[優(yōu)秀畢業(yè)設(shè)計精品]關(guān)于語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜度對‘有意注意形式教學(xué)法’

1、關(guān)于語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜度對有意注意形式教學(xué)法有效性的影響的調(diào)查investigating the impact of linguistic complexity upon the efficacy of the focus on form approach導(dǎo)師姓名職稱：專業(yè)名稱：教育碩士 研究方向：學(xué)科教學(xué) 英語論文答辯日期：2006年11月 學(xué)位授予日期：_答辯委員會主席：評 閱 人：二00六年 十一 月contents獨創(chuàng)性聲明.iabstract.ii摘 要.ivlists of tables .ilists of figures.vilists of abbreviations.vii. i

2、ntroduction. . .11.1 selecting the topic.11.2 the purpose of this study.41.3 significance of this study.42. literature review.52.1 the definition of fonf . .5 2.2 the classification of fonf.52.3 the background of the development of fonf.52.4 previous studies on fonf.72.4.1 noticing enhancement.72.4.

3、2 empirical studies on the effects of noticing enhancement.82.5 the mixed results and linguistic complexity issue.11 3. theoretical framework.133.1 schmidts noticing hypothesis.133.2 robinsons proposal.133.3 vanpattens input processing principles.143.4 linguistic complexity issue.154. the present st

4、udy.204.1 research hypotheses.204.2 operational definition of the main variables.204.3 subjects.214.4 target language forms.214.5 research design.224.6 research procedures.244.7 research instrument.274.8 data collection and analysis.284.8.1 scoring.28 4.8.2 data analysis.294.9 discussion.415 conclus

5、ions.475.1 major findings .475.2 implications findings .485.3 limitations of the present study .49references.viiiappendixes .xiiiappendix 1 reading passages in phase 1.xiiiappendix 2 phase 2 writing topic prompts for eg.xvappendix 3 model compositionsxviiappendix 4 grammaticality judgment test .xxap

6、pendix 5 八年級學(xué)生英語學(xué)習(xí)問卷.xxiiappendix 6 pretestxxivacknowledgements.xxvii獨創(chuàng)性聲明本人聲明所呈交的論文是我個人在導(dǎo)師指導(dǎo)下進(jìn)行的研究工作及取得研究成果。盡我所知，除了文中特別加以標(biāo)注和致謝的地方外，論文中不包括其他人已經(jīng)發(fā)表或撰寫過的研究成果，也不包含為獲得西北師范大或其他教育機構(gòu)的學(xué)位或證書而使用過的材料。與我一同工作的同志對研究所做的任何貢獻(xiàn)均已在論文中作了明確的說明并表示了謝意。簽名：_ 日期：_ 關(guān)于論文使用授權(quán)的說明本人完全了解西北師范大學(xué)有關(guān)保留、使用學(xué)位論文的規(guī)定，即：學(xué)校有權(quán)保留送交論文的復(fù)印件；允許論文被查閱和

7、借閱；學(xué)?？梢怨颊撐牡娜炕虿糠謨?nèi)容，可以采用影印、縮印或其他復(fù)制手段保存論文。（保密的論文在解密后應(yīng)遵守此規(guī)定) 簽名：_ 導(dǎo)師簽名：_ 日期：_abstractthe present study investigates the impact of linguistic complexity upon the efficacy of focus on form (fonf) and the differential effects of fonf and focus on forms (fonfs) in efl students learning of english article

8、system, conditional clause and past tense in the classroom settings in a chinese junior middle school.fonf directly derived from the less-than-impressive results achieved by the non-interventionists versions of the communicative language teaching approach (clt) in 1980s (ron sheen, 2003)，which refus

9、ed to give a systematic role to grammar instruction. what fonf concern is to overtly draw learners attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding focus is on meaning or communications”. the previous studies on fonf investigated a number of different noticing

10、enhancement techniques in learning different linguistic forms and produced quite mixed results. based on the discussion of the mixed results of the previous empirical studies on fonf and also on schmidts noticing hypothesis (1990, 2001), robinsons proposal of detection plus rehearsal (1995, 2003), v

11、anpattens input processing instruction theory (1996, 2002), three research questions were raised to investigate: 1) whether fonf is effective in facilitating efl learners learning of the three linguistic forms; 2) whether fonf produces better results than fonfs, and 3) whether linguistic complexity

12、exerts significant impact upon efl learners learning of a linguistic form.the complexity of the three linguistic forms under investigation was reassessed within a processing framework (vanpatten, 1996, 2001), which incorporates processibility hierarchy (ph), communicative value (cv), meaning transpa

13、rency (mt), and reranked, from difficult to simple, as the following: articlesconditionalpast tense formation. the experiment was a factorial design with pretest-posttests and two groups: eg (n=30) and (n=30). the two independent variables were the linguistic complexity of the three target forms and

14、 the enhancement techniques- fonf vs. fonfs. the dependent variable was efl learners learning of the three linguistic forms, i.e., the scores in the three tests. the findings are: 1) in facilitating the learners learning of the three linguistic forms, fonf is more effective than fonfs in learning co

15、nditional if, almost equally effective with fonfs in learning the past tense, but less effective than fonfs in the article system learning. 2) fonf is more effective than fonfs in facilitating the learners learning of english conditional if, but less effective than fonfs in learning article. as to t

16、he learning of the past tense, fonf and fonfs are equally effective. 3) linguistic complexity exerts significant impact upon the efficacy of both fonf and fonfs in the learning of all the three linguistic forms in terms of both short-term and long-term effects. the differential results have a close

17、relationship with the mt and cv features of them. a form with lower cv might be more attention-demanding in terms of its inherent semantic value.the thesis consists of 5 chapters: chapter 1 is an introduction of the research topic, purpose and significance; chapter 2 is a selective literature review

18、 of the enhancement techniques and mixed results of fonf in the previous studies, chapter 3 presents the theoretical framework the present study was based on; chapter 4 reports on the present study, including the hypotheses, operational definitions, subjects, target language forms, research design,

19、procedures, instrument, data collection and analysis, analysis, discussion; and chapter 5 is the conclusions of the present study.key words: fonf; fonfs: linguistic complexity; mt; cv;摘 要本研究旨在調(diào)查在我國中學(xué)英語教學(xué)（efl）中，語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜性對有意注意形式教學(xué)法有效性的影響，及采用有意注意形式教學(xué)與傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)法學(xué)習(xí)冠詞、一般過去時和現(xiàn)在虛擬條件句三個語言形式結(jié)構(gòu)的不同效果，并探索其制約因素。本研究提出如下三

20、個研究問題： 1) 有意注意形式教學(xué)是否對學(xué)習(xí)上述三個不同類型語言項目有效？ 2)有意注意形式教學(xué)是否比傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)更有效？ 3)語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜性是否對學(xué)習(xí)效果有顯著影響？有意注意形式教學(xué)（fonf）始于80年代，當(dāng)時交際法盛行，否認(rèn)語法教學(xué)的系統(tǒng)作用,但交際法效果卻不盡人意。有意注意形式教學(xué)的提出，是對交際法不教語法的修正，但又與傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)(fonfs)（即語法翻譯法）不同，主張“在交際中將學(xué)習(xí)者的注意力公然引向語言形式”。對fonf的前期研究主要集中于討論其有效性，對其有效性看法也不盡同。總體上認(rèn)為有效，但研究結(jié)果各異。也有學(xué)者認(rèn)為（sheen，2003)兩種教學(xué)之間沒有不同。本研究根據(jù)vanpa

21、tten (1996, 2002) 輸入加工理論，綜合加工序列(pienamann, 1998, 2003)、語義顯性度、和交際值三項指標(biāo)，對三個語言形式結(jié)構(gòu)的復(fù)雜度進(jìn)行了評估，并將其從難到易依次排列如下：冠詞現(xiàn)在虛擬條件句一般過去時。實驗為2×3因子設(shè)計，由實驗、前后、測試構(gòu)成。60名八年級學(xué)生參加了實驗，實驗組 (n=30) 與控制組 (n=30) 分別采用有意注意形式教學(xué)與傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)兩種不同方法，學(xué)習(xí)三個不同復(fù)雜度的語言結(jié)構(gòu)形式；前、后測三次成績?yōu)橐蜃兞?。對三次實驗?shù)據(jù)，采用了重復(fù)測量方差分析、單因素方差分析和多因素方差分析后，得出如下結(jié)果：1）有意注意形式教學(xué)，對學(xué)習(xí)一般過去時

22、和現(xiàn)在虛擬條件句有效，對學(xué)習(xí)冠詞基本無效，其效果不如傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)；2）學(xué)習(xí)現(xiàn)在虛擬條件句時，有意注意形式教學(xué)比傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)更有效；學(xué)習(xí)一般過去時，與傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)的效果相同；學(xué)習(xí)冠詞時，其效果不如傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)；3）語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜性對用fonf 和fonfs學(xué)習(xí)三個不同形式結(jié)構(gòu)的效果都具有顯著影響。分析上述結(jié)果得到以下啟示：有意注意形式教學(xué)只對學(xué)習(xí)部分語言形式結(jié)構(gòu)有效，但并不對各種不同類型語言形式結(jié)構(gòu)都有效。學(xué)習(xí)一項語言形式結(jié)構(gòu)，首先應(yīng)該按照語義顯性度和交際值對其復(fù)雜度進(jìn)行評判，然后再來確定選用有意注意形式教學(xué)、還是語法翻譯法。本文由五部分構(gòu)成：第一章為引言，介紹選題、研究目的及其意義；第二章對前期有意注意形式教學(xué)

23、研究中注意強化技巧及取得的不同研究成果進(jìn)行了回顧，并指出了尚存問題；第三章為理論框架，根據(jù)注假設(shè)意理論及輸入加工理論，建立了本研究假設(shè)；第四章報告了現(xiàn)行研究，包括研究假設(shè)，目標(biāo)語選用，實驗及其數(shù)據(jù)收集、整理、分析、討論；第五章報告了研究結(jié)論：有意注意形式教學(xué)法只對學(xué)習(xí)部分語言形式有效；學(xué)習(xí)某些語言形式時傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)法更有效；語言結(jié)構(gòu)復(fù)雜性對教學(xué)方法的有效性具有顯著影響。關(guān)鍵詞：有意注意形式教學(xué)；傳統(tǒng)教學(xué)；語言復(fù)雜性；交際值；語義顯性度list of tablestable 1 characteristics of attention enhancement techniques. .7table

24、2 experimental procedures.23table 3 instructional procedures.25table 4 descriptive statistics of l2 learners performance in article acquisition.30table 5 independent samples test.31table 6 group statistics.31table 7 independent samples test.32table 8 group statistics.32table 9 independent samples te

25、st.33table 10 group statistics.33table 11 independent samples test.34table 12 group statistics.35 table 13 independent samples test.35 table 14 group statistics.36 table 15 independent samples test.36 table 16 group statistics.37table 17 independent samples test.37 table 18 descriptive statistics of

26、 manova38table 19 manova.38 table 20 method39table 21 complexity.39list of figures figure 1 egs performance in article learning in the three tests.30figure 2 egs performance in past tense learning in the three tests.32figure 3 egs performance in learning conditional if in the three tests.33figure 4

27、eg performance in learning article, past tense and subjunctive in the three tests.34figure 5 estimated marginal means of score.40figure 6 estimated marginal means of score 2.41lists of abbreviationscg: control groupclt: communicative language teaching approachcv: communicative valueeg: experimental

28、groupefl: english as foreign languageffi: form-focused instructionfl: foreign languageflt: foreign language teachingfonf: focus on formfonfs: focus on formsgjt: grammaticality judgment testie: input enhancementil: interlanguagel1: the first language/native languagel2: second languagemt: meaning tran

29、sparencyncs: the new curriculum standardsnp: noun phraseoe: output enhancementph: processibility hierarchypp: prepositional phrasesla: second language acquisitiontblt: the task-based language teachingtl: target languagetlu: target like useug: universal grammar 1 introduction 1.1 selecting the topic

30、formal instruction, i.e. grammar teaching (r. ellis, 1994：611), is one of the important inter-functional components in the complicated foreign language teaching (flt) system (gui shichun, 2005) and is always a controversial issue for its contribution to the learning of foreign language (fl)/second l

31、anguage (l2) (ellis, 2002). it always draws great attention from language researchers and teachers of english for its great influence on the efficacy of l2/fl learning/acquisition. krashen (1982) claimed that conscious awareness does not help much in learning complex rules, and argued consistently (

32、1981, 1982, 1993) that the effect of form-focused instruction (ffi) on acquisition is only peripheral. however, findings from a lot of studies on the effect of immersion (harley & swain, 1978, 1985; hammerly, 1987; harley, 1993) have shown that l2 learners in immersion classes often demonstrate

33、weaknesses in grammatical accuracy. swain (1985) argued that “comprehensible input,” although invaluable to the acquisition process, is not sufficient for learners to fully develop their l2 proficiency. contra krashens claim, robinson (1996), suggested that complex rules are better learned in explic

34、it conditions. krashens non-interface position as well as his denial of the role of explicit instruction was thus challenged by swains output hypothesis (swain, 1985; 1998 for), sharwood smiths consciousness-raising or input enhancement (1981), schmidts noticing hypothesis (1990), and especially by

35、the recent focus on form (fonf) approach (doughty & long, 1998).fonf directly derived from the less-than-impressive results achieved by the non-interventionists versions of the communicative language teaching approach (clt) in 1980s (ron sheen, 2003)，which refused to give a systematic role to gr

36、ammar instruction, and instead give priority to comprehensive input (ci). since then a number of applied linguists led by long have proposed the approach which they termed as a focus on form. in order to set apart the recent reawakening of interest in grammar learning from the traditional isolated and mechanical instillation of metalinguistic knowledge, michael long (doughty & williams, 1998a; long & robinson, 1998) made an important distinction between fonf and fonf: focus on form is the term used to l