论文部分内容阅读
Introduction
First of all,two hypothesesshould be delivered to readers..i.e.Krashen’s input hypothesis andLong’s Interaction Hypothesis re-lated to second language acquisi-tion.
1.Krashen’s Input Hypoth-esis
An early yet most far-reach-ing model of learning in the L2 lit-erature is known as the MonitorModel,first described by Krashenin the 1970s.There are five basichypotheses in this model,amongdefined by Krashen as that bit oflanguage that is heard/read andthat is slightly ahead of a learner’scurrent state of grammaticalknowledge.Krashen defined alearner’s current state of knowl-edge as i and the next stage as i 1.He claimed that the input alearner is exposed to must be atthe i 1 level in order for it to beof use in terms of acquisition."Wemove from i,our current level to i 1,the next level along the nat-ural order,by understanding inputcontaining i 1" (1985:2).Lan-guage containing structures alearner already knows essentiallyserves no purpose in acquisition.Similarly, language containingstructure way ahead of a learner’scurrent knowledge is not of use ei-ther,for the learner has no abilityto "do" anything with those struc-tures.In this model of how L2 ac-quisition takes place,the input as-sumes a central role and only aspecific type of input (i 1) is rel-evant.
Later,Krashen improved anddeveloped his input hypothesistheory by presenting the "optimalinput".The optimal input has thefollowing characteristics.
(1)Input must be comprehen-sible and sufficient.Comprehensi-ble input is the prerequisite of sec-ond language acquisition.
(2)Input must be interestingand relevant.
(3)Input may not be grammat-ically sequenced.
2.Long’s Interaction Hy-pothesis
As to interaction,one of themost important notion is Long’sInteraction Hypothesis (1996),which points out that conversationis not only a medium of practice,but also the means by which learn-ing takes place (Gass, 1997).Long’s (1983) Interaction Hypoth-esis states that language learnersneed to be active learners andparticipants when receiving lan-guage input.Only listening to newlanguage structures will not lead tosuccessful language learning.Thelearner has to become an activeparticipant in the target languageby using received input in immedi-ate interaction and communicativepatterns with other learners.
Long’s Interaction Hypothe-sis suggests that second languageinteraction can facilitate develop-ment by providing opportunitiesfor learners to receive comprehen-sible input and negative feedback,as well as to modify their ownoutput,test hypothesis,and noticegaps in their interlanguage. Ac-cording to Interaction Hypothesis,feedback obtained during interac-tion can include explicit correc-tion and metalinguistic explana-tions,as well as more implicit clar-ification requests, confirmation checks, repetitions, and recasts(Long,1996; Gass,1997; Pica,1994).This feedback,in additionto serving as a source of compre-hensible input,can make problem-atic aspects of the learner’s inter-language salient and thus moreopen to revision (Schmidt
First of all,two hypothesesshould be delivered to readers..i.e.Krashen’s input hypothesis andLong’s Interaction Hypothesis re-lated to second language acquisi-tion.
1.Krashen’s Input Hypoth-esis
An early yet most far-reach-ing model of learning in the L2 lit-erature is known as the MonitorModel,first described by Krashenin the 1970s.There are five basichypotheses in this model,amongdefined by Krashen as that bit oflanguage that is heard/read andthat is slightly ahead of a learner’scurrent state of grammaticalknowledge.Krashen defined alearner’s current state of knowl-edge as i and the next stage as i 1.He claimed that the input alearner is exposed to must be atthe i 1 level in order for it to beof use in terms of acquisition."Wemove from i,our current level to i 1,the next level along the nat-ural order,by understanding inputcontaining i 1" (1985:2).Lan-guage containing structures alearner already knows essentiallyserves no purpose in acquisition.Similarly, language containingstructure way ahead of a learner’scurrent knowledge is not of use ei-ther,for the learner has no abilityto "do" anything with those struc-tures.In this model of how L2 ac-quisition takes place,the input as-sumes a central role and only aspecific type of input (i 1) is rel-evant.
Later,Krashen improved anddeveloped his input hypothesistheory by presenting the "optimalinput".The optimal input has thefollowing characteristics.
(1)Input must be comprehen-sible and sufficient.Comprehensi-ble input is the prerequisite of sec-ond language acquisition.
(2)Input must be interestingand relevant.
(3)Input may not be grammat-ically sequenced.
2.Long’s Interaction Hy-pothesis
As to interaction,one of themost important notion is Long’sInteraction Hypothesis (1996),which points out that conversationis not only a medium of practice,but also the means by which learn-ing takes place (Gass, 1997).Long’s (1983) Interaction Hypoth-esis states that language learnersneed to be active learners andparticipants when receiving lan-guage input.Only listening to newlanguage structures will not lead tosuccessful language learning.Thelearner has to become an activeparticipant in the target languageby using received input in immedi-ate interaction and communicativepatterns with other learners.
Long’s Interaction Hypothe-sis suggests that second languageinteraction can facilitate develop-ment by providing opportunitiesfor learners to receive comprehen-sible input and negative feedback,as well as to modify their ownoutput,test hypothesis,and noticegaps in their interlanguage. Ac-cording to Interaction Hypothesis,feedback obtained during interac-tion can include explicit correc-tion and metalinguistic explana-tions,as well as more implicit clar-ification requests, confirmation checks, repetitions, and recasts(Long,1996; Gass,1997; Pica,1994).This feedback,in additionto serving as a source of compre-hensible input,can make problem-atic aspects of the learner’s inter-language salient and thus moreopen to revision (Schmidt