论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Interaction has been considered as a significant contributor to second language acquisition. Drawing on Long’s Interaction Hypothesis， this paper mainly discusses its beneficial roles from three aspects： comprehensible input， negative feedback and modified output. It is aimed to fully understand the role of interaction in the complicated process of L2 acquisition and provide some pedagogic recommendations on L2 instruction.
【Key words】Interaction； Long’s Interaction Hypothesis； Comprehensible input； negative feedback； Modified output； Pedagogical recommendations
Introduction
In regard of how second language is actually acquired， linguistic researchers have been endeavoring to explore into the relationship between interaction and second language acquisition for years. Drawing from Sato’s （1986） longitudinal research initiated in Vietnam， the relationship between learners’ conversational interaction and L2 development is largely selective， which means that certain aspects of interaction are more helpful than others in facilitating L2 learning effectiveness.
Factors that have been recognized as the driving force for SLL through interaction are basically comprehensive input， negative feedback and modified output as Long （1996） mentions that “second language interaction can facilitate L2 development by offering opportunities for learners to receive comprehensive input and feedback， as well as to modify their output” （Pp.451）. Therefore， this article is aimed to analyze the contributions that L2 interaction makes to L2 acquisition from these three specific aspects.
1. The effect of interaction on promoting learners’ comprehensible input and facilitating their L2 acquisition
Comprehensible input in the interaction process is also called comprehension. It is originally put forward by Krashen （1982） in the Input Hypothesis， which claims that second language learners acquire the target language by comprehending input. According to his theory， learners progress and improve along the natural sequence when they receive some target language input which is one step beyond their previously constructed level of linguistic competence. The greater amount of comprehensible input will result in faster and better L2 acquisition， while the lack of access to it will cause little attainment. With a strong agreement to Krashen’s opinion that comprehensible input is necessary for second language acquisition， Long （1983） puts forwards the first version of Interaction hypothesis as an extension of Input Hypothesis， while emphasizing that greater importance should be attached to conversational interaction in which learners are engaged in for the purpose of understanding more comprehensively the usefulness and nature of input for SLA. Actually， the Interaction Hypothesis mainly focuses on one particular conversational interaction， which is the negotiation of meaning. Long （1983） proposes that the negotiation between different interlocutors in interaction can effectively overcome communicational problems and facilitate mutual understanding. The original three-step procedures he comes up with as a of gaining insight into how interaction impact on SLA are following the sequence of 1） conversational/linguistic adjustment promote learners’ comprehensible input； 2） comprehensible input prompt language acquisition； 3） conversational /linguistic adjustment facilitate language acquisition. As a result， a particular emphasis is placed on the importance of some interaction modifications commonly applied by conversationalists， which may include confirmation check， comprehension check and clarification request. With the help of these strategies， interlocutors are capable of giving themselves a lot of time to the process the input， repairing their communication breakdowns and reaching a greater understanding.
The above argument has been extensively examined in plenty of studies and some supportive evidence has been found. The pioneering investigation on the importance of meaning negotiation for providing comprehensible input during the interaction between NS and NNS is undertaken by Pica et al. （1986）. They examine NNS’s comprehension of an English task given by a native speaker instructor under two diverse input conditions： 1） systematically （syntactically
【Key words】Interaction； Long’s Interaction Hypothesis； Comprehensible input； negative feedback； Modified output； Pedagogical recommendations
Introduction
In regard of how second language is actually acquired， linguistic researchers have been endeavoring to explore into the relationship between interaction and second language acquisition for years. Drawing from Sato’s （1986） longitudinal research initiated in Vietnam， the relationship between learners’ conversational interaction and L2 development is largely selective， which means that certain aspects of interaction are more helpful than others in facilitating L2 learning effectiveness.
Factors that have been recognized as the driving force for SLL through interaction are basically comprehensive input， negative feedback and modified output as Long （1996） mentions that “second language interaction can facilitate L2 development by offering opportunities for learners to receive comprehensive input and feedback， as well as to modify their output” （Pp.451）. Therefore， this article is aimed to analyze the contributions that L2 interaction makes to L2 acquisition from these three specific aspects.
1. The effect of interaction on promoting learners’ comprehensible input and facilitating their L2 acquisition
Comprehensible input in the interaction process is also called comprehension. It is originally put forward by Krashen （1982） in the Input Hypothesis， which claims that second language learners acquire the target language by comprehending input. According to his theory， learners progress and improve along the natural sequence when they receive some target language input which is one step beyond their previously constructed level of linguistic competence. The greater amount of comprehensible input will result in faster and better L2 acquisition， while the lack of access to it will cause little attainment. With a strong agreement to Krashen’s opinion that comprehensible input is necessary for second language acquisition， Long （1983） puts forwards the first version of Interaction hypothesis as an extension of Input Hypothesis， while emphasizing that greater importance should be attached to conversational interaction in which learners are engaged in for the purpose of understanding more comprehensively the usefulness and nature of input for SLA. Actually， the Interaction Hypothesis mainly focuses on one particular conversational interaction， which is the negotiation of meaning. Long （1983） proposes that the negotiation between different interlocutors in interaction can effectively overcome communicational problems and facilitate mutual understanding. The original three-step procedures he comes up with as a of gaining insight into how interaction impact on SLA are following the sequence of 1） conversational/linguistic adjustment promote learners’ comprehensible input； 2） comprehensible input prompt language acquisition； 3） conversational /linguistic adjustment facilitate language acquisition. As a result， a particular emphasis is placed on the importance of some interaction modifications commonly applied by conversationalists， which may include confirmation check， comprehension check and clarification request. With the help of these strategies， interlocutors are capable of giving themselves a lot of time to the process the input， repairing their communication breakdowns and reaching a greater understanding.
The above argument has been extensively examined in plenty of studies and some supportive evidence has been found. The pioneering investigation on the importance of meaning negotiation for providing comprehensible input during the interaction between NS and NNS is undertaken by Pica et al. （1986）. They examine NNS’s comprehension of an English task given by a native speaker instructor under two diverse input conditions： 1） systematically （syntactically