权益分派股权登记日,闽江学院教务系统,辛集电视台
1.0 Introduction介绍
第二语言习得是教育中的一个重要问题。关于二语习得的研究假设很多，其中输入假设、输出假设和交互假设是三个最受讨论的假设。这些假设为二语习得教育和学习提供了有价值的理论参考，但值得注意的是，这些研究假设在理论上存在缺陷，在实践中，基于这些假设设计的教学和学习方法并没有达到预期的目的。因此，有必要对这些研究假设进行进一步的探讨和分析。本文首先讨论了输入假设、输出假设和交互假设的定义、贡献和弱点。然后从服务水平协议的角度分析了这三种研究假设的共同缺点和优点，提出了今后如何改进服务水平协议研究的建议。
Second-language acquisition (SLA) is an important issue in education. There are many research hypotheses on SLA, of which input hypothesis, output hypothesis and interaction hypothesis are the three most discussed hypotheses. These hypotheses proposed provide valuable theoretical reference for SLA education and learning, but it is noteworthy that in theory, these research hypotheses have shortcomings, in practice, teaching and learning method designed based on these hypotheses did not achieve the expected purposes. Therefore, it is necessary to further discuss and analyze these research hypotheses. This essay first discusses the definitions, contributions and weaknesses of input hypothesis, output hypothesis and interaction hypothesis. Then the author analyzes the common shortcomings and merits of the three research hypotheses from the perspective of SLA, so as to bring forward recommendations on how to improve SLA research in the future.
2.0 Main body主体
2.1 Comprehensive input hypothesis综合投入假设
2.1.1 Sources of comprehensive input hypothesis综合投入假设的来源
综合输入假设是指语言习得是通过理解信息来实现的，即通过接受大量的“可理解输入”（Krashen，1981年）。根据这一观点，学习者只要有足够数量和形式的语言输入，就可以学习目标语言（Krashen，1981年）。克拉申的假设主要基于对儿童第一语言学习过程的观察。在母语学习过程中，成人使用一种简化的语言，使幼儿能够理解新概念或新事物。Stephen D.Krashen认为，简化语言是一种在特定环境下非常有效的语言输入方法，在帮助幼儿获得母语方面起着非常重要的作用（Krashen，1985年）。克拉申语言输入理论的第二个主要论点是沉默期。沉默期主要是指幼儿没有足够的说话能力的时期，在此期间，幼儿是通过听过程来理解语言输入的。在这段静默期过后，幼儿似乎已经无意识地学会了语言输入。成人也需要积累和消化二语习得，以逐步发展二语习得能力，并利用二语习得能力表达自己的思想，这与儿童母语学习过程相似。沉默期使克拉申意识到“倾听”在语言习得过程中非常重要（克拉申、巴特勒、伯恩鲍姆和罗伯逊，1978；克拉申，1985）。
Comprehensive input hypothesis refers to that language acquisition is achieved by understanding information, namely, by receiving a large amount of "comprehensible input" (Krashen, 1981). According to this view, learners may learn a target language as long as they are provided with a sufficient number and form of language input (Krashen, 1981). Krashen’s hypothesis is mainly based on the observation of children's learning process of first language. In the process of mother tongue learning, adults use a simplified language to enable young children to understand new concepts or new things. According to Stephen D. Krashen, simplified language is a very effective language input method in a particular environment and plays a very important role in helping young children to acquire their mother tongue (Krashen, 1985). The second main argument of Krashen's languages input theory is silent period. Silent period mainly refers to the period during which a young child does not have enough ability to speak, during this period, a young child is through listening to process comprehensible language input. After this period of silent period, young children seem to have unconsciously learned language input. It is similar to children's learning process of mother tongue that adults also need to accumulate and digest SLA in order to gradually develop their SLA ability and use this ability to express their own thoughts. Silent period makes Krashen realize that "listening" is very important in the process of language acquisition (Krashen, Butler, Birnbaum and Robertson, 1978; Krashen, 1985).
2.1.2 Contents of comprehensive input hypothesis
Krashen (1981) argues that only when a learner comes into contact with comprehensive input, namely, second language (L2) that is slightly above his current level of language skills, and he can focus his attention on the understanding of meaning or information rather than the understanding of the structure, can he acquire the language. Comprehensive input can be expressed by the formula of "i +1". In this theory, Krashen set the current level of learners as "i", "i +1" is the language input level that learners can easily accept and acquire. With the help of context and extra-linguistic information, learners understand the language material of "i + 1" in order to achieve language acquisition and improve their language skills. If input language material is too difficult or far above the current level of students’, ie "i + 2"; or it is too easy or lower than the current level of students’, ie "i + 0" or "i-1", it will result in difficulties in understanding or it is not conducive to the improvement of language skills (Krashen, 1981, 1985). Krashen emphasizes that language acquisition is achieved by understanding information, ie by receiving "comprehensible input." "Comprehensible language input" has the characteristics of comprehensibility, interesting and relevant, not grammatically sequenced, and sufficient input (Krashen, 1981, Krashen and Terrell, 1983).
In order to confirm the validity of his comprehensive input hypothesis, Krashen, in cooperation with Terrell, proposed the theory of natural pedagogy and designed a teaching curriculum based on this method. Krashen divided the process of implementing natural pedagogy into four phases: pre-production, early production, speech emergence, and intermediate fluency (Krashen and Terrell, 1983).
In the first phase, teachers naturally talked to students in class, using basic vocabulary and sentence patterns, and highlighting, repeating key words (Krashen and Terrell, 1983). In the second stage, teachers could use general questions, selective questions and special questions to ask questions and ask students to answer questions with one or two words or phrases. The students should be able to understand these questions and respond (Krashen and Terrell, 1983). In the third stage, special questions such as “how...” were used to ask questions. Students were required to use phrases or complete sentences to explain and express their opinions. Teachers should encourage students to express their thoughts and communicate with others in English in real life. In the fourth stage, teachers could choose a topic or ask students to depict a scene to guide students to use English (Krashen and Terrell, 1983).
Krashen and Terrell’s (1983) natural teaching are based on the hypothesis of comprehensive input. His empirical research shows that the enthusiasm of students in learning L2 is greatly improved, and the efficiency and achievement of L2 learning are obviously improved. The results of these empirical studies show the correctness of his comprehensive input hypothesis.
2.1.3 Contributions and weakness of comprehensive input hypothesis
Comprehensive input hypothesis illustrates the importance of gradual and orderly English teaching, emphasizing creation of an environment that is similar to children’s L1 learning, allowing students to "learn" naturally to improve the fluency of English and communicating ability in English . These conclusions are very valuable suggestions for L2 learning and L2 education, but the author believes that there are still some shortcomings in the comprehensive input hypothesis theory, which is mainly reflected in the following aspects.
First of all, Krashen and Terrell’s (1983) empirical research mainly focuses on the role of input hypothesis, but it does not study the role of language output. It is known that if students only learn knowledge and do not practice repetitively, their levels of listening, speaking, writing is difficult to be improved actually, therefore, Krashen and Terrell’s (1983) study ignores the positive role of language output for students in L2 learning is a weakness of his study.
Second, the input hypothesis overemphasizes the decisive role of external input in L2 acquisition, while ignoring a learner's subjectivity. The input hypothesis holds that as long as a sufficient number of comprehensible inputs are provided, language acquisition naturally takes place. Learners become passive recipients, which completely neglects that learners have their own subjective initiative and it can not stimulate and exert the subjective initiative of students' in learning. The effect of learning will not be good.
Finally, Krashen's comprehensive input hypothesis is based on the theory of mother tongue learning, but for most L2 learners in the world, they do not have a good L2 application environment and many L2 beginners have very poor L2 fundamentals, and the ideal comprehensible input is not that easy for them to achieve.
2.2 Output hypothesis |
