On_the_Role_of_Language_Input_and_Language_Output_in_Second_Language_Acquisition英语毕业论文

毕业论文 On the Role of Language Input and Language Output in Second Language Acquisition 学 院：外国语学院 专 业： 姓 名： 指导老师： 英语专业 黄靖婷 学 号： 职 称： 0810203010 张嫔 讲师 中国·珠海 二○一○ 年 五 月 北京理工大学珠海学院毕业论文 诚信承诺书 本人郑重承诺：我所呈交的毕业论文On the Role of Language Input and Language Output in Second Language Acquisition是在指导教师的指导下，独立开展研究取得的成果，文中引用他人的观点和材料，均在文后按顺序列出其参考文献，论文使用的数据真实可靠。 承诺人签名： 日期： 年 月 日 On the Role of Language Input and Language Output in Second Language Acquisition ABSTRACT Nowadays, the phenomenon of fake prosperity in language teaching in China exams such as IELTS and BEC find that it is difficult to get a speaking and writing compared to listening and reading. In addition, many college students who passed the exam of CET4 and CET6 cannot use English appropriately, even though they is that Chinese students always neglect the importance of achieving a balance between language input and language out in second language acquisition. This paper mainly analyses the reason why language learners should pay attention to the balance between language input and language output, as well as the important role of language input and language output in second language acquisition Key Words: language input language output second language acquisition 试论语言输入与语言输出在二语习得中的作用 摘 要 如今，我国外语教学“假繁荣”现象十分严重，学习外语者比比皆是，可是实际数据显示我国学生在参加国外考试如雅思，BEC等考试时，相比起听力与阅读部分，口语以及写作部分的成绩偏低。另外，有许多通过英语大学四六级考试的学生感叹自己学的是 “哑巴英语”,所学的内容不会运用，不能与人交流。究其原因，是因为许多语言学习者在第二语言习得过程中，忽略了语言学习的本质，更突出的问题是割裂了“语言输入”与“语言输出”之间的关系，在外语学习的过程中没有给予两者同等的重视。有鉴于此，通过学习Krashen的语言输入理论以及swain的语言输出理论，笔者意图通过本研究揭示“语言输入”与“语言输出”在外语教学过程中的关系与作用及其两者间的平衡对二语习得产生的重要性，并借此提高广大外语学习者对此的重视程度。 摘要：语言输入 语言输出 二语习得 Contents Abstract……………………………………………………..…………….Ⅰ 摘要……………………………………………………….………..…….Ⅱ Literature Review..............................................................................………………........1 1.1 Input Hypothesis…………………………………………………....…….…1 1.1.1 An Overview of Input………………...…………..…..………...…….……3 1.1.2 The Limitations of Input Hypothesis...................................................…....3 1.2 Output Hypothesis………………………………………………..….………4 1.2.1 Definition of Output…………………………………………….…….…...4 1.2.2 An Overview of Comprehensible Output Hypothesis…..............................4 1.2.3 Functions of Output……………………………………………….…..…...5 1.2.3.1 The “NoticingTriggering” Function………………………….………....5 1.2.3.2 Hypothesis Testing……………………………….………………..…….6 1.2.3.3 The Meta-linguistic Function…………………….………….……..……6 ⅡClarification of Relevant Concepts..............................................….... 9 2.1 Acquisition VS. Learning…………………………………………..….........9 2.2 Second Language VS. Foreign Language……………………...…..……….10 ⅢThe Relationship between Input and Output……………...…..….......11 3.1 Input Precedes Output…...............................................................................13 3.2 Output Supplements Input…………………...……………...............………14 ⅣThe Balance between Language Input and Language Output in TEFL Classes for Chinese Students…………………………..…...…17 4.1 The Importance of Balance between Language Input and Language Output…........................................................................................................18 4.2 Classroom Activities………………………………...…….………………..19 4.2.1 Roughly-tuned Input………………………………...……………...…….20 4.2.2 Finely-tuned Input…………………………………...………………...…21 4.2.3 Communicative Output……………………………………………….......21 ⅤConclusion………………………………………….……………........22 References…………………………………………...…………...………23 Acknowledgements………………………………….…………….….....24 Ⅰ Literature Review 1.1 Input Hypothesis Input Hypothesis, advanced by Krashen, a famous American applied linguist, in the late 1970s and the early 1980s, is an all-round theory concerning second language acquisition (SLA). Meanwhile, it is the most influential and controversial theory in second language acquisition research. Such influences still exist till now. Krashen’s Input Hypothesis is similar to Chomsky’s theory on first language acquisition in some respects, such as the function of Language Acquisition Device (LAD) in the process of language learning. Krashen states that language input plays an identical part with Language Acquisition Device. Together with language input, a learner can construct a series of internal expressions of a good language, in other words, construct an independent language system outside the learner’s first language (Jia Guanjie, 1996). According to Krashen, an important condition for language acquisition to occur is that the acquirer understands (via other words, the language which learners are exposed to should be just far enough beyond their current competence that they can understand most of it but is still challenged to make progress. Krashen’s widely known and well-accepted theory of second language acquisition all areas of second language research and teaching since the 1980s. The theory consists of five main -learning believed that adults a language, namely, language acquisition and language learning. Language acquisition is a subconscious process not unlike the way a child learns language. Language acquires are not consciously aware of the grammatical rules of the language, but rather develop a “feel” for correctness. Language Learning, on the other be compared to learning about a language. The acquisition-learning distinction is the most fundamental of all the Stephen Krashen’s theory and the most widely known among linguists and language practitioners. The monitor a second language and is responsible for our fluency,” whereas the language that we editor in situations where the learner form, and knows the rule, such as on a grammar test in a language classroom or when carefully writing a composition. This conscious editor is called the Monitor. The monitor acquisition and learning and defines the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the learned grammar. The natural order Krashen’s research findings which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical structures follows a “natural order” which is predictable. The input of other words, only when we understand language that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now. The input ’s attempt to explain other words, this ’s explanation of takes place. The affective filter , self-confidence, and anxiety all affect language acquisition, in effect raising or lowering the “stickiness” or “penetration” of any comprehensible input that is received The affective filter ’s view that a number of “affective variables” play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language acquisition. Theses variables include motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. 1.1.1 An Overview of Input Input is probably one of the most important concepts in SLA. The relation between input and SLA is always a key aspect in the field of SLA. Input, itself, includes all the language signals, i.e. words, phrases and sentences of one particular language, and signals from other language that may be brought in through translation, comparison and so on. In language learning it means the linguistic material to which the learner is exposed, i.e. the learner’s experience of the target language in all its manifestations (Sharwood Smith, 1993). In the classroom teaching, the effect of linguistic input is closely connected with the strategy for its transmission to the students. It seems to be a direct and informative signal which conveys semantic sense (Andersen, 1981; Larsen-Freeman, 1991; Nunan, 1995). In language acquisition, input plays an indispensable role. However, the role of input in language acquisition is always a controversial question. Behaviorists and Mentalists differ greatly on it. 1.1.2 The Limitations of Input Hypothesis We should also point out that there are many limitations to the Input Hypothesis theory. First, Krashen emphasizes the importance of input in language acquisition, but the definition of input is narrow, as -natural input, this is impossible for Chinese learners of English to be in the real situation of communication. What’s more, Krashen emphasizes much more on the input than output; this will impede students’ communicative ability. Krashen theory also neglects the role of learners themselves, without positive motivation and attitude of learning foreign language; the input alone would not be enough for SLA. 1.2 Output Hypothesis Among many methods and techniques that aim to facilitate the development of the learner’s first language grammar, the role of output in SLA is relatively unexplored. A common assumption is that output is only an indication of SLA that place and does not play any significant role in language acquisition process (Krashen, 1985). But this assumption since the publication of Swain’s (1985) seminal article, in which the Output Hypothesis was first proposed. 1.2.1 Definition of Output Swain put forward the theory of “Output Hypothesis” in relation to second language acquisition. In ,1995:125), “producing the target language”, “language performance”, “using the language” and “speaking or writing” (Swain, 1995:127), and "production or use” (Swain&Lapkin,1995:371). It seems that output in Swain’s term is dynamic; it not only refers to the language produced by learners but also the process of producing the target language. We will adopt Swain’s view of output of output can be found in Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics as part of that of “input”: (in language learning) language which a learner learn. The language a learner produces is by analogy sometimes called “output” (Richards, J.C., Platt, J. &Platt, H., 2000:227). In this case, output simply means the language a learner produces compared with what the learner receives. 1.2.2 An Overview of Comprehensible Output Hypothesis Based on findings from studies that Swain conducted on immersion students in Canada, she found that although immersion students were provided with a rich source of comprehensible input, their inter-language performance was still off-target, that is, they were clearly identifiable as non-native speakers or writers (Swain, 1984, 1985). She therefore doubted whether comprehensible input on its own is sufficient for second language acquisition. Output for error correction, which of our rule. This approach is also known as “direct teaching” or formal instruction. The comprehensible output occurs when we say something and our conversational partner do not understand, forcing us to notice a gap in our competence. We then try again until we arrive at the correct version of the rule. Swain’s foreign language learning and , output in dialogue, can facilitate learning process. All be concisely generalized in one sentence: learners’ production of the target language in a specific context can facilitate their learning process, leading to their improvements of the target language. 1.2.3 Functions of Output In applied linguistics (in its narrow sense), much work focused on the role of input and comprehension. Although the importance of output attention from some western researchers, no systematic study of it conducted until Swain’s (1985, 1995) research of Canadian immersion program. The situation at more unsatisfactory. So far as this writer knows, there is little study that is concerned with the function of output in China’s foreign language teaching. Since the function of output to enhance the fluency widely known and accepted, Swain does not include this in promoting accuracy. 1.2.3.1 The “NoticingTriggering” Function The “noticingtriggering” function is also referred to as consciousness-raising function. Swain(1995) argues that language production may trigger learners’ noticing of problems existing in their inter-language, that is, in producing the target language, learners may notice a gap between what they want to say and what they can say, leading them to recognize what they don’t know, or know only partially of producing the target language may prompt second language learners to consciously recognize some of their linguistic problems; it may bring to their attention something they need to discover about their L2 (Swain, 1995:125-126). This may trigger cognitive process which might generate linguistic knowledge that is new for learners, or which consolidate their existing knowledge （Swain & Lapkin,1994）. Swain and Lapkin found that there were 190 occasions in which students encountered a linguistic problem in their output. In each case the students forced themselves to modify their output toward greater message comprehensibility. That is, communicative needs forced students to move from semantic to syntactic analysis of the target language. Swain and Lapkin （Swain & Lapkin,1994:384） argued that “on each occasion, the students engaged in mental processing that may other words, it was argued that in the process of modifying their IL utterances in the direction of greater comprehensibility, L2 learners were engaged in some restructuring of system which affected their access to the knowledge base, and that this restructuring process was part of second language learning. 1.2.3.2 Hypothesis Testing 1.2.3.3 The second role of output is of output relates directly to the notion of comprehensible output proposed by Swain. By producing output, learners can test their the process of negotiation of meaning, learners can be more accurate in their production. Sometimes this output invokes feedback which can lead learners to modify or “reprocess” their output. Speaking allows the speaker to control the agenda and to take risks and look for feedback on the points of uncertainty in a developing grammar (Swain, 1995). Several studies conducted to test this function. The results from the studies related to the of output (Nobuyoshi & Ellis, 1993; Pica, 1988, 1992; Pica, Holliday, Lewis & Morgenthaler, 1989; Takashima, 1994) show that learners often modify their output in response to the linguistic demands of comprehensible output may The meta-linguistics refers to the total sum of knowledge about language which learners embryonic form about linguistic form, structure and system which they obtained by reflection and analysis. It is claimed that as learners reflect upon their own target language use, their output serves a meta-linguistic function, enabling them to control and internalize linguistic knowledge (Swain, 1995: 126). In other words, output may cause the learner to engage in more syntactic progressing than is necessary for the comprehension of input. This syntactic progressing may lead to modified or reprocessed output—a possible step toward language acquisition. The results of the studies focusing on the meta-linguistic function of output (Dnato,1994; Lapierre,1994; Swain,1995) lend some support to the claim that producing language and reflection on it in an attempt to create meaning language learning process. Learners obtain meaning by negotiation; the content of negotiation is the structural form of language relating the form of language with the meaning they attempt to express, learners express the meaning with language, and then reflect the form of language. So output can cause the learner to engage in syntactically based processing from semantically based processing. In general, the importance of output in learning may be construed in terms of the learners’ active deployment of their cognitive resources. In other words, it is posited that the output requirement presents learners with unique opportunities to process language that may not be decisively necessary for simple comprehension. In proposing the Output Hypothesis, Swain (1985) argued that producing the target language (TL) may serve as “the trigger that forces the learners to pay attention to the means of expression needed in order to successfully convey intended meaning” (Swain, 1985:249). Of the three functions of output specified in the current version of the Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1993, 1995, 1998), the present study focuses on its “noticing” or “triggering” function. The “noticing“ function of output posits that learners may notice the gap in their IL knowledge in an attempt to produce the target language, which then prompts them to solve their linguistic deficiency in ways that are appropriate in a given context. For example, if learners are left on their own to solve the immediate production difficulties, they may engage in various thought processes that can consolidate existing knowledge (Swain & Lapkin, 1995). On the other may cause the learners to process subsequent input with more focused attention; they may try to examine closely that they just expressing on their own. In either case, learning is believed to be enhanced through the act of producing language, which, by its mechanisms, increases the likelihood that learners become sensitive to what they can and can’t say in the TL, which leads to the reappraisal of their TL capabilities. Ⅱ Clarification of Relevant Concepts In order to make the readers better understand the writer’s further statements, the following parts are two groups of distinctions between two pairs of similar concepts. 2.1 Acquisition VS. Learning The term ‘acquisition’, when used in linguistics, refers to the gradual development of ability in a language by using it naturally in communicative situations. The term ‘learning’, used in language teaching in schools, and tend, when successful, to result in knowledge ‘about’ the language studied. Activities associated with acquisition are those experienced by the child and, analogously, by those who ‘pick up’ another language from long periods spent in social interaction (daily use of the language) in another country. Those whose L2 experience is primarily a learning one tend not to develop the proficiency of those who acquiring experience. However, even in ideal acquisition situations, very few adults seem to reach native-like proficiency in using a second language. There are individuals who can achieve great expertise in writing, but not in speaking. One example is the author Joseph Conrad, whose novels others (e.g. phonology). Although it continues to be a matter of some debate, this type of observation is sometimes taken as evidence that, after the Critical Period support of this view, the process of lateralization of the brain is cited as a crucial factor. We might think of this process in terms of the ‘language-faculty’ being strongly taken over by the features of L1, with a resulting loss of flexibility or openness to receive the features of another language. Against this view, it demonstrated that students in their early teens are quicker and more effective L2 learners than, for example, seven-year-olds. It may be, of course, that the acquisition of an L2 requires a combination of factors. The optimum age may be during the years from ten to sixteen when the ‘flexibility’ of the language acquisition faculty completely lost, and the maturation of cognitive skills allows a more effective ‘working out’ of the regular features of L2 encountered. 2.2 Second Language VS. Foreign Language There are distinctions between L2 learning and FL learning. Second Language (L2), in a broad sense, is a language learned or acquired after the native language. The term it contrasts to the term “foreign language” (FL), in which second language “functions as a recognized means of communication among members who speak some other language as their mother tongue’, and the foreign language “plays no major role in the community and is primarily learnt only in the classroom.” Ignorance of the differences will result in confusion in the practice of language learning, teaching and research work. L2 “usually within a country” (Stern, 1983:16). On the contrary, FL refers to “a speech community outside national or territorial boundaries” (Stern, 1983:26). The distinction between second and foreign language learning settings may be significant because it is possible that there will be radical differences in both what is learnt and an open question to be answered as a result of our exploration of SLA research. There is a need for a neural and super ordinate term to cover both types of learning. Some what confusingly, but in line with common usage, the term SLA will be used for this purpose” (Ellis, 1994:12). Moreover, “in Northern American applied linguistics usage, foreign language and second language are often used to mean the same when they are used to refer to non-native language in a country” (Richards, et.al.2000:178). In fact, they indeed share common features: they both involve a reconstruction of a new language system and the cultivation of cross-cultural ability. Therefore, it is possible and necessary for us to apply modern SLA theories to our foreign language learning. Ⅲ The Relationship between Input and Output Swain (1985) claims that comprehensible input is important but insufficient for second language acquisition, in contrast, Krashen (1982) confirms that the role that the speaker’s output plays is to provide a further source of comprehension input. Until 2002, comprehensible output put students in this situation constantly.” But ’s statement was just based on the researched that oral output acted as a production not the written output which does not cause “anxiety”. When it comes to the year of 2004, Krashen modified get a ; rather, participation is voluntary”. Here, Krashen acknowledged the role of output, and then written output: “Written output, in addition to its communicative value, makes a profound contribution to thinking. In short, writing makes you smarter. As we write, as we put our ideas on paper and revise them, we come up with better ideas.” Therefore, comprehensible input and comprehensible output can really cooperative at practical and empirical level. According to the modern FLT theories, the language learning process is the combination of input, intake (processing & memorizing) and output (speaking & writing). Therefore, two basic elements --- comprehension and production are always contained in English teaching in classroom, which can be regarded as two stages : input and output. FLT in our country aims at cultivating learners’ language application based on enough comprehensible input material. At the stage of input there are two objectives: one is giving priority to comprehension through offering the comprehensible input; the other is offering enough examples for the learners to imitate in speaking and writing. At the stage of output, the learners are encouraged and then improve their skills of writing and speaking with the input knowledge. Without the pushing of the input knowledge, they can learners are pushed for language output, they will process the language in their mind and produce fresh language knowledge or consolidate their former knowledge. Output is based on input. Without input, there is no output. Meanwhile, the comprehensible feature of input can be examined and revised only if it is practice in language output. On the other , Swain, Carrol, Eliis and Harmer, although their emphases are different. Some emphasize on input, some emphasize on output, and there are still some insist on the balance of input and output. The writer advocates the third one. Input and output should be balanced in the teaching practice, most teachers pay more attention to provide enough materials for language input. However, output is more effective than input in students’ language processing. The element badly needed in students’ language development is the opportunities of output practicing but not merely the simple language input. The writer will exemplify the point in the next part. Without output, teachers can not notice the problems in students’ language learning. Only through students’ output can their mistakes be corrected by their teachers or partners. In fact, language output make a great contribution not only to more effective language input but also to providing them opportunities to test their order to motivate their competence of sentence construction and language fluency. Here we get such a conclusion: input is the guider, and output is the destination. Input and output are in complete the whole process of language acquisition. 3.1 Input Precedes Output The input theory proposed by Krashen claims that input is primary and output is secondary in the early stage of second language acquisition. Learners are eager to receive a great deal of comprehensible input to fill the “vacuum” of the brain. They do not enjoy being “pushed” to speak, since they will feel frustrated if they can not produce the language or cannot produce properly. The input fluency not by practicing talking but by understanding input, by listening and reading. Surely, in language learning, listening, reading (comprehensible input), and speaking, writing (comprehensible output) are proved that when there is enough input, production ability can emerge without any output practice. The silent period, a phenomenon that is most noticeable in children second language acquisition, is a strong supporting argument. It noted that children acquiring a second language in a natural, informal linguistic environment, may say very little for several months following their first exposure to the second language. The child is building up competence in the second language via listening, by understanding the language spoken around second language. Speaking ability emerges on its own after enough competence developed by listening and understanding. In China, it is noticeable that many successful study-by themselves learners often develop their language competence by extensive reading and listening and reach a language class. Language competence can be developed by input even without production practice, while production practice itself cannot develop new language competence. So such a conclusion can be drawn ’s input the early stage of second language acquisition, more emphasis should be put on listening and reading instead of speaking and writing. Only when there is enough comprehensible input, can output emerge and does not claim that comprehensible output is the only source of L2 acquisition. Her claim, rather, is that output can, under some conditions, prompt language acquisition by allowing learners to recognize problems in their inter-language capabilities. Recognition of problem may occur because of either internal feedback (the very process of producing output may prompt syntactic processing of language for the purpose of comprehension) or external feedback (feedback obtained from interlocutors, teachers, etc., which informs the learners as to the well-formedness of their language production). This recognition of problems through output is believed to prompt learners to seek out relevant input with more focused attention (Swain & Lapkin 1995). In Krashen’s view, speaking is not so necessary for acquiring a second language. The role that speaker’s output plays is to provide a further source of comprehensible input. The theory of input is more applicable in rich-input conditions, but it’s different in poor-input context i.e. in China in which there is a lack of target language context. Because of some of the the developing stage of language learning. When a learner approaches the developing stage, output to promoting language acquisition. Output gives the learners more chances to practice what they production the second language acquirer signal to the partner that there is a comprehensible problem, etc, in other words, manage and regulate in the input and make it more comprehensible. For written output, learners order to better understand the different roles that language input and output play in language learning at different stages, it is necessary to examine the differences between comprehension and production. According to Anderson and Lynch (1988:13), comprehension (by native speaker) is dependent on the following three sources of knowledge: 1) Schematic knowledge Background knowledge —factual —socio cultural Procedural knowledge — discourse 2) Contextual knowledge Knowledge of situation —physical setting, participants, etc Knowledge of co-text —what will be said 3) Systemic knowledge —Syntactic —Semantic —morphological In comprehension of the developed language stage, as Hawkins (1985, cited in Swain, 1995) suggests, learners often claim that they in fact they don’t. Clark (1977) argued that native-speaker listeners typically draw upon a range of comprehension strategies when they are listening. Clark (1977) also listed a set of strategies that native speakers use in comprehending. The learners can make use of syntactic and semantic clues to -native speakers in comprehending the target language. Krashen (1987) also pints out that “in many cases, we do not utilize syntax in understanding— we often get the message with a combination of vocabulary, or lexical information plus extra-linguistic in formation”. Then in comprehension, learners may ignore some of the linguistic codes while still be able to comprehend meaning. However, the processes involved in language production are quite different. In the production of language, learners comprehension is different from those necessary for production. Cook (1991) also expresses the similar idea that the ability to decode language, that is, the ability to understand the conveyed meaning is quite different from code breaking, which is, identifying the linguistics systems which carry that meaning. According to Swain and Lapkin (1995), comprehensible output can move the learners from the semantic process prevalent in comprehension to the syntactic process required by production. It can promote learners’ processing of linguistic features of a language and result in development of linguistic knowledge and in turn promote comprehension. Therefore, we cannot neglect the role of output in second language acquisition. Swain (1985, 1988) argues that, because comprehension can sometimes be achieved without fine-grained linguistic analysis of the input, learners’ progress in the language will be stalled if they are not placed in situations where they the premise that when learners experience communicative failure, they are forced into making their output more coherent, precise and appropriate. Learners’ production of output, especially their modifications of output to make it more comprehensible, draws their attention to the L2 structures. Production forces learners to pay attention to the means of expression, thus increasing the possibility that learners will stretch their linguistic resources to focus on the form to convey messages or meanings. Ⅳ The Balance between Language Input and Language Output in TEFL Classes for Chinese Students For many years, Chinese students noticed to be doing remarkably well in the parts concerning listening and reading skills in some English tests, such as IELTS (GB), TOEFL (USA) and GRE (USA). But in some other English tests which focus more on speaking and writing skills, e.g. TSE(Test of Spoken English, USA), BEC(Business English Certificate, GB) and some real communicative situations, they are found to be much less proficient. In the meanwhile, many university graduates, who to improve their ability to use the language. These facts of teachers and educators in China. People begin to realize the weakness of the traditional way of foreign language teaching in China, which generally concentrates on getting students to learn items of language in isolation, often unconnected with any real communication situation. Students are used to and quite good at passively receiving language items that might later be used to communication. But regretfully, they are not well trained with the ability to retrieve those stored language items in communication, which is actually quite vital for them. Thus, nowadays, many linguists and language teachers turn to the communicative approach, which “pay systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language” （William Littlewood, 1981） and which reportedly some other countries. Articles promoting a reform of language teaching various magazines. Some textbooks based on more communicative syllabus composed. Many native English teachers, working on some international exchange programs in China, are quite active in introducing the new approach, so do some of their Chinese counterparts. But, because of various kinds of reasons, so far, there no radical change in the country’s language teaching system as a whole. 4.1 The Importance of Balance between Language Input and Language Output Language learners generally aim to achieve four major skills: listening, reading, speaking and writing. The first two skills are receptive ones, mainly concerned with input, while the last two are productive ones, closely connected with the output, which is the emphasis of this part. Therefore, what is referred to the “the balance between input and output”, may also be put as “the balance between the training of receptive skills and productive skill.” According to the National Syllabus for College Students in China, freshmen and sophomores should China, we should look at this course first. In popular traditional textbooks for intensive reading, one lesson usually consists of: 1) one text (or two texts) 2) a list of new words and phases involved in the test(s) 3) some notes to the text(s) 4) grammar section 5) exercises (such as filling blanks, making sentences with given words or phrases, multiple choice, cloze, translation tec.) Since all the texts and new words or phrases are carefully selected and supposed to be carefully learnt, they should belong to the category of finely-tuned input, so does most of the exercises, which are mainly concerned with new words and grammatical rules. Therefore, in class, teachers are always busy with the finely-tuned input: explaining new words, analyzing sentence structure, introducing grammar rules, and so on. Very limited time in class is left for students to output. The case is the same in the listening class: students are involved in listening exercises. The only difference to their teacher in reading class but listen to tape recorders in listening class. Also, in the speaking class: teachers always focus on introducing the skills of with each other. In a word, input exceeds output greatly in traditional English language teaching classes in China. But, for Chinese students, to be able to understand the language is one thing, to be able to use it is quite another. “Knowledge and intensive practice (skill-getting) are not enough to ensure confident interaction”. (Rivers and Temperley 1981:5) In other word, considerable input does not necessarily guarantee effective communication. This reveals the reason of the problem that is mentioned in the previous part of this article. This is why many students, who real communication: they can understand quite well, but they can not write a proper note back; they may answer a phone by saying “I am Zhao Ming”,… So far, it is not difficult for us to come to this conclusion: since the traditional method that bases solely on input does not necessarily foster communicative efficiency, a new one with balanced activities (of input and out) is in urgent need. 4.2 Classroom Activities Many ways of characterizing classroom activities proposed by different experts, such as J.Harmer (1983), Rivers and Temperley (1981) and Brumfit (1984). Here, the first one is illustrated for its close relation to the concept of input and output. Jeremy Harmer generally divided classroom activities into two large areas: those that are concerned with language input (where students receive new language that is stored in the brain) and those that foster language output (where students are forced to use any of the language they output Mr. Harmer proposed that roughly tuned input should be at a level slightly above the students’ abilities of producing. So, it always provides something new to students through their reading and listening. Usually, this input is in large quantity. On the contrary, finely-tuned input is always carefully selected and firmly controlled in small quantity by teachers. Repetition practice is always used by teachers at this stage, to make sure of the accuracy of language, since finely-tuned input is supposed to be stored in students’ brains as rules. “Practice output marks a input and communication output.” (J. Harmer, 1983:3) Activities involved at this stage are communicative in some ways, but not always, because the attempt to ensure the use of a certain specific language item may give them less communicative potential. Communicative output refers to activities in which students use what they communication tasks. Language, instrument for communication. 4.2.1 Roughly-tuned Input There seems to be no doubt that comprehensive input the target language community (as in English-speaking countries), large amount of roughly-tuned input surely may stored in their brains already. As in many Chinese universities, there are only about 4-6 class. Several guidelines for college students in general are as followed: 1) Preview every text before class and review what taught in class. 2) Read some supplementary materials (always relevant to the texts in terms of content or style) from newspapers, magazines, novels etc. As many current textbooks are quite literal or theoretical, some reading materials that are just for fun are essential. 3) Listen to VOA, BBC and other obtainable materials. Dictation is one of the most useful ways to improve listening. 4) Watching foreign movies and listening to foreign music can of learning English. 4.2.2 Finely-tuned Input For many years, finely-tuned input contributes a significant part in the traditional language teaching model. In many universities in China, this type of input in language teaching still occupies a majority of time. But, I think if we can shorten the time for this part in class, then, the time that is saved can be mainly used for the other side of the scale: output. 4.2.3 Communicative Output 1) Generally speaking, after a certain amount of input, some output practices in the class enable students to use the language what they your own words and make a brief summary of certain parts of the text that the teacher and outside class. 2) Do more activities with more authentic communicative goals, such as informational-gap, survival games, debate on current issues and so on. 3) Every week listen to a brief news broadcast report and then give a report orally about the news item In fact, the above lists are just a brief summary of what the writer usually does as a language learner. As most Chinese students are used to the traditional way of learning teaching, many students may feel uneasy or nervous when they are asked to speak or do something in class at first. But, if students keep on practicing and noticing the important impact that language output may them, they may turn out to be quite co-operative and active. Ⅴ Conclusion The balance between language input and language output plays an indispensible role in second language acquisition. Once students notice the balance between language input and language output, they will become more efficient in language learning. If students ignore this balance, especially only focus on language input, most of them are incapable in oral speaking and writing. Chinese students always get a listening and reading in various exams, but speaking and writing. In language class, teachers must attach more importance on language output in order to maintain the balance between language input and output. To sum up, practice makes perfect. Teachers play a vital role in the language teaching, so teachers should adopt different kinds of teaching methods on the basis of the balance between language input and output, so that their students can all-round development capability in second language acquisition. References [1] Ellis,R. Understanding Second Language Acquisition.[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985 [2]Ellis,R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition.[M].Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994 [3]Harmer,J. How to Teach English. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000 [4] Harmer,J. The practice of English Language Teaching, Longman Inc., New York 1983 [5]Krashen,S.D. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.[M].New York: Pergamon Press Ltd.,1982 [6]Krashen,S.D. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.[M]. New York: Pergamon Press Ltd., 1981 [7] Krshen,S.D. The Input Hypothesis. London: Longman 1985 [8]Littlewood,W. Communicative Language Teaching-An Introduction.[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981 [9]Larsen-Freeman,Dianne. and Michael H.Hong. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition. London: Longman Group Limited, 1991 [10]Nunan,D. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989 [11]NING Huiping. On Balance “Input” and “Output” in College English Teaching [12]Rivers,W.M. and Temoerley,M.S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a second or Foreign Language, New York: Oxford University Press 1981 [13]Spolsky,B.. Conditions for Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1989 [14]Swain,M. and YANG Luxin. The Output Hypothesis: Its Language Teaching and Research Press, 2008 [15]胡壮麟.语言学教程.北京大学出版社.2001 Acknowledgements Through almost two months of struggle, the thesis “On the role of language input and language output in second language acquisition” completed. The academic research requires deep consideration and working with perseverance. Those who ’t gone through it themselves can never realize the the process. I, especially, would express my sincerely thanks to my supervisor Miss Zhang Pin, who offered me a patient and warmhearted the Department of Foreign Languages who offered me references. Moreover, thanks for my dear family members who always stand by my side. Their thoughtful consideration and inspiring encouragement makes me more confident in coping with all the difficulties in my study. Finally, as a result of my limited ability and lack of time, there may still be some limitations in this paper, which needs to be improved with insightful suggestions from more teachers and classmates. I am determined to make further efforts to continue with my academic research. Thank you all! 毕业设计（论文）原创性声明和使用授权说明 原创性声明 本人郑重承诺：所呈交的毕业设计（论文），是我个人在指导教师的指导下进行的研究工作及取得的成果。尽我所知，除文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，不包含其他人或组织已经发表或公布过的研究成果，也不包含我为获得 及其它教育机构的学位或学历而使用过的材料。对本研究提供过帮助和做出过贡献的个人或集体，均已在文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意。 作 者 签 名：　　 　 　　日　 期：　　 　 　　 ​​​​​​​​​​​​ 指导教师签名：　　 　 　　 日　　期：　　 　 　　 使用授权说明 本人完全了解 大学关于收集、保存、使用毕业设计（论文）的规定，即：按照学校要求提交毕业设计（论文）的印刷本和电子版本；学校有权保存毕业设计（论文）的印刷本和电子版，并提供目录检索与阅览服务；学校可以采用影印、缩印、数字化或其它复制手段保存论文；在不以赢利为目的前提下，学校可以公布论文的部分或全部内容。 作者签名：　　 　 　　 日　 期：　　 　 　　 ​​​​​​​​​​​​ 学位论文原创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的论文是本人在导师的指导下独立进行研究所取得的研究成果。除了文中特别加以标注引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写的成果作品。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的法律后果由本人承担。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 学位论文版权使用授权书 本学位论文作者完全了解学校有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，同意学校保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复印件和电子版，允许论文被查阅和借阅。本人授权　　 　 　大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇编本学位论文。 涉密论文按学校规定处理。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 导师签名： 日期： 年 月 日 指导教师评阅书 指导教师评价： 一、撰写（设计）过程 1、学生在论文（设计）过程中的治学态度、工作精神 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、学生掌握专业知识、技能的扎实程度 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 3、学生综合运用所学知识和专业技能分析和解决问题的能力 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 4、研究方法的科学性；技术线路的可行性；设计 方案 气瓶 现场处置方案 .pdf气瓶 现场处置方案 .doc见习基地管理方案.doc关于群访事件的化解方案建筑工地扬尘治理专项方案下载 的合理性 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 5、完成毕业论文（设计）期间的出勤情况 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 二、论文（设计）质量 1、论文（设计）的整体结构是否符合撰写规范？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、是否完成指定的论文（设计）任务（包括装订及附件）？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 三、论文（设计）水平 1、论文（设计）的理论意义或对解决实际问题的指导意义 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、论文的观念是否有新意？设计是否有创意？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 3、论文（设计说明书）所体现的整体水平 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 建议成绩：□ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 （在所选等级前的□内画“√”） 指导教师： （签名） 单位： （盖章） 年 月 日 评阅教师评阅书 评阅教师评价： 一、论文（设计）质量 1、论文（设计）的整体结构是否符合撰写规范？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、是否完成指定的论文（设计）任务（包括装订及附件）？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 二、论文（设计）水平 1、论文（设计）的理论意义或对解决实际问题的指导意义 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、论文的观念是否有新意？设计是否有创意？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 3、论文（设计说明书）所体现的整体水平 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 建议成绩：□ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 （在所选等级前的□内画“√”） 评阅教师： （签名） 单位： （盖章） 年 月 日 教研室（或答辩小组）及教学系意见 教研室（或答辩小组）评价： 一、答辩过程 1、毕业论文（设计）的基本要点和见解的叙述情况 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、对答辩问题的反应、理解、表达情况 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 3、学生答辩过程中的精神状态 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 二、论文（设计）质量 1、论文（设计）的整体结构是否符合撰写规范？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、是否完成指定的论文（设计）任务（包括装订及附件）？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 三、论文（设计）水平 1、论文（设计）的理论意义或对解决实际问题的指导意义 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 2、论文的观念是否有新意？设计是否有创意？ □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 3、论文（设计说明书）所体现的整体水平 □ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 评定成绩：□ 优 □ 良 □ 中 □ 及格 □ 不及格 （在所选等级前的□内画“√”） 教研室主任（或答辩小组组长）： （签名） 年 月 日 教学系意见： 系主任： （签名） 年 月 日 学位论文原创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文，是本人在导师的指导下进行的研究工作所取得的成果。尽我所知，除文中已经特别注明引用的内容和致谢的地方外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式注明并表示感谢。本人完全意识到本声明的法律结果由本人承担。 学位论文作者（本人签名）： 年 月 日 学位论文出版授权书 本人及导师完全同意《中国博士学位论文全文数据库出版章程》、《中国优秀硕士学位论文全文数据库出版章程》(以下简称“章程”)，愿意将本人的学位论文提交“中国学术期刊（光盘版）电子杂志社”在《中国博士学位论文全文数据库》、《中国优秀硕士学位论文全文数据库》中全文发表和以电子、网络形式公开出版，并同意编入CNKI《中国知识资源总库》，在《中国博硕士学位论文评价数据库》中使用和在互联网上传播，同意按“章程”规定享受相关权益。 论文密级： □公开 □保密（___年__月至__年__月）(保密的学位论文在解密后应遵守此协议) 作者签名：_______ 导师签名：_______ _______年_____月_____日 _______年_____月_____日 独 创 声 明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的毕业设计(论文)，是本人在指导老师的指导下，独立进行研究工作所取得的成果，成果不存在知识产权争议。尽我所知，除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本设计（论文）不含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写过的作品成果。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体均已在文中以明确方式标明。 本声明的法律后果由本人承担。   作者签名: 二〇一〇年九月二十日   毕业设计（论文）使用授权声明 本人完全了解滨州学院关于收集、保存、使用毕业设计（论文）的规定。 本人愿意按照学校要求提交学位论文的印刷本和电子版，同意学校保存学位论文的印刷本和电子版，或采用影印、数字化或其它复制手段保存设计（论文）；同意学校在不以营利为目的的前提下，建立目录检索与阅览服务系统，公布设计（论文）的部分或全部内容，允许他人依法合理使用。 （保密论文在解密后遵守此规定）   作者签名: 二〇一〇年九月二十日 致 谢 时间飞逝，大学的学习生活很快就要过去，在这四年的学习生活中，收获了很多，而这些成绩的取得是和一直关心帮助我的人分不开的。 首先非常感谢学校开设这个课题，为本人日后从事计算机方面的工作提供了经验，奠定了基础。本次毕业设计大概持续了半年，现在终于到结尾了。本次毕业设计是对我大学四年学习下来最好的检验。经过这次毕业设计，我的能力有了很大的提高，比如操作能力、分析问题的能力、合作精神、严谨的工作作风等方方面面都有很大的进步。这期间凝聚了很多人的心血，在此我表示由衷的感谢。没有他们的帮助，我将无法顺利完成这次设计。 首先，我要特别感谢我的知道郭谦功老师对我的悉心指导，在我的论文书写及设计过程中给了我大量的帮助和指导，为我理清了设计思路和操作方法，并对我所做的课题提出了有效的改进方案。郭谦功老师渊博的知识、严谨的作风和诲人不倦的态度给我留下了深刻的印象。从他身上，我学到了许多能受益终生的东西。再次对周巍老师表示衷心的感谢。 其次，我要感谢大学四年中所有的任课老师和辅导员在学习期间对我的严格要求，感谢他们对我学习上和生活上的帮助，使我了解了许多专业知识和为人的道理，能够在今后的生活道路上有继续奋斗的力量。 另外，我还要感谢大学四年和我一起走过的同学朋友对我的关心与支持，与他们一起学习、生活，让我在大学期间生活的很充实，给我留下了很多难忘的回忆。 最后，我要感谢我的父母对我的关系和理解，如果没有他们在我的学习生涯中的无私奉献和默默支持，我将无法顺利完成今天的学业。 四年的大学生活就快走入尾声，我们的校园生活就要划上句号，心中是无尽的难舍与眷恋。从这里走出，对我的人生来说，将是踏上一个新的征程，要把所学的知识应用到实际工作中去。 回首四年，取得了些许成绩，生活中有快乐也有艰辛。感谢老师四年来对我孜孜不倦的教诲，对我成长的关心和爱护。 学友情深，情同兄妹。四年的风风雨雨，我们一同走过，充满着关爱，给我留下了值得珍藏的最美好的记忆。 在我的十几年求学历程里，离不开父母的鼓励和支持，是他们辛勤的劳作，无私的付出，为我创造良好的学习条件，我才能顺利完成完成学业，感激他们一直以来对我的抚养与培育。 最后，我要特别感谢我的导师***老师、和研究生助教***老师。是他们在我毕业的最后关头给了我们巨大的帮助与鼓励，给了我很多解决问题的思路，在此表示衷心的感激。老师们认真负责的工作态度，严谨的治学精神和深厚的理论水平都使我收益匪浅。他无论在理论上还是在实践中，都给与我很大的帮助，使我得到不少的提高这对于我以后的工作和学习都有一种巨大的帮助，感谢他耐心的辅导。在论文的撰写过程中老师们给予我很大的帮助，帮助解决了不少的难点，使得论文能够及时完成，这里一并表示真诚的感谢。 致 谢 这次论文的完成，不止是我自己的努力，同时也有老师的指导，同学的帮助，以及那些无私奉献的前辈，正所谓你知道的越多的时候你才发现你知道的越少，通过这次论文，我想我成长了很多，不只是磨练了我的知识厚度，也使我更加确定了我今后的目标：为今后的计算机事业奋斗。在此我要感谢我的指导老师——***老师，感谢您的指导，才让我有了今天这篇论文，您不仅是我的论文导师，也是我人生的导师，谢谢您！我还要感谢我的同学，四年的相处，虽然我未必记得住每分每秒，但是我记得每一个有你们的精彩瞬间，我相信通过大学的历练，我们都已经长大，变成一个有担当，有能力的新时代青年，感谢你们的陪伴，感谢有你们，这篇论文也有你们的功劳，我想毕业不是我们的相处的结束，它是我们更好相处的开头，祝福你们！我也要感谢父母，这是他们给我的，所有的一切；感谢母校，尽管您不以我为荣，但我一直会以我是一名农大人为荣。 通过这次毕业设计，我学习了很多新知识，也对很多以前的东西有了更深的记忆与理解。漫漫求学路，过程很快乐。我要感谢信息与管理科学学院的老师，我从他们那里学到了许多珍贵的知识和做人处事的道理，以及科学严谨的学术态度，令我受益良多。同时还要感谢学院给了我一个可以认真学习，天天向上的学习环境和机会。 即将结束*大学习生活，我感谢****大学提供了一次在农大接受教育的机会，感谢院校老师的无私教导。感谢各位老师审阅我的论文。 PAGE II _1271528261.unknown