关闭

关闭

封号提示

内容

首页 ellis_grammar 2006 TESOL Quertarly.pdf

ellis_grammar 2006 TESOL Quertarly.pdf

ellis_grammar 2006 TESOL Querta…

上传者: guoguo8877 2013-03-13 评分 4.5 0 64 9 293 暂无简介 简介 举报

简介:本文档为《ellis_grammar 2006 TESOL Quertarlypdf》,可适用于高等教育领域,主题内容包含TESOLQUARTERLYVol,No,MarchCurrentIssuesintheTeachingofGrammar:AnSLAPerspec符等。

TESOLQUARTERLYVol,No,MarchCurrentIssuesintheTeachingofGrammar:AnSLAPerspectiveRODELLISUniversityofAucklandAuckland,NewZealandThestudyofhowlearnersacquireasecondlanguage(SLA)hashelpedtoshapethinkingabouthowtoteachthegrammarofasecondlanguageThereremain,however,anumberofcontroversialissuesThispaperconsiderseightkeyquestionsrelatingtogrammarpedagogyinthelightoffindingsfromSLAAssuch,thisarticlecomplementsCelceMurcia’s()articleongrammarteachinginthethanniversaryissueofTESOLQuarterly,whichconsideredtheroleofgrammarinacommunicativecurriculumanddrewpredominantlyonalinguistictheoryofgrammarTheseeightquestionsaddresswhethergrammarshouldbetaughtandifsowhatgrammar,when,andhowAlthoughSLAdoesnotafforddefinitivesolutionstothesequestions,itservesthevaluablepurposeofproblematisingthisaspectoflanguagepedagogyThisarticleconcludeswithastatementofmyownbeliefsaboutgrammarteaching,groundedinmyownunderstandingofSLAThisarticleidentifiesanddiscussesanumberofkeyissuesrelatingtotheteachingofgrammarinasecondlanguage(L)and,bydrawingontheoryandresearchinSLA,suggestswaystoaddresstheseproblemsItpointstoanumberofalternativesolutionstoeachproblem,indicatingthatmoreoftenthannottherearenoclearsolutionscurrentlyavailableTheaim,therefore,isnottoidentifynewsolutionstoexistingcontroversies,noreventopresentnewcontroversiesRatheritaddresseswithinthecompassofasinglearticleawholerangeofissuesrelatedtogrammarteaching,problematisestheseissues,andbysodoing,providesacounterweighttotheadvocacyofspecific,butalsoquitelimited,proposalsforteachinggrammarthathaveoriginatedinsomeSLAquartersHowever,IconcludewithastatementofmyownpositionontheseissuesThequestionsthatwillbeaddressedareShouldweteachgrammar,orshouldwesimplycreatetheconditionsbywhichlearnerslearnnaturallyWhatgrammarshouldweteachTESOLQUARTERLYWhenshouldweteachgrammarIsitbesttoteachgrammarwhenlearnersfirststarttolearnanLortowaituntillaterwhenlearnershavealreadyacquiredsomelinguisticcompetenceShouldgrammarinstructionbemassed(ie,theavailableteachingtimebeconcentratedintoashortperiod)ordistributed(ie,theavailableteachingtimespreadoveralongerperiod)Shouldgrammarinstructionbeintensive(eg,coverasinglegrammaticalstructureinasinglelesson)orextensive(eg,covermanygrammaticalstructuresinasinglelesson)IsthereanyvalueinteachingexplicitgrammaticalknowledgeIsthereabestwaytoteachgrammarforimplicitknowledgeShouldgrammarbetaughtinseparatelessonsorintegratedintocommunicativeactivitiesDEFININGGRAMMARTEACHINGTraditionally,grammarteachingisviewedasthepresentationandpracticeofdiscretegrammaticalstructuresThisistheviewpromulgatedinteacherhandbooksUr(),forexample,inherchaptertitled“TeachingGrammar”hassectionson“presentingandexplaininggrammar”and“grammarpracticeactivities”Hedge()inherchaptertitled“Grammar”similarlyonlyconsiders“presentinggrammar”and“practisinggrammar”ThisconstitutesanoverlynarrowdefinitionofgrammarteachingItiscertainlytruethatgrammarteachingcanconsistofthepresentationandpracticeofgrammaticalitemsBut,aswillbecomeapparent,itneednotFirst,somegrammarlessonsmightconsistofpresentationbyitself(ie,withoutanypractice),whileothersmightentailonlypractice(ie,nopresentation)Second,grammarteachingcaninvolvelearnersindiscoveringgrammaticalrulesforthemselves(ie,nopresentationandnopractice)Third,grammarteachingcanbeconductedsimplybyexposinglearnerstoinputcontrivedtoprovidemultipleexemplarsofthetargetstructureHere,too,thereisnopresentationandnopractice,atleastinthesenseofelicitingproductionofthestructureFinally,grammarteachingcanbeconductedbymeansofcorrectivefeedbackonlearnererrorswhentheseariseinthecontextofperformingsomecommunicativetaskThedefinitionofgrammarteachingthatinformsthisarticleisabroadone:Grammarteachinginvolvesanyinstructionaltechniquethatdrawslearners’attentiontosomespecificgrammaticalforminsuchawaythatithelpsthemeithertounderstanditmetalinguisticallyandorprocessitincomprehensionandorproductionsothattheycaninternalizeitCURRENTISSUESINTHETEACHINGOFGRAMMARSHOULDWETEACHGRAMMARThisquestionwasmotivatedbyearlyresearchintonaturalisticLacquisition,whichshowedthatlearnersappearedtofollowanaturalorderandsequenceofacquisition(ie,theymastereddifferentgrammaticalstructuresinarelativelyfixedanduniversalorderandtheypassedthroughasequenceofstagesofacquisitiononroutetomasteringeachgrammaticalstructure)ThisledresearcherslikeCorder()tosuggestthatlearnershadtheirownbuiltinsyllabusforlearninggrammarInlinewiththis,Krashen()arguedthatgrammarinstructionplayednoroleinacquisition,aviewbasedontheconvictionthatlearners(includingclassroomlearners)wouldautomaticallyproceedalongtheirbuiltinsyllabusaslongastheyhadaccesstocomprehensibleinputandweresufficientlymotivatedGrammarinstructioncouldcontributetolearningbutthiswasoflimitedvaluebecausecommunicativeabilitywasdependentonacquisitionTherefollowedanumberofempiricalstudiesdesignedto(a)comparetheorderofacquisitionofinstructedandnaturalisticlearners(eg,Pica,),(b)comparethesuccessofinstructedandnaturalisticlearners(Long,)and(c)examinewhetherattemptstoteachspecificgrammaticalstructuresresultedintheiracquisition(eg,White,Spada,Lightbown,Ranta,)Thesestudiesshowedthat,byandlarge,theorderofacquisitionwasthesameforinstructedandnaturalisticlearners(althoughthereweresomeinterestingdifferences),thatinstructedlearnersgenerallyachievedhigherlevelsofgrammaticalcompetencethannaturalisticlearnersandthatinstructionwasnoguaranteethatlearnerswouldacquirewhattheyhadbeentaughtTheseresultswereinterpretedasshowingthattheacquisitionalprocessesofinstructedandnaturalisticlearningwerethesamebutthatinstructedlearnersprogressedmorerapidlyandachievedhigherlevelsofproficiencyThus,someresearchersconcluded(eg,Long,)thatteachinggrammarwasbeneficialbutthattobeeffectivegrammarhadtobetaughtinawaythatwascompatiblewiththenaturalprocessesofacquisitionSubsequentresearch,suchasNorrisandOrtega’s()metaanalysisofstudies,hasborneouttheoveralleffectivenessofgrammarteachingFurther,thereisevidencethat,contrarytoKrashen’s()continuedclaims,instructioncontributestobothacquiredknowledge(seeEllis,a)aswellaslearnedknowledgeThereisalsoincreasingForexample,Pica()notesthatsomestructures(eg,plural–s)wereusedmoreaccuratelybyinstructedlearnersandsome(eg,Verb–ing)bynaturalisticlearnersInotherstructures(eg,articles)therewasnodifferenceTESOLQUARTERLYevidencethatnaturalisticlearningintheclassroom(as,eg,inimmersionprogrammes)doesnottypicallyresultinhighlevelsofgrammaticalcompetence(Genesee,)Inshort,thereisnowconvincingindirectanddirectevidencetosupporttheteachingofgrammarNevertheless,doubtsremainaboutthenatureoftheresearchevidenceManystudies(includingmostofthosereviewedbyNorrisandOrtega)measurelearningintermsofconstrainedconstructedresponses(eg,fillintheblanks,sentencejoining,orsentencetransformation),whichcanbeexpectedtofavourgrammarteachingThereisonlymixedevidencethatinstructionresultsinlearningwhenitismeasuredbymeansoffreeconstructedresponses(eg,communicativetasks)Also,itremainsthecasethatlearnersdonotalwaysacquirewhattheyhavebeentaughtandthatforgrammarinstructiontobeeffectiveitneedstotakeaccountofhowlearnersdeveloptheirinterlanguagesAswewillsee,thereiscontroversyregardingbothhowinterlanguagedevelopmentoccursandhowinstructioncanfacilitatethisWHATGRAMMARSHOULDWETEACHAssuming,then,thatgrammarteachingcancontributetointerlanguagedevelopment,thenextlogicalquestionconcernswhatgrammarweshouldteachThisquestioncanbebrokendownintotwoseparatequestions:WhatkindofgrammarshouldwebaseteachingonWhichgrammaticalfeaturesshouldweteachLinguisticsaffordsabroadselectionofgrammaticalmodelstochoosefrom,includingstructuralgrammars,generativegrammars(basedonatheoryofuniversalgrammar),andfunctionalgrammarsTraditionallysyllabuseshavebeenbasedonstructuralordescriptivegrammarsStructuralsyllabusestraditionallyemphasisedtheteachingofformovermeaning(eg,Lado,)Thoughtheinfluenceofstructuralgrammarsisstillapparenttoday,modernsyllabusesrightlygivemoreattentiontothefunctionsperformedbygrammaticalformsThus,forexample,lessemphasisisplacedonsuchaspectsofgrammarassentencepatternsortenseparadigmsandmoreonthemeaningsconveyedbydifferentgrammaticalformsincommunicationSomeattemptwasoncemadetoexploittheinsightstobegleanedfromgenerativetheoriesofgrammar(see,eg,Bright,),butingeneral,syllabusdesignersandteachershavenotfoundsuchmodelsusefulandhavepreferredtorelyonmoderndescriptivegrammars,suchasCelceMurciaandLarsenCURRENTISSUESINTHETEACHINGOFGRAMMARFreeman’s()GrammarBookThisresourceisespeciallyvaluablebecauseitnotonlyprovidesacomprehensive,clear,andpedagogicallyexploitabledescriptionofEnglishgrammarbutalsoidentifiesthekindsoferrorsthatLlearnersareknowntomakewithdifferentgrammaticalstructuresSuchinformationisimportantbecauseithelpstoidentifywhichstructuresandwhichaspectsofastructurerequirespecialattentionTheGrammarBookisalsoidealinthatitpresentsinformationnotonlyaboutlinguisticformbutalsoaboutthesemanticanddiscoursalmeaningsrealisedbyparticularformsAsVanPatten,Williams,andRott()emphasise,establishingconnectionsbetweenformandmeaningisafundamentalaspectoflanguageacquisitionThus,anyreferencegrammarthatfailstodescribetheformmeaningconnectionsofthetargetlanguagemustnecessarilybeinadequateIngeneral,then,thechoiceofwhichtypeofgrammartouseasabasisforteachingisnotamajorsourceofcontroversydescriptivegrammarsthatdetailtheformmeaningrelationshipsofthelanguageareascendantIncontrast,thechoiceofwhichgrammaticalstructurestoteachiscontroversialTwopolarpositionscanbeidentifiedandvariouspositionsinbetweenAtoneendofthiscontinuumisKrashen’sminimalistpositionKrashen()arguesthatgrammarteachingshouldbelimitedtoafewsimpleandportablerulessuchasrdperson–sandpasttense–edthatcanbeusedtomonitoroutputfromtheacquiredsystemHebaseshisargumentontheclaimthatmostlearnersareonlycapableoflearningsuchsimplerulesthatmorecomplexrulesaregenerallynotlearnableor,iftheyare,arebeyondstudents’abilitytoapplythroughmonitoringKrashen’sclaim,however,isnotwarrantedThereisnowampleevidencethatmanylearnersarecapableofmasteringawiderangeofexplicitgrammarrulesGreenandHecht(),forexample,foundthatuniversitylevelstudentsofEnglishinGermanywereabletoproduceclearexplanationsforofthegrammaticalerrorstheywereaskedtoexplain,whileoverallthelearnersintheirstudy(whoincludedsecondaryschoolstudents)managedsatisfactoryexplanationsforoftheerrorsMacroryandStone()reportedthatBritishcomprehensiveschoolstudentshadafairlygoodexplicitunderstandingoftheperfecttenseinFrench(eg,theyunderstooditsfunction,theyknewthatsomeverbsusedavoirandsomeêtre,theywerefamiliarwiththeformsrequiredbydifferentpronouns,andtheywereawareoftheneedforafinalaccentonthepastparticiple)Hu()foundthatadultChineselearnersofEnglishdemonstratedcorrectmetalinguisticknowledgeofprototypicalrulesofsixEnglishstructures(eg,forthedefinitearticlespecificreferenceconstitutedtheprototypicalrule)butwerelessclearabouttheperipheralrulesforthesestructures(eg,genericreference)Attheotherpoleisthecomprehensiveposition:TeachthewholeofTESOLQUARTERLYthegrammarofthetargetlanguageThisisthepositionadoptedbymanycoursebookwriters(eg,WalterSwan,)orauthorsofgrammarpracticematerials(eg,Murphy,)SuchapositionwouldalsoseemunwarrantedbecauselearnersareclearlycapableoflearningasubstantialamountoftheLgrammarwithoutinstructionandbecausemostteachingcontextshavelimitedtimeavailableforteachinggrammarsosomeselectionisneededWhatthenshouldselectionbebasedonTheanswerwouldseemobvioustheinherentlearningdifficultyofdifferentgrammaticalstructuresTheproblemarisesinhowtodeterminethisTobeginwith,itisnecessarytodistinguishtwodifferentsensesoflearningdifficultyThiscanreferto(a)thedifficultylearnershaveinunderstandingagrammaticalfeatureand(b)tothedifficultytheyhaveininternalisingagrammaticalfeaturesothattheyareabletouseitaccuratelyincommunicationThesetwosensesrelatetothedistinctionbetweenlearninggrammarasexplicitknowledgeandasimplicitknowledge,whichisdiscussedlaterClearly,whatisdifficulttolearnasexplicitknowledgeandasimplicitknowledgeisnotthesameForexample,mostlearnershavenodifficultyingraspingtheruleforEnglishthirdperson–sbuttheyhaveenormousdifficultyininternalisingthisstructuresotheycanuseitaccuratelyThesetwosensesoflearningdifficultyhavenotalwaysbeenclearlydistinguishedinlanguagepedagogy,withtheresultthatevenwhenthestatedgoalisthedevelopmentofimplicitknowledge,itistheanticipateddifficultystudentswillhaveinunderstandingafeaturethatguidestheselectionandgradingofgrammaticalstructuresThirdperson–s,forexample,istypicallytaughtveryearlyinacourseHowthenhaslearningdifficultybeenestablishedTraditionally,factorssuchasthefrequencyofspecificstructuresintheinputandtheirutilitytolearnershavebeeninvoked(Mackey,),butthesefactorswouldseemtohavemoretodowithusethanwithinherentcognitivedifficultyHereIconsidertwoapproachesthathavefiguredinattemptstodelineatecognitivedifficultyTeachthoseformsthatdifferfromthelearners’firstlanguage(L)TeachmarkedratherthanunmarkedformsOfcourse,itisnotpossibletospecifythewholegrammarofalanguageThoughthegrammarofalanguagemaybedeterminate,descriptionsofitarecertainlynotTheLongmanAGrammarofContemporaryEnglish(Quirk,Greenbaum,Leech,Svartvik,)rantopages(excludingindexandbibliography)butdoubtlesslydoesnotaccountforalltheknownfactsofEnglishgrammarNevertheless,thereisarecognizedcanonofEnglishstructuresthat,intheeyesofsyllabusdesignersandtextbookwriters,constitutesthegrammarofEnglishStructureslikeEnglisharticlesthatareveryfrequentintheinputcanimposeconsiderablelearningdifficultyStructuressuchasEnglishconditionalsmaybeveryusefultolearnersbutarealsodifficulttolearnCURRENTISSUESINTHETEACHINGOFGRAMMARThefirstapproachwas,ofcourse,theoneadoptedinmanyearlystructuralcoursesbasedonacontrastiveanalysisofthelearner’sLandthetargetlanguageAlthoughthecontrastiveanalysishypothesisasinitiallyformulatedisclearlynottenable(seeEllis,,chapter),SLAresearchersstillgenerallyagreethatlearnerstransferatleastsomeofthefeaturesoftheirLintotheLForexample,thereisampleevidence(TraheyWhite,)toshowthatFrenchlearnersofEnglishproduceerrorsofthekindMarykissedpassionatelyJohnbecauseFrenchpermitsanadverbtobepositionedbetweentheverbandthedirectobjectNevertheless,contrastiveanalysisdoesnotconstituteasoundbasisforselectinggrammaticalstructuresInmanyteachingcontexts,thelearnerscomefrommixedlanguagebackgroundswhereitwouldbeimpossibletousecontrastiveanalysistotailorgrammarteachingtotheentiregroupbecausethelearnershavedifferentLsAlso,wesimplydonotyetknowenoughaboutwhendifferencedoesanddoesnottranslateintolearningdifficulty,andinsomecases,learningdifficultyarisesevenwherethereisnodifferenceThesecondapproach,however,isalsoproblematicMarkednesshasbeendefinedintermsofwhetheragrammaticalstructureisinsomesensefrequent,natural,andbasicorinfrequent,unnatural,anddeviantfromaregularpattern(Richards,Platt,Weber,)Thus,theuseofaninfinitivewithouttofollowingmake,asinHemademefollowhimcanbeconsideredmarkedbecausemakeisonethefewverbsinEnglishthattakesthiskindofcomplementandbecausethispatternoccursonlyinfrequentlyThegeneralideaisthatweshouldteachthemarkedfeaturesandleavethelearnerstolearntheunmarkedformsnaturallybythemselvesTheproblemisthat,asthedefinitionsuggests,markednessremainsasomewhatopaqueconcept,sothatitisoftendifficulttoapplywiththeprecisionneededtodeterminewhichstructurestoteachTheselectionofgrammaticalcontent,then,remainsveryproblematicOnesolutiontothekindsofproblemsIhavementionedistobaseselectionontheknownerrorsproducedbylearnersInthisrespect,listsofcommonlearnererrorssuchasthoseavailableinTurtonandHeaton’s()LongmanDictionaryofCommonErrorsandSwanandSmith’s()LearnerEnglish:ATeacher’sGuidetoInterferenceandOtherProblemsarehelpfulTheproblemsofselectionprobablyexplainwhygrammaticalsyllabusesaresosimilarandhavechangedsolittleovertheyearsitissafertofollowwhathasbeendonebeforeOfcoursetheselectionofwhattoteachwillalsodependonthelearner’sstageofdevelopmentTheproblemsthatthelearner’sstageofdevelopmentinvolvearediscussedinsubsequentsectionsTESOLQUARTERLYWHENSHOULDWETEACHGRAMMARTherearetwocompetinganswerstothisquestionAccordingtothefirst,itisbesttoemphasisetheteachingofgrammarintheearlystagesofLacquisitionAccordingtothesecond,itisbesttoemphasisemeaningfocusedinstructiontobeginwithandintroducegrammarteachinglater,whenlearnershavealreadybeguntoformtheirinterlanguagesIwillbrieflyconsidertheargumentsforbothpositionsAkeypremiseofbehaviouristtheoriesoflanguagelearningisthat“errorlikesinneedstobeavoidedatallcosts”(Brooks,)Thispremiseholdsthatoncelearnershaveformedincorrecthabits,theywillhavedifficultyeradicatingthemandreplacingthemwithcorrecthabitsThus,itisnecessarytoensurethatlearnersdevelopcorrecthabitsinthefirstplaceThiswasoneofthekeypremisesofthe

类似资料

编辑推荐

魏鼎看辟谷断食.pdf

【剑桥指南】弥尔顿.pdf

黔湘桂边区剿匪记.pdf

湘西剿匪记.pdf

初学刺绣.pdf

职业精品

精彩专题

上传我的资料

精选资料

热门资料排行换一换

  • 领导者纵横智慧书 12 智慧秘经…

  • 领导者纵横智慧书 09 忍经智慧…

  • [中国房地产战争].叶檀.扫描版…

  • 哈佛灯饰外贸英语.pdf

  • 中国历史地图集:第四册(南北朝)…

  • 93J007-3~4 道路(19…

  • 04J012-3 环境景观--亭…

  • 阳痿.pdf

  • 罗素 【我们关于外间世界的知识…

  • 资料评价:

    / 25
    所需积分:1 立即下载

    意见
    反馈

    返回
    顶部