Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies >
Learner's Speech Self-repair and Effective Foreign Language Teaching
In recent years, effective foreign language teaching has invited much attention from the academic world. The present paper, from the perspective of communicative strategy and anchoring on corpus data, discusses the learner's speech self-repair and effective foreign language teaching. The findings are that in the process of learner's speech self-repair, problems do exist that include quite a number of undetected speech errors, scanty use of fillers and overuse of self-repetition, etc. that much challenge the effectiveness in foreign language teaching. It holds that effective foreign language teaching shall both enable learners to attain the comprehensible input of “high quality and quantity” and through interaction as well as negotiation of meaning to achieve the optimal comprehensible output on the basis of intake and internal comprehension in the social-like setting and therefore proposes that the use of learner's speech self-repair, an effective communicative strategy and learning strategy, not only serves as the yardstick for judging the quality and quantity of the input, but also helps the learner, during the interaction, to self-monitor the speech, test the hypothesis, notice the gap and self-regulate the errors to achieve the modified output. Therefore, we shall not only emphasize the language input and output, but also stress the input of necessary strategies for language use so as to achieve the final enhancement in language know-how. “Reading for Discussion” teaching model provides a very worthwhile venue for the use of speech self-repair as well as for the effective tr the degree of positive L1 transfer, the lower the lexical and syntactic complexity. Based on the conclusions above, some suggestions are provided for the teaching and testing practice of Chinese English learners' L2 writing.
YAO Jianpeng . Learner's Speech Self-repair and Effective Foreign Language Teaching[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020 , 20(6) : 79 -88 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2020.06.009
[1] | Allwood J., J. Nivre & E. Ahls'en. 1992. On the semantics and pragmatics of linguistic feedback[J]. Journal of Semantics 9:1-26. |
[2] | Allwood J. 2001. Dialog Coding-Function and Grammar: Gteborg Coding Schemas[C]. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics. |
[3] | Berg T. 1986. The problem of language control: Editing, monitoring and feedback[J]. Psychological Research 48:133-144. |
[4] | Brennan S. E. & M. Williams. 1995. The feeling of another's knowing: Prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers[J]. Journal of Memory and Language 34:383-398. |
[5] | Brookfield S. D. & S. Preskill. 1999. Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic Classrooms[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. |
[6] | Clark H. H. & J. E. Fox Tree. 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking[J]. Cognition 84:73-111. |
[7] | Davis B. G. 1993. Tools for Teaching[M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. |
[8] | Doughty C. 1988. An Empirical Study of Relativization in English as a Second Language[D]. University of Pennsylvania. |
[9] | Duncan S. & D.W. Fiske. 1977. Face-to-face Interaction: Research, Methods and Theory[M]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. |
[10] | Fox Tree J. E. 2001. Listeners' uses of um and uh in speech comprehension[J]. Memory and Cognition 29 (2): 320-326. |
[11] | Fraundorf, H. S. H. & D. G. Watson. 2011. The disfluent discourse: Effects of pauses on recall[J]. Journal of Memory and Language 65 (2):161-175. |
[12] | Levelt W. J. M. 1989. Speaking:From Intention to Articulation[M]. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. |
[13] | de Bot K. 1996. Review article: The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis[J]. Language Learning 46 (3):529-555. |
[14] | Gass, S. & E. Varonis. 1985. Task variation and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning [A]. S.Gass & C. M. Rowley (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition[C]. MA: Newbury House. |
[15] | Gass S. M. & E. M. Varonis. 1994. Input, interaction, and second language production[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16:283-302. |
[16] | Kormos J. 1999. Monitoring and self-repair in L2[J]. Language Learning 49 (2):302-342. |
[17] | Long M. 1983. Linguistic and conversational adjustment to non-native speakers[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 5 (2):177-93. |
[18] | Maclay, H. & C. E. Osgood. 1959. Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous speech[J]. Word 15:19-44. |
[19] | Pica T., L. Holliday, N. Lewis & L. Morgenthaler. 1989. Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11 (1):63-90. |
[20] | Robinson P. 1995. Attention, memory and the “noticing” hypothesis[J]. Language Learning 45 (2): 283-331. |
[21] | Rose R. L. 1998. The communicative value of filled pauses in spontaneous speech[EB/OL]. [2014-12-7].http://www.gpwu.ac.jp/-rose/files/madiss. |
[22] | Schehadeh A. 1999. Insights into learner output[J]. Forum 37 (4):2-7. |
[23] | Schehadeh A. 2002. Comprehensible output, from occurrence to acquisition: An agenda for acquisitional research[J]. Language Learning 52 (3):597-647. |
[24] | Schmidt, R. & S. Frota. 1986. Developing basic conversational ability in a second language:A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese[A]. R. R. Day(ed.). Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. |
[25] | Swain M. 1985. Communicative competence:Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development[A]. S. M.Gass & C. G. Madden (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. |
[26] | Swain M. 2005. The output hypothesis:Theory and research[A]. E. Hinkel(ed.). Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning [C]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. |
[27] | Swain, M. & S. Lapkin. 1995. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning[J]. Applied Linguistics 16 (3):371-391. |
[28] | Tomasello, M. & M. Carpenter. 2007. Shared intentionality[J]. Developmental Science 10 (1): 121-125. |
[29] | Zellner B. 1994. Pauses and the temporal structure of speech[A]. E. Keller (ed.), Fundamentals of Speech Synthesis and Speech Recognition[C]. Chichester: John Wiley. |
[30] | 李广明. 2010. PETS口试环境下中国英语学习者交际策略研究[J]. 济宁学院学报(3):87-89. |
[31] | 甘阳. 2006. 哈钦斯的大学理念与芝大转型[J]. 21世纪经济报道(6):1-2. |
[32] | 吴诗玉、黄绍强. 2018. 大学英语教学,为什么要坚守“阅读与讨论”?[J]. 当代外语研究(2):9-14. |
[33] | 吴诗玉、黄绍强. 2019. 何为“有效”的外语教学?——根植于本土教学环境和教学对象特点的思考?[J]. 当代外语研究(3):37-47. |
[34] | 杨惠中. 2005. 序言[A]. 杨惠中、卫乃兴.中国学习者英语口语语料库建设与研究[C]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社. |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |