任務(wù)型語言教學(xué)理論在大學(xué)英語《精讀》教學(xué)中的應(yīng)用研究

摘要任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑要求以學(xué)生為中心，既要求傳授語言知識(shí)和言語技能，又要求注重學(xué)生的語言運(yùn)用能力的培養(yǎng)。任務(wù)教學(xué)途徑在當(dāng)今外語教學(xué)中已引起特別關(guān)注。它對(duì)以語言為中心、教師為中心、課本為中心的語言教學(xué)模式無疑是一種挑戰(zhàn)。本文探討任務(wù)型語言教學(xué)的理論依據(jù)，介紹其在我國(guó)外語教學(xué)中的應(yīng)用情況，并運(yùn)用其原理進(jìn)行大學(xué)英語《精讀》課程教學(xué)，以證其可行性，在此基礎(chǔ)上，對(duì)其有效性給予了評(píng)價(jià)。任務(wù)型語言教學(xué)是20世紀(jì)80年代興起的--種語言教學(xué)途徑，它在于體現(xiàn)語言教學(xué)目標(biāo)由語言結(jié)構(gòu)向語言功能的轉(zhuǎn)變，強(qiáng)調(diào)由教向?qū)W的轉(zhuǎn)移，實(shí)現(xiàn)由學(xué)什么到怎樣學(xué)的轉(zhuǎn)移。任務(wù)型教學(xué)主要關(guān)注語言的交際功能和社會(huì)使用，要求教學(xué)實(shí)現(xiàn)以教師為中心到以學(xué)生為中心的轉(zhuǎn)變，交際任務(wù)是該教學(xué)途徑的核心。任務(wù)型教學(xué)大綱屬于過程性大綱，它不再以語言、詞匯和語法為教學(xué)內(nèi)容選擇的依據(jù)，也不必根據(jù)語言知識(shí)的難易程度來安排教學(xué)內(nèi)容及其順序，而是設(shè)計(jì)并排列學(xué)習(xí)者在學(xué)習(xí)中應(yīng)能執(zhí)行或完成的各種有利于語言學(xué)習(xí)的任務(wù)。大綱設(shè)計(jì)和教材編寫中的基本單位不是語言項(xiàng)目而是各種使用目的語進(jìn)行交際的任務(wù)或活動(dòng)。本研究通過在大學(xué)英語《精讀》課程教學(xué)的實(shí)證研究，以證學(xué)生在課堂教學(xué)中完成認(rèn)知任務(wù)、語言任務(wù)、文化任務(wù)和情感任務(wù)的過程和能力以及使用語言進(jìn)行交際的能力。本文除引言和結(jié)論外，由四部分構(gòu)成：“引言部分”介紹了本研究的理論背景及其研究目的，揭示了結(jié)構(gòu)主義、功能主義和系統(tǒng)功能語法的觀點(diǎn)對(duì)任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑的導(dǎo)向作用。結(jié)構(gòu)主義的語言系統(tǒng)觀在于強(qiáng)調(diào)語言知識(shí)和言語技能；功能主義語言觀強(qiáng)調(diào)語言系統(tǒng)的實(shí)際使用和社會(huì)使用。系統(tǒng)功能語法將語言的性質(zhì)歸納為一個(gè)社會(huì)意義學(xué)系統(tǒng)。語言符號(hào)與它所代表的意義是不可分的，意義在于語言的所有層面。任務(wù)型語言教學(xué)觀強(qiáng)調(diào)在社會(huì)交際中完成語言學(xué)習(xí)的各項(xiàng)任務(wù)，從而達(dá)到學(xué)習(xí)語言知識(shí)和運(yùn)用語言進(jìn)行交際的目的。本研究在“理論綜述部分”中對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)外任務(wù)型教學(xué)的研究情況予以了詳細(xì)介紹，對(duì)3P教學(xué)途徑進(jìn)行了分析性回顧。3P語言教學(xué)在實(shí)施語言知識(shí)和言語技能教學(xué)方面對(duì)任務(wù)型教學(xué)有一定的借鑒作用，但其在培養(yǎng)語言的實(shí)際使用方面又存在文化缺省等缺陷。本研究還論述了交際語言教學(xué)途徑對(duì)任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑的影響。針對(duì)任務(wù)型語言教學(xué)途徑，本研究從任務(wù)的定義、任務(wù)型教學(xué)大綱、理論背景（二語習(xí)得和言語行為理論等）、任務(wù)設(shè)計(jì)原則等方面進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)闡釋。最后介紹了JaneWillis的任務(wù)型教學(xué)模式，并將作者運(yùn)用該模式指導(dǎo)大學(xué)英語教學(xué)的實(shí)驗(yàn)情況予以了介紹。實(shí)驗(yàn)的樣本取自長(zhǎng)沙理工大學(xué)一年級(jí)非英語專業(yè)兩個(gè)班的新生，作者運(yùn)用任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑在這兩個(gè)班中進(jìn)行了大學(xué)英語教學(xué)對(duì)比實(shí)驗(yàn)。在“實(shí)驗(yàn)部分”，本研究對(duì)實(shí)驗(yàn)操作規(guī)則、實(shí)施進(jìn)程和可比性情況等作了簡(jiǎn)單介紹和基本分析。在“數(shù)據(jù)收集情況及問題討論”中報(bào)告了兩個(gè)班學(xué)生期考成績(jī)的t測(cè)驗(yàn)分析，以此評(píng)估任務(wù)型教學(xué)的有效性，其中詳細(xì)分析了對(duì)學(xué)生進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)前的和實(shí)驗(yàn)后的調(diào)查問卷和訪談情況，研究了學(xué)生對(duì)該途徑的態(tài)度以及師生在該途徑中角色轉(zhuǎn)變的情況。在“教學(xué)啟示''中討論了任務(wù)型教學(xué)的利弊，并提出教學(xué)使用中怎樣靈活處理的意見。本研究在“總結(jié)”中陳述了任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑實(shí)施的前景以及值得進(jìn)一步研究的問題。關(guān)鍵詞：任務(wù)型教學(xué)途徑；Willis模式；大英《精讀》教學(xué)；教學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)；有效性評(píng)價(jià)EnglishAbstractTBLTapproachputsthestudentsasitscenter.Itrequiresthetrainingoflanguageknowledgeandutteranceskills,atthesametimeitalsolaysstressonthecultivationoflearners,abilityoflanguageusing.TBLTapproachhasaprominentstatusinEnglishasaForeignLanguage(EFL)teaching.ItchallengesthecurrentcollegeEnglishteachingrealityinChinawhichisstilllanguage-centered,teacher-centeredandtext-centered.Thispaperexploresthetheoreticalbackgroundandtheapplicationoftask-basedlanguageteachingapproachinEFL.IttriestoappraisethefeasibilityofTBLTapproachinteachingcollegeintensivereading.TBLTapproachemergesintheearly1980s.ItreflectsthechangeofteachinggoalsfromlanguagestructuralgoalstolanguagefunctionalgoalsinEFLteaching.Itsemphasisconvertsfromteachingmethodstolearningmethods.ItembodiestheshiftinessfromWhattolearntoHowtolearn.Anditmainlyfocusesoncommunicativefunctionanditssocialuse.Itfulfilstheshiftinessfromteacher-centeredtolearner-centered.Thecommunicativetaskitselfiscentraltothisapproach.Atask-basedsyllabusisakindofprocesssyllabuses.Theorganizingprincipleinvolvedisnotthepresentationandpracticeofthelanguagetobelearnedbutallkindsoftasksandactivitieswhichapplytargetlanguagestocommunicate.ThisresearchcarriesoutTBLTapproachinintensivereadingclassinexpecttocompletecognitivetasks,linguistictasks,culturaltasksandaffectivetasks,andtocultivatelearners9communicativecompetence.Apartfromthepartsofintroductionandconclusion,thethesisconsistsoffourparts:In“Introduction"part,thethesisintroducestheoreticalbackgroundandobjectivesofthestudy.Itrevealstheguidanceofstructuralist,functionalistlinguistsandfunctionalgrammaronTBLTapproach.Stucturalistlinguisticsemphasizesonthelanguageknowledgeandutteranceskills.Functionalistlinguisticsstressesontheuseoflanguageandsocialcommunications.Functionalgrammarregardsthenatureoflanguageasasocialsemioticsystem.Thelanguagesignanditsmeaningareinseparable.Meaningexistsineveryaspectoflanguage.TBLTapproachputsemphasisonthecompletionoflanguagetasksinsocialcommunicationsoastoachievethegoalsoflearningandusinglanguage.In“LiteratureReview“partthepaperintroducestheresearchonTBLTapproachbothabroadandathome.AnditillustratesPPPmodelwhichhasacertaininfluenceonTBLTapproachintheaspectsofteachinglanguageknowledgeandutteranceskills.Butithassomedemeritsonculturaldefault.Thenthepaperilluminatescommunicativelanguageteachingapproach.AsconcerningaboutTBLTapproachthethesisre-definestask,introducestask-basedsyllabuses,explorestheoreticalbackgroundandprinciplesofdesigningtasks,andbriefsonJaneWillis'TBLTmodelwhichisusedbytheauthorintheexperimentofteachingintensivereading.ThesamplesoftheexperimentpartcomefromtwointactclassesofthefirstyearinChangshaUniversityofScienceandTechnology.TheauthorusedTBLTapproachtocarryoutcontrastiveexperimentinthesetwoclasses.Andthethesisbrieflyintroducesthemanipulativerules,operativeprocessandcontrastivecondition.In“Datacollectionanddiscussion“partthethesisreportsthestudents9performanceinthefinalexaminationbyt-test.Andsizesuptheresultsofsurveysandinterviewsmadebeforeandattheendoftheexperiment.AccordingtotheresultstheauthorappraisestheeffectivenessofTBLTapproachandprobesintothestudents9attitudetowardstheapproach.Andalsomakeresearchonteachers,andlearners?rolesrespectivelyinTBLTapproach.In^Pedagogicalimplications“partthethesispointsouttheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofTBLTapproach,andsuggestshowtouseTBLTapproachflexiblyintheteaching.Inthe“conclusion"part,thethesisconcludestheprospectoftask-basedinstructionandposestheproblemsthatneedfurtherresearching.Keywords:task-basedlanguageteachingapproach；Willis'model;intensivereadinginCollegeEnglish;teachingexperiment;effectiveappraisal湘潭大學(xué)學(xué)位論文原創(chuàng)性聲明本人齷聲知所呈交的論文是本人在驪的指導(dǎo)下獨(dú)立進(jìn)班晚腳得的研究成果，除了文中特別加以標(biāo)注引用的內(nèi)容外，本論文不包含任何其他個(gè)人或集體己經(jīng)發(fā)表或撰寫的成果作亂對(duì)本文桐咒做出重顫破的個(gè)人和集體，均已在文中以明確方式標(biāo)明.本人完全京識(shí)到本聲剪的法愫后果由本人承擔(dān).作者簽名；取上日觸同年/月日學(xué)位論文版權(quán)使用授權(quán)書本學(xué)位論文作者完全了解學(xué)校有關(guān)保留、住用學(xué)位論文的規(guī)定，同意學(xué)校保國(guó)并向國(guó)家有關(guān)部門或機(jī)構(gòu)送交論文的復(fù)印件和電子版，允許論文板查閱和借間.本人授權(quán)湘潭大學(xué)可以將本學(xué)便比文的全部或部分內(nèi)容羯入有關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)進(jìn)行檢索，可以采用影取絡(luò)印靶理勒刷手段保存新二■本學(xué)位論文涉密論文按學(xué)校規(guī)定處理。作苕簽名:導(dǎo)師簽名:日期:其年作苕簽名:導(dǎo)師簽名:日期:其年f月?日日斯淑笄6月》2日IntroductionTheoreticalBackgroundforthisStudyTherehasbeenachangeofemphasisfrompresentinglanguageasasetofforms(grammatical,phonological,lexical)topresentinglanguageasafunctionalsystemwhichisusedtofulfillarangeofcommunicativepurposesinrecentyears.Withthedevelopmentofthestudyoflinguisticsandlanguageteaching,theteachingfocushasbeenchangedfromlanguageformstolanguageuses,especiallytosocialcommunication.StructuralistViewpointsStructurallinguisticsstressesontheimportanceoflanguageasasystemandfocusesontheinvestigationonsounds,words,sentences,andgrammarrules.Initswidestsense,thetermhasbeenusedforvariousgroupsoflinguists,includingthosefromPragueSchool,butmostoftenforthegroupofAmericanlinguistssuchasBloomfieldwhopublishedtheresearchesmainlyinthe1930sto1950s.Inthe1920s,J.B.Waston9sbehavioristtheoryreplacedmentalism.Watsonheldthatallknowledgecomesfromdirectexperience;onlydataobtainedfromobjectiveandobservableexperimentsarereliable.Behaviorismisbasedonthebeliefthathumanbeingscannotknowanythingtheyhavenotexperienced.Wastonpointsoutthatweexperienceallkindsofstimuliandresponsesinourdailylifeandcometoassociatecertainstimuliwithresponses.Thisisthestimulus-responsetheory.AccordingtoWaston,alloursocialbehaviorsaretheresultofexternalstimuliandhavenothingtodowithmind.Learningisonlytheresultofaseriesofstimuliandresponses,becauselanguageisakindofbehavior.Behaviorisminlinguisticsholdsthatchildrenlearnlanguagethroughachainofstimulus-responsereinforcement,andadults,useoflanguageisalsoaprocessofstimulus-response.AccordingtoAlbertPaulWeiss,linguistsshouldbeabletoprovethathumanbeingshavenothought,andthattheycanonlymakesoundswhichstimulateotherpeople'snervoussystemsasexternalstimulionotherpeople'sbehavior.Whatwecallthoughtisnothingbutlinguisticforms,andtheactivitiesofthemindarepartlyphysiologicalactivitiesandpartlysocialactivities.ForBloomfield,linguisticsisabranchofpsychology,andspecificallyofthepositivisticbrandofpsychologyknownasbehaviorism.Structuralismderivesfromthethoughtofbehaviorism.Thisisthebasisforhistheoryaboutlanguage.Behaviorismisaprincipleofscientificmethod,basedonthebeliefthattheonlythingsvalidenoughtoconfirmorrefuteascientifictheoryareinterpersonallyobservablephenomena,ratherthanpeople'sintrospectionsor“intuitions”.Bloomfieldalsotouchedupontheapplicationoflinguisticstolanguageteachingandcriticizedtraditionalgrammar.Hepointedoutthatthe18thand19thcenturygrammariansweremostlylayingdownrulesaboutwhatEnglishshouldbelike.Hesaidthatlearningalanguageinvolvesconstantpracticeandrepetitioninrealsituationsratherthanmerelyteachinglanguagelearnersgrammaticaltheories;traditionalpractice,beingsometimesconfusingandfarfrombeingeconomical,cannothelpthelearnersmuch.Bloomfield'sthoughtstartedAmericanstructuralismasaschoolofthought.TheAmericanstructuralistlinguisticsassumedthatthestructureofalanguagecouldbelookeduponasasystemofsentencepatterns.Oncethesentencepatternstobetaughtwereidentified,therequirementfrombehavioristpsychologywasthattheybeingrainedintheirlearnerthroughdrilling.Andthepatterndrill,anexerciseinwhichlearnersmanipulatethesentencepatternsofthetargetlanguageuntiltheycanproducethem“automatically”,becameamajortechnique.Thoughsomeeffortsweremadetoprovidecontextforpatternsdrilledinclass,itturnedoutinpracticethatcontextualizationwasinsufficientandmeaningwasnotlearnt.Learnerscouldoftenchantdrillsperfectly,butalltoofrequentlydidnotreallyunderstandwhattheyweresayingandcouldnotapplystructuresrehearsedinmeaningfulcontexts.TheearlyeffortsofthePragueSchoolweredirectedat(1)justifyingthesynchronicapproachtofactsoflanguage;(2)stressingtheprevailinglysystemiccharacteroflanguage;(3)layingemphasisonthefunctionperformedbylanguageingivenlanguagecommunity.TBLTapproachmakesuseofmanyideasofPragueSchool.Itcentersonlanguagefunction,especiallycommunicativefunction.ThisisinaccordancewithPragueSchoolinthispoint.Onthewhole,linguisticresearchesoftheselinguistswerebasedonthetheoriesofBehavioristicpsychologyandhadaconsiderableinfluenceonsomelanguageteachingmethods(suchasDirectMethod,Audio-lingualMethodandPPPteachingapproach).AccordingtotheviewsofStructuralists,theteachingapproachesandmaterialsconcentrateonthedevelopmentofgrammaticalcompetence,almosttotheexclusionoftheothercomponents.Thegrammar,thelexicon,orthephonologyofalanguageareatthecentreofthesyllabusesandteachingmaterials.Thelearnersarerequiredtoproducegrammaticallyorphonologicallyaccuratesentencesinthelanguagebeingstudied.Intheclassroom,teachersaredominators,whoareprovidingmodel,controllingdirectionandpace.WhattheStructuralisticLinguisticcaresaboutisthelanguageknowledgeandtheutteranceskills.InTBLTapproach,thelinguistictaskalsoputsemphasisonlanguageformsandutteranceskills.ThetwosidesareaccentuatedinTBLTapproachbecausetheyarethenecessaryprerequisiteforsuccessfullycommunication.Onlyconcentratingondevelopinggrammaticalcompetence,however,willnotprovidethelearnerswiththeabilitytoproducesentencesorutteranceswhichareappropriatetothecontextofuse,orcannotcultivatetheircommunicativecompetence.FunctionalistViewpointsThe20thcenturyhaswitnessedanotherinfluentialtypeoflinguisticschoolscharacterizedbyfunctionalism.ThiscampoftheoriesincludesthePragueSchool(orthePragueCircle),theCopenhagenSchool,andtheLondonSchool.Theseschools,afterSassure,seelanguageasacompletestructuralsystemandbelievethateverylanguagehasitsowninternalstructure,inwhicheverythingisdeterminedbyitsrelationtootherlinguisticelements.Functionalistlinguistsattempttoexplainlinguisticphenomenafromafunctionalpointofview.Theiraimisnotsimplytodescribelanguagebutalsowhylanguageiswhatitis.MuchofEuropeanlinguisticsafterSaussuremaybetermedasbroadlyfunctional,butfunctionalismarosefromtheconcernsofVilemMathesius,ateacherintheCarolineUniversityinPrague.Mathesiuscalledforanon-historicalapproachtothestudyoflanguage.Someofthelinguistssharehisconcerns,includingR.JacksonandPragueSchool.OfthemanyideasdevelopedinthePragueSchool,threepointsareofspecialimportant.First,itisstressedthatthesynchronicstudyoflanguageisfullyjustifiedasitcandrawoncompleteandcontrollablematerialforinvestigationbutnorigidtheoreticalbarrieriserectedtoseparatediachronicstudies.Secondly,thereisanemphasisonthesystemiccharacteroflanguage.Itisarguedthatnoelementofanylanguagecanbesatisfactorilyanalyzedorevaluatedinisolation,andthatanassessmentcanbemadeonlywhentherelationshipofanelementisestablishedwiththecoexistingelementsinthesamelanguagesystem.Inotherwords,elementsareheldtobeinfunctionalcontrastoropposition.Thirdly,languageislookedonasfunctionalinanothersense,thatis,asatoolperforminganumberofessentialfunctionsortasksforthecommunityusingit.Afterthe1950s,theNeo-PragueSchoolscholarstookupthebasicprinciplesoftheirpredecessors,developingandenrichingtheirlinguistictheories.ThePragueSchoollinguistsdistinguishedthreebasicfunctions:thefunctionofexpression,thefunctionofappealandthefunctionofreference.Whilethethirdfunctionconveysthefactualcontentreflectingthecommunicatedextralinguisticreality,thefirsttwofunctionsservetheemotivepurposes.Theexpressivefunctioncharacterizesthespeakerasdistinctfromotherspeakers,whilethefunctionofappealisdirectedatthelistenerwhowillbeinfluencedbythegivenutterance.Veryoftensuchinfluencingconsistsintransmittingtothelistenersomeemotiveevaluationofthecommunicatedcontent,withmoreorlessobviousintentionofevokinganalogousemotiveevaluationonthepartofthelistener.OneoftheobjectivesofTBLTapproachistoaccomplishaffectivetaskthroughcommunication.Actuallyitservesasthefunctionofappeal.TheCopenhagenSchoolconsidersthenatureoflanguageastheinstrumentwithwhichmanformsthoughtandfeeling,mood,aspiration,willandact,theinstrumentbywhosemeansheinfluencesandisinfluenced,theultimateanddeepestfoundationofhumansociety.Theaimoflinguistictheoryistodescribeandpredicatenotonlyanypossibletextcomposedinacertainlanguage,butonthebasisoftheinformationthatitgivesaboutlanguageingeneral.OneoftherepresentativesisJ.R.Firth.Firth'stheoriesmainlyconcernsemanticsandphonology.Instudyingmeaning,hetookasociologicalapproach.Histermofmeaningdoessimplycoverlexicalandgrammaticalmeanings,butisalargerconceptcoveringthemeaninginthecontextoflanguageuse.Hedefinessemanticsastheclassificationofutterancesofalanguageintothetypicalcontextsofsituationforwhichtheymightbeappropriate.OneoftheaimsofTBLTapproachistocultivatelearnerstoproduceappropriatespeechactaccordingtothesituation.Functionallinguisticsconcernswithlanguageasaninstrumentofsocialinteractionratherthanasasystemthatisviewedinisolation.Itconsiderstheindividualasasocialbeingandinvestigatesthewayinwhichheorsheacquireslanguageandusesitinordertocommunicatewithothersinhisorhersocialenvironment.Itstressesthatlanguageisusedtocommunicatewithdifferentpeopleinsociety.InTBLTapproach,thefunctionaltaskcentersonlanguageuse,especiallythoseofsocialcommunication.Intask-basedinstruction,thepriorityisnotthebitsandpiecesoflanguagebutratherthefunctionalpurposesforwhichlanguagemustbeused.TBLTapproachfocusesoncommunicationandmeaning,neverthelessgoalsarelinguisticinnature.Theyarenotlinguisticinthetraditionalsenseofjustfocusingongrammarorphonology,butbymaintainingthecentralityoffunctionslikegreetingpeople,expressingopinions,requestinginformation,etc.,thecoursegoalscenteronlearners5pragmaticlanguagecompetence.ManyoftheideasofTBLTapproachderivefromfunctionallinguistics.TheViewpointsofFunctionalGrammarHallidaystudiestherelationsbetweenlanguageandsocietyfromanthropologicalandsociologicalpointsofview,takinglanguageas“socialsemiotic”.Thistheoreticalframeworkischaracterizedbyconceptssuchasfunctions,systems,levelsandcontext.Hallidayexploreslanguageintermsoftherelationsbetweenlanguageandsocialneeds,socialstructure,andsocioculturalbackground.Heseeslanguageasoneoftheculturalsemioticsystemsinthegeneralsocialsemioticsystem—thesocialrealitysemioticsystemwhichmanifestsothersocio-culturalsystemsofthesociety,thenatureoflanguagecanbeaccountedforonlyinasocio-culturalenvironment.Languageisalsoasystemofsocialfunctions,whichliesinallhumanculturesandishumanlanguage-specific.Thevarioussocialfunctionsoflanguageconsistinthesocialusesofitinvariouscontexts,andeverylinguisticelementinthelanguagesystemcanbefunctionallyaccountedfor.Itisjustbecauseofthefunctionsinthesystemthatlanguagecanhavevarioussocialfunctions.Halliday,togetherwithotheractivescholarsintheSystemic-Functionalschool,believesthatlanguageistheproductofsocialactivities.Heholdsthatlanguageiswhatitisbecauseithastoservecertainfunctions.Inotherwords,socialdemandonlanguagehashelpedtoshapeitsstructure.AccordingtoHalliday(1994),therearethreemetafunctionsinfunctionalgrammar.Thefirstistheideationalfunction,whichistoconveynewinformationtocommunicateacontentthatisunknowntothehearer.Presentinalllanguageuses,theideationalfunctionisameaningpotential,becausewhateverspecificuseoneismakingoflanguagehehastorefertocategoriesofhisexperienceoftheworld.Thesecondisinterpersonalfunction,whichembodiesallusesoflanguagetoexpresssocialandpersonalrelations.Thisincludesthevariouswaysthespeakerentersaspeechsituationandperformsaspeechact.Thethirdistextualfunction,whichreferstothefactthatlanguagehasmechanismstomakeanystretchofspokenorwrittendiscourseintoacoherentandunifiedtextandmakealivingmessagedifferentfromarandomlistofsentences.Hallidaypointsoutthatsocialpropertyistheessenceoflanguage.Languageisauniformofformsandfunctions.Thesocialpropertycouldonlybeachievedbyusinglanguage.Soinlanguageteaching,theteachersshouldnotonlyfocusonlanguagerulesandformsbutalsoonfunctions.Theteachingmaterialsshouldbeauthenticandlanguagesystemshouldbedynamicandopen.Theunderstandingoflanguagemeaningshouldalsobedynamicandcontext-based.Tocultivatelearners?dynamiclanguagesense(especiallyculturalandcontextualsense)isthekeycontentoflanguageteaching.TBLTapproachemphasizesonmeaning,andfunctionalgrammarprovidesasocialbaseforittoexplainmeaning.ObjectivesItissupposedthatthroughcarryingoutTBLTapproachinteachingintensivereadingcannotonlydeveloplearners,grammaticalcompetencebutalsosociolinguisticcompetence.InthisexperimentalstudyontheeffectivenessofTBLTapproachinteachingintensivereadingclass,threeobjectivesareaddressed:Theachievementofthegoalsofcognitivetasks,affectivetasks,culturaltasks,andlinguistictasks.Thecultivationoflearners9communicativecompetencewhichincludesbothgrammaticalcompetenceandsociolinguisticcompetence.TheobtainmentofapositiveattitudetowardsTBLTapproachfromthelearners.AnOverviewOnTBLTApproachTheResearchBothAbroadandatHomeTheResearchAbroadTheresearchonTBLTapproachbeganintheearly1980s.PrabhufirstlycarriedoutBangloreProjectinSouthIndiawhichbeganthestudyoftask-basedinstruction.Theresearchdomainhasdevelopedfromtheoriginallycommunicativeteachingapproachtosociolinguistics,psychologicallinguistics,thetheoryofsecondlanguageacquisitionandthetheoryoflanguageevaluation.Itattractsmanyscholarsfromdifferentcountrieswithdifferentbackgroundtoinvestigate.AmongthemincludesthefamouslinguistsBreen,Candlin,Ellis,Nunan,SkehanandWillis.Nowadaysmanycountriesandregions,suchasAmerica,Canada,Singapore,andHongKongallpopularizeTBLTapproachintheofficialdocuments.Muchcurrentinterestisfocusedonthenatureofclassroomactivities(tasks).Learnersareaskedtoundertake,andonthepossibilityofusingthesetasksasthebasisforsyllabusdesign.Prabhu9swork(1987)ontheproceduralsyllabus(CommunicationalTeachingProject)isamajorattemptattask-basedteachingwhichisoneofhismotivationsfortheapproachbeingtoachievetrueMessage-focusintheclassroom.OtherslikeSkehan(1992)andWillis(1996)areledinasimilardirectionthroughbeliefintheimportanceofinteractiontolanguagelearning.Thereisagrowingliteratureclassifyingtasktypes(Nunan,1989)andalsoonidentifyingcriteriaforgradingtaskdifficulty(SkehanandFaster,1995).TheResearchatHomeInChinatheresearchonTBLTapproachcommencedin1990s.XiaJimeiandWuXudongfirstlyintroducedTBLTapproachinthelateof1990s.TheapproacharousesgeneralconcerninEFLteachingcircle.SuchasXiaJimei(2003),sheillustratesthesignificance,constitution,taskactivitiesandtaskevaluationofTBLTapproachwhichareusefulforteachersbothinprimaryandsecondaryschools.OtherslikeFengYufangandTangXiaoyan(2004),theydesignfiveprocedurestocarryoutSkehan'stask-basedinstructionmodelincollegeclassroom.AlsoQinXiuguiandQiZhenhai(2004)probedeeplyintotask-basedsyllabuses,theoreticalbackgroundofTBLTapproach,itsmaincharacteristicsandthepredicamentofimplementationfromacriticalangle.TheresearchonTBLTapproachmainlycentersonthefollowingsevenaspects.TheResearchonTheoreticalBackgroundTherearefewspecialdiscussionsontheoreticalbackground.HeAnping(2001),FengYufang(2004),ZhangZhengdong(2004),YuYongnian(2003),DingWen(2002),RuanZhoulin(2001)andGeWenshan(2003)considerTBLTapproachasthedevelopmentofCommunicativeLanguageTeachingApproach.QinXiugui(2004),XuXiaoqing(2004),CaiLanzhen(2004),ChengKela(2003)andLiuFusheng(2003)thinkTBLTapproachabsorbsthetheoriesofsecondlanguageacquisition.TheDiscussionsonConcepts,ClassificationandCharacteristicsofTBLTApproachXiaJimei(1998)looksontasksasthecommunicativeactivitiesorprocesswithdefiniteaims.LiBoli(2003)presentstasksasthecommunicativeactivitiesbasedonmeaning.JiaZhigao(1999)believestasksarethecommunicativeactivitieswhichinvolveinformationmanagement.Asconcerningabouttheclassificationoftasks,FengYufang(2004),JiaZhigao(2005),FuRuiping(2004),FanWenli(2003),ChenWeixin(2004),ChenYiyin(2004)andSuShaping(2003)introducetheviewpointsofNuan(1989),Willis(1996)andPica(1998)separately.GongYafuandLuoShaoqian(2003)classifytasksintobroadandnarrowsenseoftasks.ChengXiaotang(2004)thinksthatmanycommunicativetasksintheclassroomarethecontinuityofrealtasksandpedagogicaltasks.AndGeWenshan(2003),JiaZhigao(2005),SongXuedong(2003)andRuanZhoulin(2001)introduceclearlySkehan'sopinionsoncharacteristicsoftasks.TheResearchontheDesign,ImplementationandEvaluationofTBLTApproachThemostdifficultchallengeforteacherstouseTBLTapproachistoconsiderhowtodesignallkindsoftasksaccordingtolearners9age,cognitivelevels,hobbiesandlearningbackground,andhowtomonitortheimplementationprocessandhowtoevaluatethecompletionoftasks.JiaZhigao(2005),XuJin(2003),LuLi(2002),GeWenshan(2003),andHuangXia(2004)designthecommunicativetasksinclassaccordingtoNunan's(1989)task-basedinstructionapproachanddesigningprinciples.Manyprimaryschoolteachers,suchasXuWeina(2003),ZhuYuan(2003),ShengYanping(2003)andLiSuijuan(2003)havetheirownopinionsonthedesigningprinciples.LuZiwen(2003)thinksthatthedesignshouldincludetheanalysisofteachingcontent,designingauthenticpedagogicaltasksandteachingmaterials.ChenKela(2003)holdsthatthetaskscouldbedesignedwiththehelpofthetechnologyofmultimedia.Manyteachers,suchasDingWen(2002),ShenQin(2004)andLiuPeijiang(2003)claimthattheimplementationoftasksshouldbefromeasytodifficult,fromsimpletocomplex.Thelearnersmainlyfocusonthemeaningnegotiation.Intheclassroom,theteachersshouldflexiblyadjustthetaskdifficultyandprocessaccordingtothelearners9feedbackinclass.XiaJimeiestablishesthreestandardsforevaluationwhicharechances,abilityandeffect.LuoShaoqian(2002)advancestheevaluationschemeofspeechactbasedonthetasks.TheResearchontheFrameofTask-basedSyllabusTheresearchontask-basedsyllabusbeganinthelate1980s.Theemphasisconcentratesonthefollowingfiveaspects:first,thedefinitionandcontentoftask-basedsyllabus.Second,thetheoreticalbaseofthesyllabus.Third,thevalueanditsdefect.Forth,theconstitutionprocess.Fifth,theselectionandarrangementoftasks.QinXiugui(2004),ZengWenxiong(2002),andZhangYuxiang(2002)thinkthattheformationoftask-basedsyllabuslacksoftheoreticalbasis.Task-basedsyllabuscannotguaranteethesystematicnatureandintegrationoflearning.Thecontentsarerestrictedbymanyfactorsinthepracticeofteaching.ThePracticeofTBLTApproachintheclassroomNiWensai(2002)advocatesthetask-drivenmodelinprimaryschool.CaiLanzheng(2004)advancesfiveprocedurestocarryouttask-basedinstructionincollegeEnglish.ZengWenxiong(2003)suggeststask-basedinstructiontoguidetheteachingofcommercialEnglish.LiuPing(2004),LiJilan(2004)andJiLichun(2003)teachreadingcomprehensionundertheguidanceofTBLTapproach.CaiLanzhen(2001)makeresearchonwritingteachingwiththehelpofTBLTapproach.JiaZ