论文部分内容阅读
“纠错反馈”是否有益于和如何有益于二语学习是过去几十年研究界和教学界共同关注的议题,在不同的课堂纠错形式中,“重说式”纠错得到的关注最多。互动假说理论领军人物Long(1996)认为,“重说式”纠错由于其低显隐性,不但可以让学生把注意力暂时转移到相关语言知识上,还不会中断原来进行的意义交流,也不会出现因显性纠错可能带来的不快课堂气氛,因此可谓是二语课堂行之有效的纠错方式。然而Lyster等学者(1997,1998)发表的一系列研究数据显示,“重说式”是二语课堂使用最多、但效果最不理想的纠错方式。这一结论挑战了Long的观点,也引发了其后一系列围绕“重说式”纠错的细化研究,其中包括对纠错效果评估、纠错显隐度、所涉语言结构、教学环境、学生语言水平、学生个体差异的相关性讨论。本文将对这些讨论做一纵横两方面的梳理和总结。
Whether the “error correction feedback” is beneficial or not and how it is beneficial to second language learning is an issue that has been the focus of research and teaching in the past few decades. In different forms of classroom error correction, the “retelling” error correction Get the most attention. Long (1996), the leader of the theory of interactive hypotheses, argues that because of its low explicitness, students can not only temporarily divert their attention to related linguistic knowledge but also not interrupt their original meaning Communication, nor will there be any unpleasant class atmosphere due to explicit error correction, so it can be described as an effective way to correct mistakes in second-language classrooms. However, a series of research data published by Lyster et al. (1997, 1998) show that “retelling” is the most frequently used but least effective method of error correction in L2 classes. This conclusion challenged Long’s viewpoints and triggered a series of refinement studies focusing on “retelling” error correction, including the evaluation of error correction effectiveness, the degree of error correction, the language structure involved, Teaching environment, students’ language proficiency, individual differences in students. This article will make a vertical and horizontal review and summary of these discussions.