본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Processing Instruction and Skill-specificity: In which direction should they go?

2

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류언어학

초록

Processing instruction (PI) and skill-specificity may not be compatible with each other in SLA. Though VanPatten (2002a) has argued that PI was never intended to refer to comprehension versus production, PI and skill-specificity make opposite claims at least in terms of the usefulness of output practice. This paper discusses major arguments and empirical studies of each side and suggests following three directions to take for future research. First, further research on the effect of PI on various cross-linguistic structures and better operationalization of traditional instruction would help solve the problem. Second, both sides should differentiate two kinds of knowledge, declarative and procedural knowledge in Anderson's framework (1993) and do more empirical studies on procedural knowledge. Finally, both sides should take into consideration the auto-input function of output suggested in the literature

Abstract

Processing instruction (PI) and skill-specificity may not be compatible with each other in SLA. Though VanPatten (2002a) has argued that PI was never intended to refer to comprehension versus production, PI and skill-specificity make opposite claims at least in terms of the usefulness of output practice. This paper discusses major arguments and empirical studies of each side and suggests following three directions to take for future research. First, further research on the effect of PI on various cross-linguistic structures and better operationalization of traditional instruction would help solve the problem. Second, both sides should differentiate two kinds of knowledge, declarative and procedural knowledge in Anderson's framework (1993) and do more empirical studies on procedural knowledge. Finally, both sides should take into consideration the auto-input function of output suggested in the literature

참고문헌 (53)

  1. Allen, L, "Form-meaning Connections and the French Causative", 22, pp.69~84 (2000)
  2. DeKeyser, "What Gets Processed in Processing Instruction? A Commentary on Bill VanPatten′s ″Processing Instruction", pp.805~823 (2002)
  3. Anderson, J. R, "Rules of the mind" (1993)
  4. Byun, J, "The effect of practice on the automatization of grammar rules" (2006)
  5. Ellis, "A theory of instructed second language acquisition Implicit and explicit learning of languages", pp.79~114 (1994), Academic Press
  6. Cadierno, T, "Formal instruction from a processing perspective: An investigation into the Spanish past tense", 79, pp.179~193 (1995)
  7. Collentine, J, "Processing instruction and the subjunctive", 81, pp.576~587 (1998)
  8. Farley, "The effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction", pp.57~94 (2001)
  9. de Bot, K, "The Psycholinguistics of the Output Hypothesis", 46, pp.529~555 (1996)
  10. DeKeyser, R. M, "Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax", 19, pp.195~222 (1997)
  11. DeKeyser, R. M, "Automaticity and automatization" (2001), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  12. In Burt, "The monitor model for adult second language performance Viewpoints on English as a second language" (1977)
  13. Krashen, S, "Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition" (1982)
  14. DeKeyser, Robert M, "The Differential Role of Comprehension and Production Practice", 46(4), pp.613~642 (1996)
  15. DeKeyser, Robert M, "The Differential Role of Comprehension and Production Practice", 51(1), pp.81~112 (2001)
  16. Cambridge, "From intention to articulation" (1989), MIT Press
  17. DeKeyser, R, "What Gets Processed in Processing Instruction? A Commentary on Bill VanPatten′s ″Processing Instruction: An Update", 52, pp.805~823 (2002)
  18. Roelofs, "A theory of lexical access in speech production", pp.1~75 (1999)
  19. Ellis, R, "A theory of instructed second language acquisition" (1994)
  20. Logan, G. D, "Toward an instance theory of automatization" (1988)
  21. Farley, A. P, "The effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction", 5, pp.57~94 (2001)
  22. Platt, "Error assimilation as a mechanism in language learning Journal of Child Language", pp.401~414 (1983)
  23. Farley, A. P, "Authentic processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive", 84, pp.289~299 (2001)
  24. "The role of input and output practice in second language acquisition", pp.422~451 (1997)
  25. Sanz, "and the nature of replication tasks A response to M", pp.263~273 (1998)
  26. Krashen, S, "The monitor model for adult second language performance" (1977)
  27. Swain, "Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development Input in second language acquisition", pp.235~153 (1985)
  28. Krashen,S, "Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition" (1982), Pergamon
  29. Krashen, S, "The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications" (1985)
  30. Levelt, W. J. M, "Speaking: From intention to articulation" (1989)
  31. Swain, "Focus on form through conscious reflection" (1998), Oxford University Press Incorprated
  32. Levelt, W. J. M, "A theory of lexical access in speech production", 22, pp.1~75 (1999)
  33. Swain, "Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue" (2000), Oxford University Press
  34. Logan, "Toward an instance theory of automatization", pp.492~527 (1988)
  35. Nobuyoshi, J, "Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition" (1993)
  36. Platt, C. B, "Error assimilation as a mechanism in language learning" (1983)
  37. Salaberry, M. R, "The role of input and output practice in second language acquisition", 53, pp.422~451 (1997)
  38. VanPatten, "Processing in Content of Input-Processing and Processing Instruction Research A Response to DeKeyser", pp.825~831 (2002)
  39. Sanz, C, "On input processing, processing instruction, and the nature of replication tasks: A response to M. Rafael Salaberry", 54, pp.263~273 (1998)
  40. VanPatten, "A Role for Instruction", & cadier, pp.45~57 (1993)
  41. Swain, M, "mmunicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development" (1985)
  42. VanPatten, "Studies in Second Language Acquisition", & cadier, pp.225~243 (1993)
  43. VanPatten, "structured input in processing instruction Studies in Second Language Acquisition", & oiken(n), pp.495~510 (1996)
  44. Swain, M, "The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing aren′t Enough" (1993)
  45. VanPatten, B, "From input to output: Processing instruction and communicative tasks", pp.169~185 (1995), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  46. Swain, M, "Focus on form through conscious reflection" (1998), N.Y.: Oxford University Press, Incorprated
  47. Swain, M, "The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue" (2000), N. Y: Oxford University Press
  48. VanPatten, B, "Input Processing and Grammar Instruction: Theory and Research. Norwood" (1996), NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation
  49. VanPatten, B, "Processing Instruction: An Update", 52, pp.755~803 (2002)
  50. VanPatten, B, "Processing in Content of Input-Processing and Processing Instruction Research: A Response to DeKeyser, Salaberry, Robinson, and Harrington", 52, pp.825~831 (2002)
  51. VanPatten, B, "Input Processing and Second Language Acquisition: A Role for Instruction" (1993)
  52. VanPatten, B, "Explicit instruction and input processing" (1993)
  53. VanPatten, B, "Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction", 18, pp.495~510 (1996)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)