论文部分内容阅读
Abstract:Input and output are the two important concepts in foreign language teaching and learning process. This paper first reviews Krashen’s Input Hypothesis and Swain’s Output Hypothesis, then focuses on their enlightenments to foreign language teaching.
Key words: Second language acquisition; input hypothesis; comprehensible input; output hypothesis
I.Introduction
Second language acquisition is a process of adopting a language (not the native language) by conscious or unconscious learning under natural conditions or guidance (Ellis, 1900). Researchers into the second language acquisition or foreign language learning began in the 1950s. From the 1980s, researchers gradually turned their attention to the effect of the second language acquisition or foreign language teaching.
Among many theories, the Input Hypothesis by Krashen and the Output Hypothesis by Swain are the most famous. They made great contributories to people’s second language acquisition or foreign language teaching and learning.
II.Input Hypothesis
In the early 1980’s, the burgeoning field of Second Language Acquisition was dominated by the concept of input. Stephen D. Krashen, an American famous linguists, has put forward one of the world’ influential “Language Acquisition Theory”. This theory contains five hypotheses, Krashen believes that the input hypothesis is the most important one among them as it touches upon directly the most fundamental question of second language acquisition.
According to Krashen, “Second-language acquisition theory provides a very clear explanation as to why immersion works. According to current theory, we acquire language in only one way: when we understand messages in that language, when we receive comprehensible input.”(Krashen, 1985). Based on the hypothesis, he introduces the concept of comprehensible input, namely, language acquisition conforms to the pattern of “i+1”, that is, language acquisition shall take place if and only if the comprehensible input is just slightly higher than the learner’s current language ability. Krashen emphasized that language is acquired by understanding the language information. That is to say, language acquisition can be attained by achieving the comprehensible input.
However, this Input Hypothesis exaggerated the importance of language input. It also simplified the process of language learning. What’s more, Input Hypothesis ignored people’s initiative and the individual difference. In order to complete and supplement the theory, Swain put forward the “Output Hypothesis” in 1980s, and later the role of output transformed from being ignored to being accepted by everyone.
III. Output hypothesis
The output hypothesis claims that the act of producing language (speaking or writing) constitutes, under certain circumstances, part of the process of second language learning.
Merrill Swain (2005: 471) argued that output, by its nature, is not the end of production, but rather a process of the language learning. Therefore, output, if carefully taken care of, can also contribute to the language learning. In order to prove this, she has outlined three functions conducive to second language learning: a) the noticing and triggering function, b) the hypothesis-testing function and c) the metalinguistic function.
IV. The implications of input and output in English teaching
In China, many students are used to and quite good at passively receiving language items that might later be used to communication. But regretfully, they are not well trained with the ability to retrieve those stored language items in communication, which is actually quite vital for them. They are good at grammar, but it’s difficult for them to express themselves freely.
Language learners in China generally aim to achieve four major skills: listening, reading, speaking and writing. The first two skills are receptive ones, mainly concerned with input, while the last two are productive ones, closely connected with output, which is the emphasis of this part. Therefore, what is referred to as “the balance between input and output” should be put as “the balance between the training of receptive skills and productive skills”.
In English class, the new words and phrases in the textbook are supposed to be finely-tuned input, so are most of the exercises. Most of the time in class, teachers are always busy with the input: explaining the new words, analyzing sentence structure, introducing grammar rules, and so on. Very limited time in class is left for students to have some independent, autonomous practice out, let alone the communication output. In a word, input exceeds output greatly in traditional English language teaching classes in China.
In second language acquisition, input and output are very necessary. Thus, nowadays, many linguists and language teachers turn to the communicative approach, which “pay systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language” (William Littlewood, 1981).
V. Conclusion
The balance between language input and output plays an indispensible role in second language acquisition. Once teachers and students notice this, they will become more efficient in language learning. In language class, teachers must attach more importance on language output in order to maintain the balance between language input and output, and they can adopt various teaching method so that the students can have an all-round development capability in second language acquisition.
Bibliography
[1] Ellis, R. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1900.
[2] Guy Cook, Barbara Seidlhofer. 应用语言学的原理与实践[M]. 上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999.
[3] Krashen S. D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1982.
[4] Littlewood W. Communicative Language Teaching-An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
[5] Merrill Swain, Yang Luxin. Output Hypothesis：Its History and Its Future.[J]. 外语教学与研究，2008 (1).
[6] Zoltan Dornyei 著, 宋孔尧译. 实践中的Krashen 输入假说和Swain 输入假说: 设计i + 1 教学技巧[ J] . 国外外语教学, 1994, ( 1) .
[7] 郑银芳. 二语习得中的输入与输出[J]. 广州大学学报，2003（2）.
作者简介：陈小峥(1984- )，女，广东湛江人，广东行政职业学院外语系教师，主要研究方向为应用语言学，英语教学。
Key words: Second language acquisition; input hypothesis; comprehensible input; output hypothesis
I.Introduction
Second language acquisition is a process of adopting a language (not the native language) by conscious or unconscious learning under natural conditions or guidance (Ellis, 1900). Researchers into the second language acquisition or foreign language learning began in the 1950s. From the 1980s, researchers gradually turned their attention to the effect of the second language acquisition or foreign language teaching.
Among many theories, the Input Hypothesis by Krashen and the Output Hypothesis by Swain are the most famous. They made great contributories to people’s second language acquisition or foreign language teaching and learning.
II.Input Hypothesis
In the early 1980’s, the burgeoning field of Second Language Acquisition was dominated by the concept of input. Stephen D. Krashen, an American famous linguists, has put forward one of the world’ influential “Language Acquisition Theory”. This theory contains five hypotheses, Krashen believes that the input hypothesis is the most important one among them as it touches upon directly the most fundamental question of second language acquisition.
According to Krashen, “Second-language acquisition theory provides a very clear explanation as to why immersion works. According to current theory, we acquire language in only one way: when we understand messages in that language, when we receive comprehensible input.”(Krashen, 1985). Based on the hypothesis, he introduces the concept of comprehensible input, namely, language acquisition conforms to the pattern of “i+1”, that is, language acquisition shall take place if and only if the comprehensible input is just slightly higher than the learner’s current language ability. Krashen emphasized that language is acquired by understanding the language information. That is to say, language acquisition can be attained by achieving the comprehensible input.
However, this Input Hypothesis exaggerated the importance of language input. It also simplified the process of language learning. What’s more, Input Hypothesis ignored people’s initiative and the individual difference. In order to complete and supplement the theory, Swain put forward the “Output Hypothesis” in 1980s, and later the role of output transformed from being ignored to being accepted by everyone.
III. Output hypothesis
The output hypothesis claims that the act of producing language (speaking or writing) constitutes, under certain circumstances, part of the process of second language learning.
Merrill Swain (2005: 471) argued that output, by its nature, is not the end of production, but rather a process of the language learning. Therefore, output, if carefully taken care of, can also contribute to the language learning. In order to prove this, she has outlined three functions conducive to second language learning: a) the noticing and triggering function, b) the hypothesis-testing function and c) the metalinguistic function.
IV. The implications of input and output in English teaching
In China, many students are used to and quite good at passively receiving language items that might later be used to communication. But regretfully, they are not well trained with the ability to retrieve those stored language items in communication, which is actually quite vital for them. They are good at grammar, but it’s difficult for them to express themselves freely.
Language learners in China generally aim to achieve four major skills: listening, reading, speaking and writing. The first two skills are receptive ones, mainly concerned with input, while the last two are productive ones, closely connected with output, which is the emphasis of this part. Therefore, what is referred to as “the balance between input and output” should be put as “the balance between the training of receptive skills and productive skills”.
In English class, the new words and phrases in the textbook are supposed to be finely-tuned input, so are most of the exercises. Most of the time in class, teachers are always busy with the input: explaining the new words, analyzing sentence structure, introducing grammar rules, and so on. Very limited time in class is left for students to have some independent, autonomous practice out, let alone the communication output. In a word, input exceeds output greatly in traditional English language teaching classes in China.
In second language acquisition, input and output are very necessary. Thus, nowadays, many linguists and language teachers turn to the communicative approach, which “pay systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language” (William Littlewood, 1981).
V. Conclusion
The balance between language input and output plays an indispensible role in second language acquisition. Once teachers and students notice this, they will become more efficient in language learning. In language class, teachers must attach more importance on language output in order to maintain the balance between language input and output, and they can adopt various teaching method so that the students can have an all-round development capability in second language acquisition.
Bibliography
[1] Ellis, R. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1900.
[2] Guy Cook, Barbara Seidlhofer. 应用语言学的原理与实践[M]. 上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999.
[3] Krashen S. D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1982.
[4] Littlewood W. Communicative Language Teaching-An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
[5] Merrill Swain, Yang Luxin. Output Hypothesis：Its History and Its Future.[J]. 外语教学与研究，2008 (1).
[6] Zoltan Dornyei 著, 宋孔尧译. 实践中的Krashen 输入假说和Swain 输入假说: 设计i + 1 教学技巧[ J] . 国外外语教学, 1994, ( 1) .
[7] 郑银芳. 二语习得中的输入与输出[J]. 广州大学学报，2003（2）.
作者简介：陈小峥(1984- )，女，广东湛江人，广东行政职业学院外语系教师，主要研究方向为应用语言学，英语教学。