g., adverb placement). They read a series of texts containing the use of this form, but there was no teaching of this form nor was any error correction given. –The results showed that exposure to many instances of correct models in the instructional input could help learners add something new to their interlanguage, but not to get rid of an error based on their L1. That is, this approach failed to provide learners with information about what is not possible or not grammatical. 110二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Enhanced input (study 14)–Learners were given the reading passages designed to draw their attention to a particular form (e.g., the possessive determiners – his/her) which was embedded in the text. This was done through typographical enhancement (i.e., the form appeared in bold type, underlined, italicized, or written in CAPITAL LETTERS). –Comparison of the performance of learners who had read the typographically enhanced passages with that of learners who had not showed little difference in their knowledge and use of these forms. Perhaps the enhancement was not explicit enough to draw the learners’ attention to this form.111二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Input processing (study 15)–Learners received explicit explanations about a particular form (e.g., object pronouns) and comprehension-based “procession instruction” (i.e., through focused listening and reading activities, learners were required to pay attention to how the target forms were used to convey meaning).–The results showed that learners who had received the comprehension-based processing instruction achieved higher levels of performance on both the comprehension tasks and the production tasks than learners who engaged in production practice doing exercises to practice the form.112二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Conclusions (I)–The French immersion research confirms the effectiveness of comprehensible input in terms of learners’ development of comprehension skills (reading and listening), fluency, and confidence in the TL.–However, the research does not support that an exclusive focus on meaning in comprehensible input is enough to bring learners to high levels of accuracy in their L2. –The claim that “language will take care of itself as long as meaningful comprehensible input is provided” is questionable.113二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Conclusions (II)–It is important to keep in mind that the learners in the comprehension-based immersion studies were beginners and the follow-up study suggested that more guidance from a teacher was needed to ensure their continuing development in the L2.–The performance of the learners in the comprehension-based programs was eventually surpassed by that of learners who had opportunities to use the TL interactively and to receive some careful form-focused intervention later in their development.114二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Conclusions (III)–The TPR results show great benefits for learners in the early stages of their L2 development. It prepares learners to go out into the TL community to get more comprehensible input.–The input flood and enhancement studies provide more evidence that L2 learners may not be able to discover what is ungrammatical in their own interlanguage if the focus is always on meaning, even if the frequency and salience of correct model is increased.–The processing instruction shows greater benefits for comprehension practice over production practice. This points to the benefits of an explicit focus on language form within input-based instruction. 115二语习得理论Proposal 3. Just listen… and read•Summary–Comprehension-based programs appear to be beneficial in the development of basic comprehension and communicative performance in the early stages of L2 learning.–However, comprehension-based instructional approaches may not be sufficient to get learners to continue developing their L2 abilities to advanced levels. In particular, these approaches may make it difficult for learners to discover and eliminate patterns already present in the interlanguage that are not grammatical in the TL. 116二语习得理论Proposal 4. Teach what is teachable•Introduction (I)–The purpose is for teachers to choose appropriate language features to teach according to learners’ L2 developmental stages. –The research has shown that some linguistic structures develop along a particular developmental path. These structures are called “developmental features”, such as question forms (examples 9-12), negation, tense, and relative clauses.–On the other hand, researchers also found that some language features can be taught at any time, such as vocabulary, which are called “variational features”. The success of learning these variational features depends on factors such as motivation, intelligence, and the quality of instruction. 117二语习得理论Proposal 4. Teach what is teachable•Introduction (II)–These research studies can inform teachers about which language features are “developmental” (and thus teachable only in a given sequence) and which are “variational” (and thus teachable at various points in learner language development). –The recommendation is to assess the learners’ developmental level and teach what would naturally come next. This is based on Krashen’s “natural order hypothesis”. Thus, instruction cannot change learners’ natural language developmental course. 118二语习得理论Proposal 4. Teach what is teachable•Research findings (I)1.For some linguistic structures, learners cannot be taught what they are not ‘developmentally ready’ to learn. That is, instruction cannot permit learners to ‘skip’ a stage in the natural sequence of development (study 16 – German word order).2.When learners are ‘developmentally ready’ to learn a specific language feature, instruction on that feature (whether it is meaning-focused or form-focused) makes a difference when it is provided at the time (study 17 – English relative clause formation).119二语习得理论Proposal 4. Teach what is teachable•Research findings (II)3.The research showed little effect for instruction on learners’ development of question forms. This may be due to limited instructional time or no explicit instruction (study 18 – wh-question inversion rules).4.Instruction that is timed to match learners’ developmental readiness may move them into more advanced stages but their performance may still be affected by other factors, such as L1 influence (study 19 – questions)120二语习得理论Proposal 4. Teach what is teachable•Conclusions–The research only measured the short-term effects of instruction. There is no way of knowing whether instruction had any permanent or long-term effects on learners’ developing interlanguage systems. –Explicit instruction might have led to more positive results, particularly if the instruction had consisted of contrastive information about L1 and L2.–“Teach what is teachable” position is of great potential interest to syllabus planners as well as teachers.121二语习得理论Proposal 5. Get it right in the end•Introduction (I)–Proponents of this position argue that there is a role for form-focused instruction and correction provided within communicative contexts.–This position is assumed that learners need guidance in learning some specific features of the TL. Comprehensible input and meaningful interaction is not enough to bring learners to high levels of accuracy as well as fluency. –While they view comprehension-based, content-based, task-based, or other meaning-focused instruction as crucial for language learning, they hypothesized that learners will do better if they also have access to some form-focused instruction. 122二语习得理论Proposal 5. Get it right in the end•Introduction (II)–This position also emphasizes the idea that some aspects of language must be taught and may need to be taught quite explicitly. Explicit instruction is particularly needed when learners in a class share the same L1, because the errors resulting from L1 transfer are not likely to lead to any kind of communication breakdown; thus, it will be very difficult for learners to discover the errors on their own. –They argue that learners will benefit in terms of both speed and efficiency of their learning and also in terms of the level of proficiency which they will eventually reach. 123二语习得理论Proposal 5. Get it right in the end•Research findings–The research findings support the hypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback within communicative L2 programs can improve learners’ use of particular grammatical features.–The effects of form-focused instruction are not always long-lasting, which can be explained in terms of the frequency of use of the particular structure in regular classroom input. Thus, opportunities for continued use may have contributed to the continued improvement in learners’ use of a particular form. –Form-focused instruction may be more successful with some language features than with others.124二语习得理论Proposal 5. Get it right in the end•Conclusions–Form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the communicative contexts are more effective in promoting L2 learning.–The challenge is to find the balance between meaning-focused and form-focused activities. The right balance is likely to be different according to the characteristics of the learners, such as age, metalinguistic sophistication, motivation, goals, and the similarity of the TL to the L1. –Explicit, guided form-focused instruction is needed when features in the TL differ from the L1 in subtle ways, particularly when the information about these differences is not available in the regularly occurring input. 125二语习得理论Implications of Classroom Research for Teaching•Rethink the five proposals1.Get it right from the beginning•Grammar-translation & audiolingual methods2.Say what you mean and mean what you say•Communicative language teaching (“what to say” vs. “how to say it”)3.Just listen… and read•Comprehension-based programs4.Teach what is teachable•Setting realistic expectations5.Get it right in the end•Finding the balance between meaning-based and form-based instruction126二语习得理论此课件下载可自行编辑修改，供参考！此课件下载可自行编辑修改，供参考！感谢你的支持，我们会努力做得更好！感谢你的支持，我们会努力做得更好！。