基于语料库的EFL课堂会话中的修正片断研究
|
摘要
一直以来，许多外语教学研究者致力于课堂教师—学生会话中的修正片段的结构分析，既失误源、诱发因子和修正。本研究根据Swain的“修正后的可理解输出假设”理论，将修正片段的结构分析延伸至学生修正后的输出这一话步，以期探明课堂会话中的修正机制如何影响学生的语言输出。本文的研究问题主要是：(一)中国英语课堂会话倾向使用哪一种修正模式?哪一种修正模式更能引导学生产生修正后的可理解输出?(二)在教师诱发的修正片段中，学生语言形式错误、教师反馈语(教师主要通过反馈语诱发修正)和学生修正后的可理解输出这三者之间的关系如何?(三)上述研究问题在三个不同水平课堂会话中(小学、初中和高中)的差异如何?
本研究是一个基于语料库的研究，基于语料库的研究依赖计算机，而计算机只能辨认语言符号，由于会话结构的复杂性，如何在众多的语言信息中用计算机提取有用的语言信息是一个值得研究的课题。本文从三届全国英语课堂教学优质课大赛中选取了30节一等奖课堂作为语料库(小学、初中、高中各10节)，并探索性地用语料库的研究方法从语料库中提取了405个修正片段。其主要方法是：首先基于前人的研究建立分析修正片段的结构框架和模式，同时从语料库中随机抽取6节课堂(小学、初中、高中各两节)作一个先行研究，总结出提取修正片段的检索词，再利用Wordsmith Tools中的检索功能从大规模语料库中提取出修正片段。然后对片段中的修正模式(学生自我诱发自我完成的修正、学生自我诱发教师完成的修正、教师诱发学生完成的修正和教师诱发教师完成的修正)、语言形式错误类型(语音、语法和词汇错误)、教师反馈语(形式协商法、投射法、公开更正法)以及学生修正后的输出进行进一步地标注。最后对这些标记进行检索，对数据进行分析、讨论。
分析结果显示，就课堂会话中的四种基本修正模式而言，除学生诱发的教师修正所占比例太少(3.3％)外，其他三种修正模式在使用上并没有明显差异。进一步的分析显示，教师诱发的修正的使用明显多于学生诱发的修正；学生完成的修正的使用明显多于教师完成的修正。就三种不同水平的课堂而言，小学课堂中的教师诱发的教师修正的使用明显多于其他三种修正模式；初中课堂会话倾向于教师诱发的学生修正(没有统计意义上的显著差异)；高中课堂会话中的学生诱发的学生修正的使用明显多于其他三种修正模式。统计分析还显示，学生诱发的学生修正和教师诱发的学生修正更能引导学生产生修正后的可理解输出。本文认为，课堂会话中的修正模式反映了教师作为中介者的中介作用。
中介作用的最终目的是促进学生的自主学习。语言水平较低者往往受到较多的
教师指导，随着学生语言水平的提高，教师应创造机会让学生进行自主学习。
当教师诱发修正时，教师更多会注意语言形式的错误（83．5％），注意到语言形
式错误的教师通常会用形式协商法诱发学生对词汇错误和语音错误进行修正，
并且用在词汇错误和语音错误后的形式协商法比投射法和公开更正法更能推动
学生产生修正后的可理解输出。教师一般不倾向于用形式协商法来诱发语法错
误。就三种不同水平的课堂而言，小学课堂中的教师用公开更正法，高中教师
用投射法诱发学生修正语法错误，初中教师没有明显的倾向用那种反馈语诱发
学生修正语法错误。本文认为，学生语言错误的性质影响教师反馈语的选抒，
而教师的反馈语又影响了学生产生修正后的可理解输出。
本文为英语课堂教学提供了一些启示：在课堂教师一学生会话中，是教师
诱发还是学生诱发修正应充分考虑学生的语言水平，根据不同水平的学生采用
不同的修正模式。当教师诱发修正时，教师应考虑学生语言形式错误的性质，
根据不同的错误类型选择不同的反馈语诱发修正。本研究表明：形式协商法有
利于不同水平的学生修正词汇和语音错误：而公开更正法有利于小学生，投射
法有利于高中生修正语法错误。
本研究是一个受语料库驱动的研究，它的另外一个意义在于它开发了一些
语料库检索工具的新的功能，这些功能可能对相关研究有借鉴作用。
The structure of repair sequences in classroom conversation has been the focus for second or foreign language teachers or researchers, that is: trouble source, trigger and repair. The present study will, based on Swain' modified comprehensible output hypothesis, study how the structure of repair sequences affect students' producing modified comprehensible output. The research questions are: 1) In China's English classroom conversation, which repair patterns are more likely to be used and which repair patters are more likely to lead the students to produce more modified comprehensible output? 2) In teachers initiated repair sequences, what are the relationships among students' linguistic errors, teachers' feedback and modified comprehensible output? 3) How do the findings of the above two questions reflect in the 3 leveled classroom conversation (primary school, middle school and senior middle school level)?
The present study is a corpus-based approach, corpus-based studies rely on computer, but computer can only identify linguistic forms.It is a new project to pick out the meaningful sequencesby computer. The thesis has chosen 30 classes from the three times of national qualified English classroom teaching competition as its research data (10 from primary school, 10 from junior middle school and 10 from senior middle school teaching). It has picked out 405 repair sequences through a set of corpus-based methods. The main methods are that first, based on the previous studies, establish the models and framework to analyze repair sequences; then, randomly choose 6 lessons as sub-corpus to do a pilot study to conclude the search words and use the search words to do searching in the large scale of corpus to pick out the repair sequences. For those sequences which do not contain search words, The present study use lemmatization and word clusters function of Wordsmith Tools to pick them out. After picking out the seque
nces, further marking have been done for error types (repair of meaning and repair of form),types of errors of linguistic form (grammatical lexical, phonological errors), feedback types (negotiation of form, recast and explicit correction), repair patterns (self-initiated self repair, self initiated other repair, other initiated self repair and other initiated other repair), students' modified output.
The findings of the present study indicate that among the four repair patterns (SISR, SIOR, OIOR, OISR), except for that SIORs occupy a very small part (3.3%), the other three repair patterns do not differ significantly. The results showed that language proficiency affected the using of repair patterns: the primary school classes prefer to use OIORs';
the junior middle school classes tend to use OISRs and the senior middle school classes prefer to use SISRs. The statistic analysis indicated that SISRs and OISRs leaded the students to produce more MCOs. The present study argued that the repair patterns used in the classes reflected the teachers' role as mediators.
When teachers initiate repairs, teachers noticed more errors of linguistic forms (83.5%). The teachers in three levels of classes preferred to use negotiation of form to follow lexical and phonological errors. The findings of the present study showed that negotiation of form following lexical and phonological errors pushed the students to produce more MCOs than the other two corrective feedback types (recast and explicit correction). The teachers did not prefer to use negotiation to follow grammatical errors. The primary school teachers preferred to use explicit correction and the senior middle school teachers preferred to use recast after grammatical errors. The junior middle school teachers did not have any preferred feedback types after grammatical errors. The present study argued that the nature of the errors and the teaching goals of the different levels of classes affected the teachers' choosing of feedback types and the teachers' feedback types affected the students' producing of MCOs.
Findings of the present study provide some pedag
本研究是一个基于语料库的研究，基于语料库的研究依赖计算机，而计算机只能辨认语言符号，由于会话结构的复杂性，如何在众多的语言信息中用计算机提取有用的语言信息是一个值得研究的课题。本文从三届全国英语课堂教学优质课大赛中选取了30节一等奖课堂作为语料库(小学、初中、高中各10节)，并探索性地用语料库的研究方法从语料库中提取了405个修正片段。其主要方法是：首先基于前人的研究建立分析修正片段的结构框架和模式，同时从语料库中随机抽取6节课堂(小学、初中、高中各两节)作一个先行研究，总结出提取修正片段的检索词，再利用Wordsmith Tools中的检索功能从大规模语料库中提取出修正片段。然后对片段中的修正模式(学生自我诱发自我完成的修正、学生自我诱发教师完成的修正、教师诱发学生完成的修正和教师诱发教师完成的修正)、语言形式错误类型(语音、语法和词汇错误)、教师反馈语(形式协商法、投射法、公开更正法)以及学生修正后的输出进行进一步地标注。最后对这些标记进行检索，对数据进行分析、讨论。
分析结果显示，就课堂会话中的四种基本修正模式而言，除学生诱发的教师修正所占比例太少(3.3％)外，其他三种修正模式在使用上并没有明显差异。进一步的分析显示，教师诱发的修正的使用明显多于学生诱发的修正；学生完成的修正的使用明显多于教师完成的修正。就三种不同水平的课堂而言，小学课堂中的教师诱发的教师修正的使用明显多于其他三种修正模式；初中课堂会话倾向于教师诱发的学生修正(没有统计意义上的显著差异)；高中课堂会话中的学生诱发的学生修正的使用明显多于其他三种修正模式。统计分析还显示，学生诱发的学生修正和教师诱发的学生修正更能引导学生产生修正后的可理解输出。本文认为，课堂会话中的修正模式反映了教师作为中介者的中介作用。
中介作用的最终目的是促进学生的自主学习。语言水平较低者往往受到较多的
教师指导，随着学生语言水平的提高，教师应创造机会让学生进行自主学习。
当教师诱发修正时，教师更多会注意语言形式的错误（83．5％），注意到语言形
式错误的教师通常会用形式协商法诱发学生对词汇错误和语音错误进行修正，
并且用在词汇错误和语音错误后的形式协商法比投射法和公开更正法更能推动
学生产生修正后的可理解输出。教师一般不倾向于用形式协商法来诱发语法错
误。就三种不同水平的课堂而言，小学课堂中的教师用公开更正法，高中教师
用投射法诱发学生修正语法错误，初中教师没有明显的倾向用那种反馈语诱发
学生修正语法错误。本文认为，学生语言错误的性质影响教师反馈语的选抒，
而教师的反馈语又影响了学生产生修正后的可理解输出。
本文为英语课堂教学提供了一些启示：在课堂教师一学生会话中，是教师
诱发还是学生诱发修正应充分考虑学生的语言水平，根据不同水平的学生采用
不同的修正模式。当教师诱发修正时，教师应考虑学生语言形式错误的性质，
根据不同的错误类型选择不同的反馈语诱发修正。本研究表明：形式协商法有
利于不同水平的学生修正词汇和语音错误：而公开更正法有利于小学生，投射
法有利于高中生修正语法错误。
本研究是一个受语料库驱动的研究，它的另外一个意义在于它开发了一些
语料库检索工具的新的功能，这些功能可能对相关研究有借鉴作用。
The structure of repair sequences in classroom conversation has been the focus for second or foreign language teachers or researchers, that is: trouble source, trigger and repair. The present study will, based on Swain' modified comprehensible output hypothesis, study how the structure of repair sequences affect students' producing modified comprehensible output. The research questions are: 1) In China's English classroom conversation, which repair patterns are more likely to be used and which repair patters are more likely to lead the students to produce more modified comprehensible output? 2) In teachers initiated repair sequences, what are the relationships among students' linguistic errors, teachers' feedback and modified comprehensible output? 3) How do the findings of the above two questions reflect in the 3 leveled classroom conversation (primary school, middle school and senior middle school level)?
The present study is a corpus-based approach, corpus-based studies rely on computer, but computer can only identify linguistic forms.It is a new project to pick out the meaningful sequencesby computer. The thesis has chosen 30 classes from the three times of national qualified English classroom teaching competition as its research data (10 from primary school, 10 from junior middle school and 10 from senior middle school teaching). It has picked out 405 repair sequences through a set of corpus-based methods. The main methods are that first, based on the previous studies, establish the models and framework to analyze repair sequences; then, randomly choose 6 lessons as sub-corpus to do a pilot study to conclude the search words and use the search words to do searching in the large scale of corpus to pick out the repair sequences. For those sequences which do not contain search words, The present study use lemmatization and word clusters function of Wordsmith Tools to pick them out. After picking out the seque
nces, further marking have been done for error types (repair of meaning and repair of form),types of errors of linguistic form (grammatical lexical, phonological errors), feedback types (negotiation of form, recast and explicit correction), repair patterns (self-initiated self repair, self initiated other repair, other initiated self repair and other initiated other repair), students' modified output.
The findings of the present study indicate that among the four repair patterns (SISR, SIOR, OIOR, OISR), except for that SIORs occupy a very small part (3.3%), the other three repair patterns do not differ significantly. The results showed that language proficiency affected the using of repair patterns: the primary school classes prefer to use OIORs';
the junior middle school classes tend to use OISRs and the senior middle school classes prefer to use SISRs. The statistic analysis indicated that SISRs and OISRs leaded the students to produce more MCOs. The present study argued that the repair patterns used in the classes reflected the teachers' role as mediators.
When teachers initiate repairs, teachers noticed more errors of linguistic forms (83.5%). The teachers in three levels of classes preferred to use negotiation of form to follow lexical and phonological errors. The findings of the present study showed that negotiation of form following lexical and phonological errors pushed the students to produce more MCOs than the other two corrective feedback types (recast and explicit correction). The teachers did not prefer to use negotiation to follow grammatical errors. The primary school teachers preferred to use explicit correction and the senior middle school teachers preferred to use recast after grammatical errors. The junior middle school teachers did not have any preferred feedback types after grammatical errors. The present study argued that the nature of the errors and the teaching goals of the different levels of classes affected the teachers' choosing of feedback types and the teachers' feedback types affected the students' producing of MCOs.
Findings of the present study provide some pedag
引文
Allright, D., 1975, Problems in the Study of the Language Teacher's Treatment of Learner Error. In M.Burt & H.Dulay (Eds.),New Directions in Second Language Learning, Teaching and Bilingual Education: On TESOL'75. Waschington,TESOL
Allright, D. & Bailey, K., 1991, Focus on the Language Classroom.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Ayoun, D. , 2001, The Role of Negative and Positive Feedback in the Second Language Acquisition of the Pass(?) Compose and Imparfait. The Modem Language Journal, 85 ii
Batstone,R., 2002, Context of Engagement: A Discourse Perception on Intake and Pushed Output. System 30(2002) 1-14
Biber, D.,Courall,S. & Reppen, R., 2000, Corpus Linguistics, Beijing:Foreign Language and Research Press
Buckwalter, P., 2001, Repair Sequences in Spanish L2 Dyadic Discourse:A Descriptive Study. The Modem Language Journal, 85 ⅲ
Chaudron, C., 1988, Second Language Classroom New York:Cambridge University Press
Chaudron, C., 1977, A Descriptive Model of Discourse in the Corrective Treatment of Learners' Errors Language Learning,27,29-46.
Chenoweth,N.A., Day, R.,Chun, A.E. & Luppescu,S., 1983, Attitudes and Preferences of ESL Students to Error Correction. SSLA 6,No, 1
Chun, Ann E., Richard, R., Day, N., Ann Cheoweth& Stuart Luppescu, 1982, Errors, Interaction and Correction: A Study of Native-nonnative Conversation. TESOL Quartly 16,4:537-546
Corder, S.P., 1967, The Significance of Learners' Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 4,161-170
Day, R., Chenoweth,Ann N., Chun,Ann,E& Stuart Luppeseu, 1984,
Corrective Feedback in Native-Nonnative Discourse.Language Learning Vo134 No2
Doughty, C.&Williams,J., 1998, Pedagogical Choices in Focus on Form.In C. Doughty & J.Williams(Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. New York:Cambridge University Press
Ellis,R, Bastrkman,H.& Loewen,S., 2001, Learner Uptake in Communicative Lessons. Language Learning 51:2
Gaskill, W., 1980, Correction in Native Speaker-nonnative Speaker Conversation. In D. Larsen-Freeman (Eds.) Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research, Rowley, MA.Newbury House.
Gold, E., 1967, Language Identification in the Limit. Information and Control, 10 447-474
Hendriekson, J., 1978, Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory Research and Practice. Modem Language Journal, 62,387-398
James, C., 1998, Errors in Language Learning and Use. Longman.
Jefferson, G., 1972, Side Sequences. In D. Sudnow(Eds.). Studies in Social Interaction. New York: Free Press. 294-338
Kasper, G., 1986, Repair in Classroom Teaching. In G. Kasper (Eds.) Learning, Teaching and Communication in the Foreign Language Classroom. Arthus University Press.
Kennedy, G., 2000, An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Kormos, J., 1999,Monitoring and Self-repair in L2. Language learning 49; 2 303-342
Krashen, S., 1982, Principle and practice in Second language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon
Krashen, S., 1981 b, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Lennon, P., 1990, Investigating Fluency in EFL: A Quantitative Approach. Language Learning 40 387-417
Li Hua, 2001, Repair Mechanism in Foreign Language Classroom Interaction. Teaching English in China Vol.24.No 1
Lightbown, p.& Spada, N., 1990, Focus- on- form and Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching: Effects on Second Language Learning. SSLA, 12 429-448.
Long, M., 1991, Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology. In K.de Bot, D.Coste, R.Ginsberg & Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-culture Perspective. Amsterdem: Benjamins.
Long, M., 1983b, Native/nonnative Speaker Conversation in the Second Language Classroom. In M. Clark and J. Handscombe (Eds.), On TESOL' 82: Pacific Perspectives on Language Learning and Teaching. Washington D.C,: TESOL
Long, M., 1983c, Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory. Paper Presented at the Tenth University of Michigan Conference on Applied Linguistics.
Long, M. & Robbinson, P., 1998, Focus on Form: Theory, Research and Practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R., 1998a, Recast, Repetition and Ambiguity in L2 Classroom Discourse. SSLA. 20,51-81
Lyster, R., 1998b, Negotiation of Form, Recasts and Explicit Correction in Relation to Error Types and Learner Repair in Immersion Classroom. Language Learning 48:2 183-218
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L., 1997, Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake: Negotiation of Form in Communicative Classroom.SSLA19 37-66
Marcus, G., 1993 , Negative Evidence in Language Acquisition Cognition, 46, 53-85
Muranoi, H., 2000, Focus on Form Through Interactive Enhancement: Integrating Formal Instruction into a Communicative Task in EFL Classrooms. Language Learning 50:4 pp617-673
Nobuyoshi,J & Ellis,R., 1993, Focused Communication Tasks and Second Language Acquisition. ELT Journal vol. 47/3
O'Connor, N., 1988, Repairs as Indicative of Interlanguage Variation and Change. In T.J. Walsh(Eds.), Georgetown University Round Table in Language and Linguistics 1988: Synchronic and Diachronic Approach to Linguistic Variation and Change.Washington D.C. George Town University Press
Oliver, N., 2000, Age Differences in Negotiation and Feedback in Classroom and Pairwork. Language Learning, 50:1 pp119-151
Pica, T., 1994, Review Article Research on Negotiation: What Does It Reveal About Second-Language Learning Conditions,Processes and Outcomes? Language Learning. 44/3, 493-527
Pica, T., 1988, Interlanguage Adjustments as an Outcome of NS-NNS Negotiated Interaction. Language Learning vol. 38 No: 1
Pica, T., Italliday, L., Lewis, N. & Morgenthaler, L., 1989, Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learners . Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11,63-90
Rivers, W. P., 2001, Autonomy at All Costs: An Ethnography of Metacognitive Self-assessment and Self-management Among Experienced Language Learners. The Modern Language Journal 85ii
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G., 1974 A Simplest Systematic for the Organization of Turn taking for Conversation.Language vol.50 number 4
Sehegloff, E. A., 1979, The Relevance of Repair to Syntax for Conversation. In Givon,T. (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics 12:Discourse and Syntax. Academic Press. New York.
Sehegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H., 1977, The Preference for Self-correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language 53:361-82
Schehadeh, A., 1999, Non-native Speakers' Production of Modified Comprehensible Output and Second Language Learning. Language Learning 49:4 pp627-675
Schmidt, R., 1993, Awareness and Second Language Acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13,206-226.
Schmidt, R., 1990, The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 11,129-158.
Schmidt, R. & Frota, S., 1986, Developing Basic Conversation Ability in a Second Language: A Case Study of An Adult Learner of Portuguese. In R. Day (Eds.), Talking to Learn. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Schwarz, J., 1980, The Negotiation of Meaning; Repair in Conversations Between Second Language Learners of English. In D. Larsen Freeman (Eds.), Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Sinclair, J. & Couthard, M., 1975, Towards an Analysis of Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
Spada, N., 1997, Form-focused Instruction and Second Language Acquisition: A Review of Classroom and Laboratory Research. Language Learning, 30, 73-87.
Swain, M., 1998, Focus on Form Through Conscious Reflection. In C. Doughty & J. William (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M., 1995, Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of G. Widdowson. New York: Oxford University press.
Swain, M., 1993, The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren't Enough. The Canadian Modem Language Review, 50, 158-164.
Swain, M., 1985, Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in Its
Development. In S. Gass & Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M., 1984, A Review of Immersion Education in Canada: Research and Evaluation Studies. ELT Documents, 119,35-51
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S., 1995, Problems in Output and Cognitive Process They Generate: A Step Towards Second language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391
Tarone, E., 1980, Communication Strategies, Foreigner Talk and Repair in Interlanguage. Language Learning 30, 417-431
Tsui, A.B.M., 1995, Introducing Classroom Interaction. Penguin English.
Van den Branden, 1997, Effects of Negotiation on Language Learner's Output. Language Learning, 47:4
Van Hest, E., 1996a, Self-repair as a Measure of Language Proficiency. Paper Presented at the 18th Annual Language Testing Colloquiums in Tamper, Finland
Van Hest, E., 1996b, Self-repair in L1 and L2 Production. Tilbury, the Netherlands: Tilbury University Press
Van Lier, L., 1988, The Classroom and the Language Learner. Longman
Varonis, E. & Gass, S., 1985, Non-native/non-native Conversation: A Model for Negotiation of Meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6,71-90
Williams, J., 2001, The Effectiveness of Spontaneous Attention to Form. System (2001) 325-340
Williams, M. & Burden, R., 1997, Psychology for Language Teachers . Cambridge University Press
北京师范大学课题组2001全国首届小学英语优质课大赛课堂教学观摩分析报告(上)．中小学外语教学．2001．第8期
北京师范大学课题组．1999．全国第三届中学英语优质课大赛课堂教学观摩分析报告(上)．中小学外语教学．1999，第3期
戴炜栋(Dai)2001．构建具有中国特色的英语教学“一条龙”体系．外语教学与研究．2001第5期
卢仁顺(Lu)．2002．“输出假设”研究对我国英语教学的启示 外语与外语教学．2002第4期
孙启耀、尹英莉(Sun etal)．2001．国外对英语会话中修正现象的研究综评．西安外国语学院学报2001第6期
王初明、牛瑞英、郑小湘(Wang etal)．2000．以写促学．外语教学与研究．2000(3)
王银泉(Wang)．1999．第三届国际英语教师协会年会侧记．外语界．1999年第2期
应惠莲、何莲珍、周颂波(Ying etal)，1998．大学公共英语教学改革．外语教学与研究．1998第4期
赵晓红(2hao)．1998．大学英语阅读课教师话语的调查与分析．外语界 1998第2期
Allright, D. & Bailey, K., 1991, Focus on the Language Classroom.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Ayoun, D. , 2001, The Role of Negative and Positive Feedback in the Second Language Acquisition of the Pass(?) Compose and Imparfait. The Modem Language Journal, 85 ii
Batstone,R., 2002, Context of Engagement: A Discourse Perception on Intake and Pushed Output. System 30(2002) 1-14
Biber, D.,Courall,S. & Reppen, R., 2000, Corpus Linguistics, Beijing:Foreign Language and Research Press
Buckwalter, P., 2001, Repair Sequences in Spanish L2 Dyadic Discourse:A Descriptive Study. The Modem Language Journal, 85 ⅲ
Chaudron, C., 1988, Second Language Classroom New York:Cambridge University Press
Chaudron, C., 1977, A Descriptive Model of Discourse in the Corrective Treatment of Learners' Errors Language Learning,27,29-46.
Chenoweth,N.A., Day, R.,Chun, A.E. & Luppescu,S., 1983, Attitudes and Preferences of ESL Students to Error Correction. SSLA 6,No, 1
Chun, Ann E., Richard, R., Day, N., Ann Cheoweth& Stuart Luppescu, 1982, Errors, Interaction and Correction: A Study of Native-nonnative Conversation. TESOL Quartly 16,4:537-546
Corder, S.P., 1967, The Significance of Learners' Errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 4,161-170
Day, R., Chenoweth,Ann N., Chun,Ann,E& Stuart Luppeseu, 1984,
Corrective Feedback in Native-Nonnative Discourse.Language Learning Vo134 No2
Doughty, C.&Williams,J., 1998, Pedagogical Choices in Focus on Form.In C. Doughty & J.Williams(Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. New York:Cambridge University Press
Ellis,R, Bastrkman,H.& Loewen,S., 2001, Learner Uptake in Communicative Lessons. Language Learning 51:2
Gaskill, W., 1980, Correction in Native Speaker-nonnative Speaker Conversation. In D. Larsen-Freeman (Eds.) Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research, Rowley, MA.Newbury House.
Gold, E., 1967, Language Identification in the Limit. Information and Control, 10 447-474
Hendriekson, J., 1978, Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory Research and Practice. Modem Language Journal, 62,387-398
James, C., 1998, Errors in Language Learning and Use. Longman.
Jefferson, G., 1972, Side Sequences. In D. Sudnow(Eds.). Studies in Social Interaction. New York: Free Press. 294-338
Kasper, G., 1986, Repair in Classroom Teaching. In G. Kasper (Eds.) Learning, Teaching and Communication in the Foreign Language Classroom. Arthus University Press.
Kennedy, G., 2000, An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press
Kormos, J., 1999,Monitoring and Self-repair in L2. Language learning 49; 2 303-342
Krashen, S., 1982, Principle and practice in Second language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon
Krashen, S., 1981 b, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Lennon, P., 1990, Investigating Fluency in EFL: A Quantitative Approach. Language Learning 40 387-417
Li Hua, 2001, Repair Mechanism in Foreign Language Classroom Interaction. Teaching English in China Vol.24.No 1
Lightbown, p.& Spada, N., 1990, Focus- on- form and Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching: Effects on Second Language Learning. SSLA, 12 429-448.
Long, M., 1991, Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology. In K.de Bot, D.Coste, R.Ginsberg & Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-culture Perspective. Amsterdem: Benjamins.
Long, M., 1983b, Native/nonnative Speaker Conversation in the Second Language Classroom. In M. Clark and J. Handscombe (Eds.), On TESOL' 82: Pacific Perspectives on Language Learning and Teaching. Washington D.C,: TESOL
Long, M., 1983c, Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory. Paper Presented at the Tenth University of Michigan Conference on Applied Linguistics.
Long, M. & Robbinson, P., 1998, Focus on Form: Theory, Research and Practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R., 1998a, Recast, Repetition and Ambiguity in L2 Classroom Discourse. SSLA. 20,51-81
Lyster, R., 1998b, Negotiation of Form, Recasts and Explicit Correction in Relation to Error Types and Learner Repair in Immersion Classroom. Language Learning 48:2 183-218
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L., 1997, Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake: Negotiation of Form in Communicative Classroom.SSLA19 37-66
Marcus, G., 1993 , Negative Evidence in Language Acquisition Cognition, 46, 53-85
Muranoi, H., 2000, Focus on Form Through Interactive Enhancement: Integrating Formal Instruction into a Communicative Task in EFL Classrooms. Language Learning 50:4 pp617-673
Nobuyoshi,J & Ellis,R., 1993, Focused Communication Tasks and Second Language Acquisition. ELT Journal vol. 47/3
O'Connor, N., 1988, Repairs as Indicative of Interlanguage Variation and Change. In T.J. Walsh(Eds.), Georgetown University Round Table in Language and Linguistics 1988: Synchronic and Diachronic Approach to Linguistic Variation and Change.Washington D.C. George Town University Press
Oliver, N., 2000, Age Differences in Negotiation and Feedback in Classroom and Pairwork. Language Learning, 50:1 pp119-151
Pica, T., 1994, Review Article Research on Negotiation: What Does It Reveal About Second-Language Learning Conditions,Processes and Outcomes? Language Learning. 44/3, 493-527
Pica, T., 1988, Interlanguage Adjustments as an Outcome of NS-NNS Negotiated Interaction. Language Learning vol. 38 No: 1
Pica, T., Italliday, L., Lewis, N. & Morgenthaler, L., 1989, Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learners . Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11,63-90
Rivers, W. P., 2001, Autonomy at All Costs: An Ethnography of Metacognitive Self-assessment and Self-management Among Experienced Language Learners. The Modern Language Journal 85ii
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G., 1974 A Simplest Systematic for the Organization of Turn taking for Conversation.Language vol.50 number 4
Sehegloff, E. A., 1979, The Relevance of Repair to Syntax for Conversation. In Givon,T. (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics 12:Discourse and Syntax. Academic Press. New York.
Sehegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H., 1977, The Preference for Self-correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation. Language 53:361-82
Schehadeh, A., 1999, Non-native Speakers' Production of Modified Comprehensible Output and Second Language Learning. Language Learning 49:4 pp627-675
Schmidt, R., 1993, Awareness and Second Language Acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13,206-226.
Schmidt, R., 1990, The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 11,129-158.
Schmidt, R. & Frota, S., 1986, Developing Basic Conversation Ability in a Second Language: A Case Study of An Adult Learner of Portuguese. In R. Day (Eds.), Talking to Learn. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Schwarz, J., 1980, The Negotiation of Meaning; Repair in Conversations Between Second Language Learners of English. In D. Larsen Freeman (Eds.), Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Sinclair, J. & Couthard, M., 1975, Towards an Analysis of Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
Spada, N., 1997, Form-focused Instruction and Second Language Acquisition: A Review of Classroom and Laboratory Research. Language Learning, 30, 73-87.
Swain, M., 1998, Focus on Form Through Conscious Reflection. In C. Doughty & J. William (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swain, M., 1995, Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of G. Widdowson. New York: Oxford University press.
Swain, M., 1993, The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren't Enough. The Canadian Modem Language Review, 50, 158-164.
Swain, M., 1985, Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in Its
Development. In S. Gass & Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M., 1984, A Review of Immersion Education in Canada: Research and Evaluation Studies. ELT Documents, 119,35-51
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S., 1995, Problems in Output and Cognitive Process They Generate: A Step Towards Second language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391
Tarone, E., 1980, Communication Strategies, Foreigner Talk and Repair in Interlanguage. Language Learning 30, 417-431
Tsui, A.B.M., 1995, Introducing Classroom Interaction. Penguin English.
Van den Branden, 1997, Effects of Negotiation on Language Learner's Output. Language Learning, 47:4
Van Hest, E., 1996a, Self-repair as a Measure of Language Proficiency. Paper Presented at the 18th Annual Language Testing Colloquiums in Tamper, Finland
Van Hest, E., 1996b, Self-repair in L1 and L2 Production. Tilbury, the Netherlands: Tilbury University Press
Van Lier, L., 1988, The Classroom and the Language Learner. Longman
Varonis, E. & Gass, S., 1985, Non-native/non-native Conversation: A Model for Negotiation of Meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6,71-90
Williams, J., 2001, The Effectiveness of Spontaneous Attention to Form. System (2001) 325-340
Williams, M. & Burden, R., 1997, Psychology for Language Teachers . Cambridge University Press
北京师范大学课题组2001全国首届小学英语优质课大赛课堂教学观摩分析报告(上)．中小学外语教学．2001．第8期
北京师范大学课题组．1999．全国第三届中学英语优质课大赛课堂教学观摩分析报告(上)．中小学外语教学．1999，第3期
戴炜栋(Dai)2001．构建具有中国特色的英语教学“一条龙”体系．外语教学与研究．2001第5期
卢仁顺(Lu)．2002．“输出假设”研究对我国英语教学的启示 外语与外语教学．2002第4期
孙启耀、尹英莉(Sun etal)．2001．国外对英语会话中修正现象的研究综评．西安外国语学院学报2001第6期
王初明、牛瑞英、郑小湘(Wang etal)．2000．以写促学．外语教学与研究．2000(3)
王银泉(Wang)．1999．第三届国际英语教师协会年会侧记．外语界．1999年第2期
应惠莲、何莲珍、周颂波(Ying etal)，1998．大学公共英语教学改革．外语教学与研究．1998第4期
赵晓红(2hao)．1998．大学英语阅读课教师话语的调查与分析．外语界 1998第2期
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |