[优秀毕业设计精品]关于语言结构复杂度对‘有意注意形式教学法’

1、关于语言结构复杂度对有意注意形式教学法有效性的影响的调查investigating the impact of linguistic complexity upon the efficacy of the focus on form approach导师姓名职称：专业名称：教育硕士 研究方向：学科教学 英语论文答辩日期：2006年11月 学位授予日期：_答辩委员会主席：评 阅 人：二00六年 十一 月contents独创性声明.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 八年级学生英语学习问卷.xxiiappendix 6 pretestxxivacknowledgements.xxvii独创性声明本人声明所呈交的论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得研究成果。尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，论文中不包括其他人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得西北师范大或其他教育机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意。签名：_ 日期：_ 关于论文使用授权的说明本人完全了解西北师范大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：学校有权保留送交论文的复印件；允许论文被查阅和

7、借阅；学校可以公布论文的全部或部分内容，可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存论文。（保密的论文在解密后应遵守此规定) 签名：_ 导师签名：_ 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 要本研究旨在调查在我国中学英语教学（efl）中，语言结构复杂性对有意注意形式教学法有效性的影响，及采用有意注意形式教学与传统教学法学习冠词、一般过去时和现在虚拟条件句三个语言形式结构的不同效果，并探索其制约因素。本研究提出如下三

20、个研究问题： 1) 有意注意形式教学是否对学习上述三个不同类型语言项目有效？ 2)有意注意形式教学是否比传统教学更有效？ 3)语言结构复杂性是否对学习效果有显著影响？有意注意形式教学（fonf）始于80年代，当时交际法盛行，否认语法教学的系统作用,但交际法效果却不尽人意。有意注意形式教学的提出，是对交际法不教语法的修正，但又与传统教学(fonfs)（即语法翻译法）不同，主张“在交际中将学习者的注意力公然引向语言形式”。对fonf的前期研究主要集中于讨论其有效性，对其有效性看法也不尽同。总体上认为有效，但研究结果各异。也有学者认为（sheen，2003)两种教学之间没有不同。本研究根据vanpa

21、tten (1996, 2002) 输入加工理论，综合加工序列(pienamann, 1998, 2003)、语义显性度、和交际值三项指标，对三个语言形式结构的复杂度进行了评估，并将其从难到易依次排列如下：冠词现在虚拟条件句一般过去时。实验为23因子设计，由实验、前后、测试构成。60名八年级学生参加了实验，实验组 (n=30) 与控制组 (n=30) 分别采用有意注意形式教学与传统教学两种不同方法，学习三个不同复杂度的语言结构形式；前、后测三次成绩为因变量。对三次实验数据，采用了重复测量方差分析、单因素方差分析和多因素方差分析后，得出如下结果：1）有意注意形式教学，对学习一般过去时和现在虚拟条

22、件句有效，对学习冠词基本无效，其效果不如传统教学；2）学习现在虚拟条件句时，有意注意形式教学比传统教学更有效；学习一般过去时，与传统教学的效果相同；学习冠词时，其效果不如传统教学；3）语言结构复杂性对用fonf 和fonfs学习三个不同形式结构的效果都具有显著影响。分析上述结果得到以下启示：有意注意形式教学只对学习部分语言形式结构有效，但并不对各种不同类型语言形式结构都有效。学习一项语言形式结构，首先应该按照语义显性度和交际值对其复杂度进行评判，然后再来确定选用有意注意形式教学、还是语法翻译法。本文由五部分构成：第一章为引言，介绍选题、研究目的及其意义；第二章对前期有意注意形式教学研究中注意强

23、化技巧及取得的不同研究成果进行了回顾，并指出了尚存问题；第三章为理论框架，根据注假设意理论及输入加工理论，建立了本研究假设；第四章报告了现行研究，包括研究假设，目标语选用，实验及其数据收集、整理、分析、讨论；第五章报告了研究结论：有意注意形式教学法只对学习部分语言形式有效；学习某些语言形式时传统教学法更有效；语言结构复杂性对教学方法的有效性具有显著影响。关键词：有意注意形式教学；传统教学；语言复杂性；交际值；语义显性度list of tablestable 1 characteristics of attention enhancement techniques. .7table 2 expe

24、rimental 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 test.33t

25、able 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 manov

26、a38table 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 eg per

27、formance 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 groupe

28、fl: 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 transparen

29、cyncs: 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 formal

30、 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 languag

31、e (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 (1981,

32、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 weaknesses

33、 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 explicit conditi

34、ons. 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 the recent

35、 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 grammar instruct

36、ion, 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