H.H.Stern 语言教学的基本概念总结资料

语言教学的基本概念总结资料第一部分扫除障碍clearing the groundChapter oneL1L1 terms are used to indicate, first of all, that a person has acquired the language in infancy and early childhood and generally within the family. Secondly, the L1 terms signal a characteristic level of proficiency in the language. A person's first language is a basis for sociolinguistic identity. L1 language is also called the native language or primary language, consequently, it would be best to reserve the term “native language” for the language of early-childhood acquisition and “primary language” for the language of dominant or preferred use when the distinction has to be made, with the terms first language to cover both uses, allowing the context to make clear the distinction.L2The term second language has two meanings. First, it refers to the chronology of language learning. A second language is any language acquired later than the native language. This definition deliberately leaves open how much later second languages are acquired. At one extreme the second language learning process takes place at an early age when the native language command is still rudimentary. At the other, it may take place in adult life when the L1 acquisition process is virtually completed or slowed down. Or, it may take place at any stage between these two extremes. Secondly, the term second language is used to refer to the level of language command in comparison with a primary or dominant language. In this sense, second language indicates a lower level of actual or believed proficiency. Hence second means also ‘weaker’or ‘secondary’.BilingualismBilingualism can be used in two situations. When we say “ Canada is a bilingual country”, we are making a statement about the objectivity or legal status of two languages in that country. It does not necessarily mean that every individual in that country is bilingual. It may mean no more than that some people in Canada are native speakers of one language and other people are native speakers of the other language.The second use of the term, namely that of personal bilingualism, implies (a) notions of manner of language acquisition and (b) level of proficiency in the two languages. With regard to (a), it suggests a simultaneous language learning process in two languages which is analogous to first or native language acquisition in one language. With reference to the level of command, being bilingualism is usually understood to mean a high level of proficiency in two languages. In more technical discussions the use of the concept of bilingualism in this respect has changed. It has tended to be more broadly defined so that any proficiency level in more than one language can be referred to as bilingualism.Second versus foreign languageIn contrasting second and foreign language there is today consensus that a necessary distinction is to be made between a non-native language learnt and used within one country to which the term second language has been applied, and a non-native language learnt and used with reference to a speech community outside national or territorial boundaries to which the termforeign language is commonly given. A second language usually has official status or a recognized function within a country which a foreign language has not.The purposes of second language are quite different from foreign language. Second language is needed for the full participation in the political or economical life of the nation since it is the official language or educational language, while the foreign language learners hold a variety of purposes in mind, such as traveling or communicating with native speakers.A second language, because it is used within the country, is learnt with much more environmental support than a foreign language whose speech community may be thousands of miles away. A foreign language usually requires more formal instruction and other measures compensating for the lack of environmental support. By contrast, a second language is often learnt informally because of its widespread use within the environment.International language / intranational languageSecond and foreign language learning both imply a specified speech community or communities as a territorial reference or contact group. International or intranational language lack this characteristic. Thus, English in India which has the status of an official language but has no specified reference group, is learnt as a means of intranational communication. If English is learnt in many countries across the world, this is not only with reference to specified English-speaking territories, but as a means of international communication across national boundaries among speakers of other language. For this role the term international language has been proposed.Language learningThe psychological concept of learning includes not only learning of skills and acquisition of knowledge. It refers also to learning to learn and learning to think. Language learning is also widely concerned, it includes all kinds of language learning.From the perspective of the psychology of learning, learning has been approached in two main ways: (1) through theoretical and experimental studies and (2) through empirical studies in educational settings.With regards to the (1), broadly speaking, two groups can be distinguished. The first, derived from the British associationist school of philosophy, adopts a largely environmentalist view of man. Modern milestone in the development of this position are Watson’s behaviorism, Skinner’s operate conditioning, etc. Theories in this school of thought, so-called S-R theories, are characterized by emphasis on externally observable response to specific stimuli, an empirical and experimental approach, and the avoidance of subjective or mentalist concept. The psychology of learning, according to this viewpoint, therefore, is a study of learning phenomena which disregards the intentions, the thinking, the conscious planning and internal processes of the learner.The other trend of thought on learning is cognitive approaches to learning, of which an early representative was Gestalt psychology. It had laid emphasis on innate organizing principles in human perception, cognition, sensorimotor skills, learning, and even in social conduct. For Gestalt theory, it is impossible to represent human learning without concepts of subjective experience, such as the sudden click of understanding. Gestalt psychology was able to throw light on perceptual and cognitive learning by describing and demonstrating the subjective cognitive experiences of the learner with such concepts as ‘whole and part’, field, structure, andorganization.Without necessarily subscribing to all the concepts of the Gestalt school, some psychologists have developed a cognitive theory of learning. They lay emphasis on meaningful learning, meaning being understood not as a behavioral response, but as a conscious experience which emerges when potentially meaningful signs, symbols or concepts are related to and incorporated within a given individual’s cognitive structure.As far as the empirical studies of learning are concerned, psychology has also investigated learning problems from the applied side in practical learning situations. Critics have deplored the wide gap between the classroom learning theory and the theoretical and laboratory study of learning.Categories of the psychology of learning, commonly applied to formal educational activities, refer to (a) characteristics of the learners and individual differences among learners, (b) different kinds of learning, (c) the learning process and (d) outcomes of learning.(a)Among learner characteristics, factors that are frequently presented in the literature include: (1)the influence of age and maturity on mental development and learning; (2)the influence of heredity and environment on abilities and achievement; (3) specific aptitudes for particular learning tasks, for example, musical aptitude, language learning aptitude, etc. (4) the influence of home and community on motivations and attitudes.(b)What is being learnt has been frequently expressed as three psychological categories. They areconceptual and verbal learning, skill learning and affective and social learning.(c)As for the process of learning, a number of distinctions have been introduced. One is on thetime-scale of learning: early learning in contrast with the later learning; learning processes may further differ in the degree of awareness or volitional control on the part of the learner: the conscious learning and the latent learning,, the distinction introduced by Krashen between language learning and language acquisition refers to this identification. The contrast between mechanical learning and cognitive learning refers to the degree of conceptual understanding of the learning task by learners.(d)Lastly, the needs of assessing the outcome of learning have led to the development of tests ofachievement and proficiency. Techniques of measurement and evaluation, which psychometrics has contributed to educational psychology, have an obvious relevance for the assessment of language learning.Learning and acquisitionThe American applied linguist Krashen uses the term “acquisition’to describe second language learning which is analogous to the way in which a child acquires his first language, that is naturally, without focus on linguistic form, and learning as conscious language development particularly in formal school-like settings.A disadvantage of Krashen’s terminology is that it runs counter to the terms used in psychology which, as we have noted, comprise Krashen’s acquisition and learning as different ways of learning.Language teachingIt can be defined as the activities which are intended to bring about language learning. All that need to be pointed out is that language teaching is more widely interpreted than instructing alanguage class. Formal instruction or methods of training are included, but so is individualized instruction, self-study, computer-assisted instruction, and the use of media, such as radio or television.Chapter two: theory and practiceDefinition of theoryThe word theory is used in three fairly distinct but related senses. When we speak of theory of art, or educational theory, the term theory is used in the first and widest sense (T1). It refers to the systematic study of the thought related to a topic or activity, for example, art, music, or education.Second, under T1, it is possible to subsume different schools of thought or theories (T2), each with their own assumptions, postulates, principles, models and concepts. What we often loosely referred to as language teaching method. Lastly, in the natural and human sciences the concept of theory is employed in a more rigorous third sense(T3) as “ a hypothesis or set of hypotheses that have been verified by observation or experiment’’. The theory of evolution is a case in point.Criteria for a good theoryWe can identify the following criteria as relevant to theory development in language teaching (1) usefulness and applicabilitySince a theory of second language teaching is primarily a theory of practical activities. It should be useful, effective or applicable. It proves its usefulness by making sense of planning, decision making, and practice. It should help decision making both on the broader policy level and at the level of classroom activity. The crucial test of language teaching theory is its effect.InterlanguageAn interlanguage is an emerging linguistic system that has been developed by a learner of a second language (or L2) who has not become fully proficient yet but is only approximating the target language: preserving some features of their first language (or L1) in speaking or writing the target language and creating innovations. An interlanguage is idiosyncratically(特殊物质的, 特殊的, 异质的) based on the learners' experiences with the L2. It can ossify in any of its developmental stages. The learner creates an interlanguage using different learning strategies such as language transfer, overgeneralisation and simplification.Interlanguage is based on the theory that there is a "psychological structure latent in the brain" which is activated when one attempts to learn a second language. Larry Selinker proposed the theory of interlanguage in 1972, noting that in a given situation the utterances produced by the learner are different from those native speakers would produce had they attempted to convey the same meaning. This comparison reveals a separate linguistic system. This system can be observed when studying the utterances of the learners who attempt to produce a target language norm.To study the psychological processes involved one should compare the interlanguage of the learner with two things:Utterances in the native language to convey the same message made by the learnerUtterances in the target language to convey the same message made by the native speaker of that language.Interlanguage yields new linguistic variety. Interlanguage is the basis for diversification of linguistic forms through an outside linguistic influence. Dialects formed by interlanguage are the product of a need to communicate between speakers with varying linguistic ability, and with increased interaction with a more standard dialect, are often marginalized or eliminated in favor of a standard dialect. In this way, interlanguage may be thought of as a temporary tool in language or dialect acquisition.Stephen Krashen & SLAStephen Krashen is professor emeritus at the University of Southern California, and is a linguist, educational researcher, and activist. Krashen has contributed to the fields of second language acquisition (SLA), bilingual education, and reading. He is credited with introducing various influential concepts and terms in the study of second language acquisition, including the distinction between acquisition and learning, the Input Hypothesis, Monitor Theory, the Affective Filter, and the Natural Order Hypothesis.The term "language acquisition" became commonly used after Stephen Krashen contrasted it with formal and non-constructive "learning." However, "second language acquisition" or "SLA" has become established as the preferred term for this academic discipline.Though SLA is often viewed as part of applied linguistics, it is typically concerned with the language system and learning processes themselves, whereas applied linguistics may focus more on the experiences of the learner, particularly in the classroom. Additionally, SLA has mostly examined naturalistic acquisition, where learners acquire a language with little formal training or teaching.The monitor theory 监控理论It was put forward by Krashen in the late 1970s. The theory consists of the following five hypotheses:①The acquisition-learning hypothesis The theory claims that adult learners of a second language have two ways of developing their competence —acquisition and learning. The basic distinction between language acquisition and language learning is whether the learner pays a conscious attention to the rules of the target language. Acquisition refers to the subconscious process in which learners develop their language proficiency. Learning refers to the conscious process in which learners acquire the knowledge of rules of the target language.②The monitor hypothesis Different functions— According to Krashen, acquisition is responsible for the fluency of the utterances produced by speakers while learning is responsible for the accuracy of the speeches or passages. Three conditions — In order to perform this monitor function, language learners have to satisfy at least threeconditions: sufficient time to monitor his production, to have his focus on form, and to have clear knowledge of the rules of the target language.③The natural order hypothesis Same order —The hypothesis claims that foreign language learners acquire the rules of the target language in the same order no matter where, when and how they are learning the language. Speed —In Krashen’s point of view, language teaching cannot change the natural order of language acquisition. It can only facilitate the speed of acquisition.④The input hypothesis Language input and language acquisition—According to Krashen, the only way for people to acquire a language is by understanding messages or receiving comprehensive input. They move from their current level to the next level by understanding input. They move from i, their current level, to i+1, the next level along the natural order, by understanding input containing i+1. That is to say, language is acquired by people’s comprehension of input that is slightly beyond their current level.⑤The affective filter hypothesis Purpose —It attempts to explain the variation in speed of language acquisition among individuals of the same group. The three affective factors which determines the speed of success —motivation, self-confidence, and anxiety. Influence of the three factors —learners with high motivation, self-confidence, and low anxiety will do much better than those that are unmotivated, lacking in self-confidence and concerned too much with failure. That is to say, learners with a low affective filter will get more input than learners with a high affective filter.Error analysisError analysis in SLA was established in the 1960s by Stephen Pit Corder and colleagues (Corder, 1967). Error analysis was an alternative to contrastive analysis, an approach influenced by behaviorism through which applied linguists sought to use the formal distinctions between the learners' first and second languages to predict errors. Error analysis showed that contrastive analysis was unable to predict a great majority of errors, although its more valuable aspects have been incorporated into the study of language transfer. A key finding of error analysis has been that many learner errors are produced by learners making faulty inferences about the rules of the new language.Error analysts distinguish between errors, which are systematic, and mistakes, which are not. They often seek to develop a typology of errors. Error can be classified according to basic type: omissive, additive, substitutive or related to word order. They can be classified by how apparent they are: overt errors such as "I angry" are obvious even out of context, whereas covert errors are evident only in context. Closely related to this is the classification according to domain, the breadth of context which the analyst must examine, and extent, the breadth of the utterance which must be changed in order to fix the error. Errors may also be classified according to the level of language: phonological errors, vocabulary or lexical errors, syntactic errors, and so on. They may be assessed according to the degree to which they interfere with communication: global errors make an utterance difficult to understand, while local errors do not. In the above example, "I angry" would be a local error, since the meaning is apparent.From the beginning, error analysis was beset with methodological problems. In particular, the above typologies are problematic: from linguistic data alone, it is often impossible to reliably determine what kind of error a learner is making. Also, error analysis can deal effectively only with learner production (speaking and writing) and not with learner reception (listening and reading). Furthermore, it cannot account for learner use of communicative strategies such as avoidance, in which learners simply do not use a form with which they are uncomfortable. For these reasons, although error analysis is still used to investigate specific questions in SLA, the quest for an overarching theory of learner errors has largely been abandoned. In the mid-1970s, Corder and others moved on to a more wide-ranging approach to learner language, known as interlanguage.Error analysis is closely related to the study of error treatment in language teaching. Today, the study of errors is particularly relevant for focus on form teaching methodology.Pedagogical grammarPedagogical grammar serves as an intermediary or link between linguistics and pedagogy. Drawing on work in several fields such as linguistics, psychology and second language acquisition theory, pedagogical grammar is of a hybrid nature, which usually denotes grammatical analysis and instruction designed for the needs of second language students. In its expanded view it involves decision making processes on behalf of the teacher which requires careful and time-consuming interdisciplinary work. This pr ocess is influenced by the teachers’ cognition, beliefs, assumptions, and attitudes about the teaching of grammar.Noblitt bases his conception of a pedagogical grammar on a fivefold analysis: a pedagogical grammar requires descriptive and contrastive data and concepts, an ordering of the information in terms of skills( listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and in terms of levels of achievement (elementary, intermediate, and advanced), and evaluation procedures, bearing in mind objectives and educational settings for which the pedagogical grammar in intended.What is the relationship between the linguistics and language teaching?The relationship between linguistics and language teaching has moved through different phases. In spite of the early interest in phonetics around the turn of the 20th century, the language teaching remained unaffected until the interwar period. Equally, the linguists ignored the application of linguistics in the pedagogical activities.From about the 1940s to 1960s, there is a confident application of linguistics in the teaching practice. Linguists in the forties in America were fully aware of their role in language teaching. Bloomfield suggested a professional and almost technical approach in teaching the language. The set of the approach was (1) a structural analysis of the language, forming the basis for graded material, (2) presentation of the analysis by a trained linguist, (3) several hours of drill per day with the help of a native speaker and in small classes, and (4) emphasis on speaking as the first objective. The structuralism forms the linguistic basis of the audiolingual method which was prevailing in the 40s and 50s.The new perspective of language offered by transformational generative grammar led to a violent rejection of structuralism and everything it stood for. It shook the foundations of structuralism in linguistics and by implication of audiolingualism in language teaching.Transformational generative grammar recognizes the language as a rule-governed system, therefore, learning a language involves internalizing the rules. Structural linguistics only treats a language as a collection of habits. In language teaching, therefore, it sanctions imitation, memorization, mechanical drills, ect. Chomsky accused the linguists of sharing the myth that linguistic behavior is habitual and that a fixed of stock of patterns ia acquired through practice and used as a basis for analogy. The new version of Chomsky’s theory leads to the disorienting impact of linguistics to language teaching from 1965 to 1970.The sudden ideological changes reopened the entire question of the contribution of linguistics to language teaching. A shift was taken place from applying linguistics directly to treating linguistics as a resource to be drawn on for the benefit of pedagogy with complete independence of mind. The conviction that linguistic studies cannot be applied to language pedagogy without modification led to the formulation of the concept of pedagogical grammar as an intermediary or link between linguistics and pedagogy.Now that we have traced the development of the relations between linguistics and language teaching we will attempt to draw some lessons for the development of our own view of language within a language teaching theory. We will investigate the relationship under the distinction of application and implication and recognize a twofold connection: (1) A language teaching theory incorporates a theory of language, (2) The description of particular language is brought to language teaching.With regard to the theory of language in teaching, a language teaching theory expresses answers to questions about the nature of language. We should identify view of language implicit in language teaching theories from the following 5 aspects:a.analytical and non-analytical approaches to languageA basic question to ask is to what extent the language teaching theory treats the language analytically and therefore adopts a linguistics point of view, or whether it presents the language non-analytically.When we treat language non-analytically, the teaching approaches avoids deliberate study of the language, but the rationale underlying this teaching approach still implies a view of nature of language.As we treat language as an object to be studied, practiced, or manipulated in any way, we must conceptualize it or at least to a certain extent.b. the complexity of languageLinguistic theory has not presented us with a simple and unified picture of language. The second question to ask is : what aspects of language does our language teaching theory include or exclude, and among those that are included, which of these are espically emphasized?We can ask ourselves to what extent the language teaching theory gives priority to phonology, grammar, vocabulary or discourses aspects. Going on from these, we can further ask how it handles these different components of language. Does it deal with them entirely as language forms or structures? Or does it teach them as meanings? And does it place language features into a social context and thus relate the language to the real world?c. the humpty-dumpty effectit is one thing to isolate and analyse different aspects of language, it is quite another to bring the different aspects of the language together. The categories which linguists have devised in order to study an aspect of language more effectively can become troublesome barriers. To overcomethese, linguistics has not only concerned itself with analysis but has also aimed to make a synthesis between the different parts of language. In the same way, the language teacher wishes to teach language as a whole.d. rule versus creativitya language teaching theory, like a linguistic theory, should take into account the regularities( rules, patterns, structures, habits) as well as the possibility of making use of the regularities in varied, novel, and sometimes unique ways as demanded by a given situation.e. a theory of language --- a necessary artifactthe final question to ask is of a more general nature: what are the main characteristics of the view of language in this language teaching theory? Since the language is comprehensive by nature, both the linguistics and teaching should concern the complexity of language and convey it. However, it is impossible to justice to the whole of language, a language teaching theory inevitably demand choices based on an interpretation of language. That is to say, all language teaching theories are artifacts which highlight some aspects of language at the expense of the others.When we come to the description of languages, there is often a discrepancy between descriptive information on a second language and the needs of pedagogy. Therefore an intermediate device, the pedagogical grammar , has been suggested and the following conceptual steps which link theoretical and descriptive linguistics with the development of a language curriculum can be indicated.The descriptive relationship can be divided into six steps. Theoretical linguistics at step I is concerned with the development of general categories and research strategies for studies of particular language. Research at step II can be visualized as detailed studies of linguistic features of particular languages. These studies form the descriptions of given language at step III. The descriptions provide the basis for a pedagogical grammar at step IV. The pedagogical grammar forms the linguistic resource for curriculum development which takes place at step V, with the teaching of language aspect at step VI.Maintaining the dual relationship between linguistics and language teaching is important for language pedagogy, but it is a complex undertaking. The continuing developments in linguistic theory and in language pedagogy as well as the constant changes in the language themselves, demand the permanent study of language and languages and a review of the relations between linguistic theory and language pedagogy.What is communicative competenceCommunicative competence is a linguistic term which refers to a intuitive mastery that the native speaker possesses to use and interpret language appropriately in the process of interaction and in relation to social context.This concept was coined by Hymes in 1972 to constitute a challenge to Chomsky’s linguistic competence which is confined to internalized rules of syntax and abstracts from social rules of language use. Communicative competence no doubt implies linguistic competence but its main focus is the intuitive grasp of social and cultural rules and meanings that are carried by any utterance.The complexity of the entire rule system makes it impossible for anyone except the native。