对 外 汉 语 课 堂 学 生 自 主 话 语 与 师 生 互 动 研 究 王 丹 新 加 坡 国 立 大 学 中 文 系 2011 对外汉语课堂学生自主话语 与师生互动研究 A S T U D Y O F S T U D E N T- D I R E C T E D TA L K A N D T E A C H E R - S T U D E N T INTERACTION IN A CSL CLASSROOM 王丹 WA N G D A N 新加坡国立大学中文系 N AT I O N A L U N I V E R S I T Y O F S I N G A P O R E 2011 对外汉语课堂学生自主话语 与师生互动研究 A S T U D Y O F S T U D E N T- D I R E C T E D TA L K A N D T E A C H E R - S T U D E N T INTERACTION IN A CSL CLASSROOM 王丹 WA N G D A N 新加坡国立大学中文系 博士学位论文 A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY D E PA RT M E N T O F C H I N E S E S T U D I E S N AT I O N A L U N I V E R S I T Y O F S I N G A P O R E 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In this accomplishment, I am grateful to a variety of individuals. Firstly, my heartiest thanks go to A/Prof. Lee Cher Leng, my principle supervisor, for her enthusiastic commitment and her patient guidance in the course of my study at National University of Singapore. She encouraged me to pursue this research topic in the first place, read my draft, furnished me with advice to broaden my knowledge and trigger initially hidden thoughts. Without her ongoing support, this dissertation would not have come to fruition. I am very grateful to my dissertation committee members, Dr. Adrian Tien and Dr. Xu Zheng. Many thanks are due to their incisive advice and kind support on the dissertation writing. My tremendous gratitude goes to Dr. Chen Qi, one of my friends in Singapore, for her guidance and continuous encouragement in my study and my life. She brought me to where I am today. Special thanks, as well, go to other friends I have met here, Mrs. Zhao Chunyan, Mrs. Yap Jingjing and Miss. Jiang Miao. I treasure all the time I spent with them. They shared my ups and downs here. Their kindness and honesty always touch my heart, giving me strength during my time in Singapore. I would like to thank Overseas Education College of Sichuan University in China for providing me with opportunity to pursuit my degree abroad. My thanks also go to many colleagues and friends, Mrs. Liu Rong, Mrs. Hu Xiao and Mrs. Lei Li, who support my data collection and research during my fieldwork there. I express my profound appreciation to all the students participating in my research for their kind support and great contributions. Without their participation, this study would not have been completed. Finally, I dedicate this dissertation to all members in my big family, who have always been there for me. Their support, encouragement, love and understanding made the completion of this challenging journey possible. i 目 录 第一章 绪 论 - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - 1 .1 研 究 缘 起 - - -- - -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- 1.1.1 对 外 汉 语 教 学 的 课 堂 研 究 ------------------------------------1 1.1.2 交 际 与 第 二 语 言 习 得 -------------------------------------- ----2 1.1.3 学 生 话 语 和 课 堂 互 动 模 式 ------------------------------------3 1.2 研 究 问 题 说 明 -------------------------------------------------------6 1.3 本 研 究 的 概 念 架 构 和 方 法 论 简 介 -------------------------------- 1.3 .1 概 念 架 构 - - - -- -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - - . . 方 法 论 简 介 — — 会 话 分 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11 第二章 文 献 综 述 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.1 目 前 第 二 语 言 习 得 研 究 的 两 大 趋 势 -----------------------------13 .1 . 从 认 知 学 的 理 论 角 度 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.1.2 从 社 会 文 化 学 的 理 论 角 度 -----------------------------------14 2.2 课 堂 互 动 与 第 二 语 言 习 得 ---------------------------------------- 19 2. .1 输 入 — 互 动 — 输 出 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 . .1 . 可 理 解 性 输 入 假 说 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.2.1.2 互 动 假 说 - --------------------------------- ----------------- 21 . .1 . 可 理 解 性 输 出 假 说 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.2.2 课 堂 互 动 的 社 会 文 化 学 研 究 视 角 ---------------------------26 2.3 第 二 语 言 课 堂 师 生 互 动 模 式 与 语 言 学 习 研 究 -----------------30 2.4 第 二 语 言 课 堂 师 生 话 语 研 究 ------------------------------------- 34 2.4.1 教 师 话 语 -- -- - --- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- - - -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- - 34 ii 2.4.2 学 生 话 语 -- -- - --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- - 36 2.5 采 用 会 话 分 析 进 行 第 二 语 言 习 得 和 课 堂 话 语 研 究 -----------38 .6 对 研 究 问 题 的 重 申 -- - -- -- -- - -- -- -- - - - - -- -- - -- -- - -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- - - 44 第三章 研 究 方 法 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .1 研 究 场 景 - ---- ---- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- -- -- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- ---- ---- - 47 3.1.1 课 程 说 明 -- -- - --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- - 48 3.1.2 班 级 说 明 -- -- - --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- - 48 .2 研 究 对 象 - ---- --- - ---- --- --- ---- --- -- -- -- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- ---- ---- - 49 .3 语 料 收 集 与 处 理 程 序 - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - 3.3.1 语 料 收 集 过 程 ----- --- ---- --- ---- - -- - ----- --- ---- --- ---- --- - ---- 3. 3. 1.1 录 音 录 像 - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - - -- - 3.3 .1.2 访 谈 ----- - ------- ----- ---- ---- - -- ------- ----- ---- ----- -- ---- 5 3. . . 研 究 者 的 笔 记 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 3.3.2 语 料 选 择 与 转 写 ---------------------------------------------- 55 3.3.3 语 料 分 析 过 程 和 定 性 分 析 方 法 -----------------------------58 .4 研 究 局 限 - ---- ---- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- -- -- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- ---- ---- - 59 第四章 学 生 自 主 话 语 研 究 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4.1 概 述 ------------------------------------ ------------------------------ 63 4.2 由 教 师 引 发 的 学 生 自 主 话 语 ------------------------------------- 69 4.2.1 学 生 回 应 之 后 进 行 补 充 -------------------------------------- 67 .2 . 学 生 回 应 教 师 并 提 问 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4.2.3 学 生 采 用 提 问 进 行 回 应 -------------------------------------- 79 4.2.4 跟 随 别 的 学 生 发 出 话 语 -------------------------------------- 84 4.3 由 学 生 引 发 的 学 生 自 主 话 语 ------------------------------------- 94 iii 4.3.1 在 某 一 教 学 活 动 进 行 过 程 中 ， 学 生 发 出 自 主 话 语 ------94 4. 3. .1 补 充 新 信 息 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 4. 3. 1.2 学 生 提 问 - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - - -- - 小 结 与 讨 论 -------------------------------------- --------105 4.3.1.3 师 生 协 商 - --- -- --- -- --- -- --- - - -- - --- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- -- - -- 10 . . 在 教 学 活 动 结 束 的 边 界 ， 学 生 发 出 自 主 话 语 - - - - - - - - - - - 11 .3 .2. 提 供 新 信 息 - - - -- - - -- - -- - - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - 11 4.3.2.2 学 生 提 问 - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- - --- -- -- -114 小 结 与 讨 论 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11 4.3.2.3 师 生 协 商 - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- - --- -- -- - 118 4. 3.3 对 同 学 的 回 应 - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - - - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - - -- - -- -- - - -- - .4 本 章 小 结 ----- ----------------------- ---- ------------------- -------- 124 第五章 教 师 对 学 生 自 主 话 语 的 回 应 研 究 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5.1 概 述 ------------------------------------ ----------------------------- 129 .2 封 闭 性 回 应 -- ----- --- ---- ---- --- ---- -- --- --- ---- ---- --- ---- ----- --- 13 5.2.1 没 有 回 应 --- -- ------ ---- ----- - --- - --- ------ ---- ----- ---- ---- --- 132 5.2.2 直 接 并 充 分 回 答 学 生 问 题 ---------------------------------- 136 . 2. 教 师 对 学 生 的 肯 定 反 馈 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5.2.4 转 移 话 题 或 者 进 入 新 的 教 学 活 动 --------------------------146 5.2 .5 对 封 闭 性 回 应 的 小 结 - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - -1 51 5.3 开 放 性 回 应 ------------------------------------- --------------------152 5.3.1 允 许 或 者 鼓 励 学 习 者 自 主 话 语 的 进 行 --------------------152 5.3.2 教 师 不 充 分 的 回 答 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- 157 5. 3.3 教 师 的 更 正 性 反 馈 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- 61 iv 5.3.4 对 学 生 进 一 步 的 追 问 --------------------------------------- 166 .4 本 章 小 结 ----- ----------------------- -- --------------------- -------- 173 第六章 与 学 生 自 主 话 语 相 关 的 师 生 互 动 模 式 研 究 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 6.1 概 述 - ---- ---- - ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- -- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ----- --- 177 6.2 有 关 词 汇 讲 授 的 会 话 序 列 分 段 考 察 ---------------------------178 6. 本 章 小 结 - - - - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - - 6.3.1 学 生 自 主 话 语 对 会 话 序 列 发 展 的 影 响 ------------------205 6.3.2 学 生 自 主 话 语 引 发 的 师 生 互 动 模 式 ---------------------207 第 七 章 学 生 自 主 话 语 与 第 二 语 言 习 得 ------------------------------ 209 7.1 “ 习 得 ” 与 “ 学 习 ” -------------------------------------------209 7.2 “转拨”、“参与”和“习得” - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7.3 自 主 话 语 、 语 言 输 出 与 习 得 -----------------------------------213 第八章 研 究 结 论 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8.1 研 究 内 容 与 发 现 -------------------------------------------------220 8. 研 究 意 义 - - - - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - -- - -- - -- - - 2 8. 2. 理 论 意 义 - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 2 8. 2. 实 践 意 义 - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 2 .3 未 来 的 研 究 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 附 件 1-- ------ ------ - --------- ------ ------ -- -- ------- ------ ------ -- -------- 229 附 件 2-- ------ ------ - --------- ------ ------ -- -- ------- ------ ------ -- -------- 23 附 件 3-- ------ ------ - --------- ------ ---- -- -- -- ------- ------ ------ -- -------- 233 参 考 文 献 -- --- -- --- --- ---- -- --- --- -- --- --- -- - ---- -- --- - -- -- --- --- --- ---- -- - 248 v 表格一览 表 格 1： 学 生 基 本 信 息 -------------------------------------------------- 50 表 格 2： 本 研 究 所 采 用 的 转 写 符 号 体 系 ---------------------------56-57 表 格 3： 学 生 自 主 话 语 分 类 （ 一 ） ------------------------------------ 64 表 格 4： 学 生 自 主 话 语 分 类 （ 二 ） ------------------------------------ 64 表 格 5： 学 生 自 主 话 语 分 类 （ 三 ） ------------------------------------ 65 表 格 6： 学 生 自 主 话 语 属 性 表 ------------------------------------------ 67 表 格 7： 三 种 学 生 自 主 话 语 的 异 同 ------------------------------------ 83 表 格 8： 教 师 对 学 生 自 主 话 语 的 回 应 分 类 --------------------------130 vi 图示一览 图 示 ： 片 段 4-15 的 结 构 次 序 -------------------- --------------- -------89 图 示 2： 跟 随 别 的 学 习 者 发 出 自 主 话 语 的 引 发 因 素 ------------------93 图 示 ： 片 段 － 的 次 序 结 构 -------------------- --------------- ------148 图 示 4： 片 段 5－ 11 中 “ 嗯 ” 的 话 语 功 能 -------- --------------- -----155 图 示 ： 片 段 － 的 会 话 序 列 结 构 ----------------------------------- 183 图 示 ：“ 原 本 ” 序 列 结 构 与 互 动 模 式 解 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 图 示 ：“ 经 意 ” 序 列 结 构 与 互 动 模 式 解 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 图 示 ：“ 标 本 ” 序 列 结 构 与 互 动 模 式 解 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 图 示 ：“ 鱼 贯 而 入 ” 序 列 结 构 与 互 动 模 式 解 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 图 示 10 ： 片 段 6－ 的 部 分 会 话 序 列 ----- ----------------------------- 204 图 示 11 ：“ 扎 堆 儿 ” 序 列 结 构 与 互 动 模 式 解 析 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - 20 图 示 12 ： 本 文 的 研 究 理 论 、 方 法 和 主 要 内 容 ---- ---- ---- - -- ----- ---- - 219 vii Riggenbach, H. 1999. Discourse Analysis in the Language Classroom. Volume 1: The Spoken Language. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Rogoff, B. 1990. Apprenticeship in thinking, cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schegloff, E. A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: a Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Seedhouse, P. 2004. The Instruction Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Sidnell, J. 2010. Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Ten Have, P. 1999. Doing Conversation Analysis: A practical guide . Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. Thornbury, S. & Slade, D. (eds.). 2006. Conversation: from description to pedagogy. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. van Lier, L. 1988. The Classroom and the Language Learner. London: Longman. VanPatten，B. 2007. From input to out: a teacher's guide to second language acquisition. Beijing：shijie tushu chuban gongsi. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Walsh, S. 2006. Investigating Classroom Discourse. London; New York: Routledge. Wertsch, J. V. 1985. Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J. V. 1991. Voices of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wertsch, J. V. 1998. Mind as Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 254 Wertsch, J.V., & Stone, C.A. 1979. A Social interactional analysis of learning disabilities remediation. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Association for Children with Learning Disabilities, San Francisco. Wintergerst, A. C. 1994. Second Language Classroom Interaction. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Wong, J. & Waring, H. Z. 2010. Conversation Analysis and Second Language Pedagogy. New York: Routledge. Yoshida,R. 2009. Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms: Overt and Covert Participation. Continuum: London; New York. ARTICLES: Adams, R., Fujii, A., & Mackey, A. 2005. Research methodology: Qualitative research. In C. Sanz (ed.), Mind and Context in Adult Second Language Acquistion: Methods, theory, and practice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 69-104. Adair-Hauck, B. & Donato, R. 1992. Discourse perspectives on formal instruction. Language Awareness, 1, 73-90. Ajaafreh, A. & Lantolf, J. P. 1994. Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development. Modern Language Journal, 78, 465-483. Allwright, D. 1980. Turns, topics and tasks: patterns of participation in language learning and teaching. In D. Larshen -Freeman (ed.), Discourse Analysis in Second Language Research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp. 165-187. Allwright, D. 2005. From teaching points to learning opportunities and beyond. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 9-32. Antón, M. 1999. A learner-centered classroom. Sociocultural perspectives on teacher-learner interaction in second language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 83, 303-318. 255 Antón, M., & DiCamillia, F. J. 1998. Socio-cognitive function of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 314-342. Block, D. 2007. The rise of identity in SLA research post Firth and Wagner (1997). Modern Language Journal, 91, 861-874. Bloome, D., & Egan-Robertson, A. 1993. The social construction of intertextuality in classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 305-333. Boyd, M., & Maloof, V. M. 2000. How teachers can build on student -proposed intertextual links to facilitate student talk in the ESL classroom. In Hall, J. K & Verplaetse. L. S. (eds.). Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 163-182. Breen, M. P. 2001. Overt participation and covert acquisition in the language classroom. In Michael P. Breen (ed.), Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New direction in research. Harlow, England; New York: Longman, pp. 112-140. Brooks, F. 1992. Spanish L2 learners talking to one another through a jigsaw task. Canadian Modern Language Review, 48: 496-717. Brooks, F.,& Donato, R. 1994. Vygotsky approaches to understanding foreign language learner discourse during communicative tasks. Hispania, 77, 262-274. Brouwer, C. E. & Wagner, J. 2004. Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 29-47. Carroll, D. 2005. Restarts in novice turn beginnings: Dis fluencies or interactional achievements? In Garder, R. & Wagner, J. (eds.), Second Language Conversations. London; New York: Continnum, pp. 201-220. Carroll, S. & Swain, M. 1993. Explicit and implicit negative feedback: an empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in second language acquisition, 15: 357-86. 256 Celec-Murcia, M., Dornyei, Z., & Thurell, T. 1995. Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 25-35. Chang, G. L., & Wells, G. 1993. Dynamics of discourse: Literacy and the construction of knowledge. In Ellice A. F, Norris. M, & C. Addison. S (eds.), Contexts for Learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 58-90. Commeyras, M. 1995. What can we learn from students’ questions? Theory into Practices, 34(2): 101-106. Cotterral, S. 2005. It's just rules .That's all it is at this stage. In P. Benson & D. Nunan (eds.), Learners Stories: Difference and diversity in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 101-118. Crookers, G. 1991. Second language speech production: A methodologically oriented view. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 113-132. Cullen, R. 1997. Teacher talk and the classroom context. ELT Journal, 52, 179-87. Cullen, R. 2002. Supportive teacher talk: The importance of the F -move. ELT Journal, 56, 117-27. de Bot, K. 1996. The Psycholinguistics of the Output Hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529-555. Donato, R. 1994. Collective scaffolding in second language acquisition. In J. P. Lantolf. & G. Appel (eds.), Vygotskian Approach to Second Language Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 33-56. Donato, R. 2000. Sociocultural contributions to understanding the for eign and second language classroom. In J. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27-50. Drew, P. & Heritage, J. (eds.). 2006. Conversation Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Duff, P. 2000. Repetition in foreign language classroom interaction. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaetse (eds.), Second and Foreign Language Learning 257 through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum，pp. 109-138. Ellis, R. 1992. Learning to communicate in the classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 1-23. Ellis, R. 1994. The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. 1998. Discourse control and the acquisition-rich classroom. In W. Renandya & G. Jacobs (eds.), Learners and Language Learning. Singapore: RELC, pp. 145-171. Ellis, R., Y. Tanaka & A. Yamazaki. 1994. Classroom interaction, comprehension and the acquisition of word meanings. Language Learning, 44, 449-491. Ernst, G. 1994. 'Talking Circle': Conversation and negotiation in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 293-322. Firth, A.& Wagner, J. 1997. On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81, 285-300. Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. 2005. Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402-430. Frawley, W. & Lantolf, J. P. 1985. Second language discourse: A Vygotskyan perspective. Applied Linguistics 6: 19-44. Gardner, R. 1994. Conversation analysis: Some thoughts on its applicability to applied linguistics. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, Series S, No 11: 97-118. Gass, S. 2004. Conversation analysis and input -interaction. Modern Language Journal, 88, 597-602. Gass, S., & Mackey, A. 2006. Input, interaction and output: An overview. AILA Review, 19, 3-17. Gass, S., & Mackey, A., & Pica, T. 1998. The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition: Introduction to the special issue. Modern 258 Language Journal, 82, 299-305. Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. 1994. Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283-302. Gee, J., & Green, J. 1998. Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169. Gibbons, P. 2003. Mediating language learning: teacher interaction with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 247-74. Gutierrez, K. 1994. How talk, context, and script shape contexts for learning: A cross-case comparison of journal sharing. Linguistics and Education, 5, 335-365. Hall, J. K. 1998. Differential teacher attention to student utterances: The construction of different opportunities for learning in the IRF. Linguistics and Education, 9, 287-311. Hall, J. K & Walsh, M. 2002. Teacher-student interaction and language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 186-203. He, A. W. 2004. CA for SLA: Arguments from the Chinese language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 88, 568-582. Hellermann, J. 2005. Syntactic and prosodic practices for cohesion in series of three-part sequences in classroom talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38, 105-130. Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, pp. 269-293. Iwashita, N. 2003. Negative feedback and positive evidence in task -based interaction: Differing effects on L2 development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 1-36. Jacknick, C. M. 2009. A Conversation-analytic Account of Student-initiated Participation in an ESL Classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia University. 259 Jansem, A. 2008. ESL Teacher Questions and Question Modifications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Illinois State University. Jefferson, G. 1972. Side sequence. In D. Sudnow (ed.), Studies in Social Interaction. New York: Free Press, pp. 294-338. Jitsopa，A. 1999. Teacher's grammatical foreigner talk discourse when teaching low-level ESL leaners: phonology. Studies in Language Learning and Teaching, 8(4), 39-52. John-Steiner, V. 1992. Private speech among adults. In L. E. Berk & R. M. Diaz (eds.), Private Speech: From social interaction to self -regulation. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 285-296. Kasper, G. 2006. Beyond repair: Conversation analysis as an approach to SLA. AILA Review, 19, 83-99. Kinger, C. 2002. Proximal development in US foreign language education. Applied Linguistics, 2, 240-261. Ko, J., Schallert, D. L. & Walters, K. 2003. Rethinking scaffolding: Examining negotiation of meaning in an ESL storytelling task. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 303-324. Koshik, I. 2002. Designedly incomplete utterances: a pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35, 277-309. Kowal, M., & Swain, M. 1994. Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students' language awareness. Language Awareness, 3(2): 73-93. Lafford, B. 2007. Second language acquisition reconceptualized? The impact of Firth and Wagner (1997). Modern Language Journal, 91, 735-756. Lantolf, J., & A. Aljaafreh. 1995. Second Language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. Interactional Journal of Education Research, 23, 619-632. Lantolf, J., & Genung, P. 2003. I'd rather switch than fight': An acticity theoretic study of power, success, and failure in a foreign language 260 classroom. In C. Kramsch (ed.), Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. London: Continuum, pp. 175-196. Lantolf, J. & Thorne, S. 2007. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In Vanpatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 201-224. Larsen-Freeman, D. 2004. CA for SLA? It all depends Modern Language Journal, 88, 603-607. Lazaraton, A. 2002a. Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Discourse Analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22: 32-51. Laz arat on, A. 2004. Conversat ion anal ys is and t he norm at ive Engli sh speaki ng ES L t eacher: A case st ud y. In D. Boxer & A. C ohen ( eds . ) , Studyi ng Speaking t o Inf orm Second Language Learni ng . Cl evedon, UK: Mul ti li ngual Mat t ers , pp. 49 -67. Lerner, G. H. 1995. Turn design and the organization of participation in instructional activities. Discourse Process, 19, 111-131. Liebscher, G., & Dailey-O’Cain, J. 2003. Conversational repair as a role-definingmechanism in classroom interaction. Modern Language Journal, 87, 375–390. Liddicoat, A. 1997. Interaction, social structure, and second language use. Modern Language Journal, 81, 313-317. Lin, A. 1999a. Doing-English-Lessons in the reproduction or transformation of social worlds? TESOL Quarterly, 33, 393-412. Lin, A. 1999b. Resistance and creativity in English reading lessons in Hong Kong. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 12, 285-296. Lin, A. 2000. Lively children trapped in an island of disadvantage: Verbal play of Cantonese working-class schoolboys in Hong Kong. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 143, 63-83. Lin, H. H. 2009. Patterns of Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake in ESL Low, Intermediate and Advanced level Speaking Classrooms . 261 Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University, San Diego. Liu, D. B.; Zhao, S. H., & Goh, H. H. 2009. Teacher Questions and Construction of Opportunities for Chinese Language Learning. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 44(2): 81-101. Long, M. H. 1983a. Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141. Long, M. H. 1983b. Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non -native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 177-193. Long, M. H. 1996. The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W & T. Bhatia (eds.), the Handbook of Second Language Acquisition . San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 413-468. Loschky, L. 1994. Comprehensible input and secon d language acquisition: What is the relationship? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 303-323. Lyster, R. 1998a. Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51-81. Lyster, R. 1998b. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classroom. Language Learning, 48, 183-218. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. 1997. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66. Markee, N. 1995. Teacher's answers to students' questions: Problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 63-92. Markee, N. 2004. Zone of interactional transiti on in ESL classes. Modern Language Journal, 88, 583-596. Markee, N. 2005a. Conversation analysis for second language acquisition. In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum，pp. 355-374. 262 Markee, N. 2005b. The organization of off-task talk in second language classroom. In K. Richards & P. Seedhouse (eds.), Applying Conversation Analysis.New York: Palgrave Macmillan，pp.197-213. Markee, N. & Kasper, G. 2004. Classroom talks: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 88, 491-500. Massaji, H.,& Wells, G. 2000. What's the use of 'triadic dialogue'?: An investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21, 376-406. McCafferty, S. 1994. Adult second language learner’s use of private speech: a review of studies. Modern Language Journal 78, 421-436. McCormick, D.E.,&Donato, R. 2000. Teacher questions as scaffolded assistance in an ESL classroom. In J.K.Hall&L.S.Verplaetse (eds.), Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum, pp.183-201. McMahill, C. 2001. Self-expression, gender, and community: A Japanese feminist English class. In A. Pavlenko, A. Blackledge, I. Piller, & M. Teutsch-Dwyer (eds.), Multilingualism, Second Language Acquisition, and Gender. New York: Mouton de Greyter，pp. 307-344. Mondada, L. & Pekarek Doehler, S. 2004. Second language acquisition as situated practice: Task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 88, 501-18. Mori, J. 2002. Task design, plan and development of t alk-in-interaction: An analysis of a small group activity in a Japanese classroom. Applied Linguistics 23:3, 323-347. Mori, J. 2007. Border crossings? Exploring the intersection of second language acquisition, conversation analysis, and foreign language pedagogy. Modern Language Journal, 91, 849-892. Mori, J. & Zuengler, J. 2008. Conversation analysis and talk -in-interaction in the classroom. In M.Martin-Jones,A. M. de Mejia & N.H.Hornberger (eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 3. Discourse and education. New York: Springer, pp. 1-29. 263 Nassaji，H., & Swain，M. 2000. A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness. 9, 34-51. Nassaji, H., & Wells, G. 2000. What's the use of 'triadic dialogue'?: An investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics, 21, 376-406. Nobuyoshi, J., & Ellis, R. 1993. Focussed communication tasks. English Language Teaching Journal, 47, 203-210. Nunan, D. 1991. Methods in second language classroom research: A critical review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 249-274. Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. 1991. Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25, 261-290. Ohta, A. S. 1995. Applying sociocultural theory to analysis of learner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6/2, 93-121. Ohta, A. S. 1997. The development of pragmatic competence in learner-learner interaction. In L. Bouton (ed.), Pragmatics and Language Learning. Vol. 8. Urhana-Champaign: University of Illinois, pp. 223-242. Ohta, A. S. 2000. Re-thinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition of L2 grammar. In J. P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 51-78. Ohta, A. S., & Nakaone, T. 2004. When students as k questions: teacher and peer answers in the foreign language classroom. IRAL, 42: 217-237. Oliver, R. 2000. Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning 50: 119-51. Pavlenko, A., & Lantolf, J. P. 2000. Second language learning as participation and the (re)construction of selves. In J.P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural 264 Theory and Second Language Learning. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 155-177. Pica, T. 1987. Second language acquisition, social interaction, a nd the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8, 3-21. Pica, T. 1994. Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, process, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527. Pica, T. 1997. Tradition and transition in English Language Teaching. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 13(1): 1-20. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. 1996. Language learners' interaction: How does it address input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 21, 737-757. Pica, T., Young, R. & Doughty, C. 1987. The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 737-758. Richards, J. & Lockhart. C. 1994. Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Roberts, M. 1995. Awareness and the efficacy of error correction. In J.S.Bruner, A. Jolly, & K.Sylva (eds.), Play: Its role on development and evolation. New York: Basic Books, pp. 621-635. Robinson, J. D., & Heritage, J. 2005. The structure of patients’ presenting concerns: The completion relevance of current symptoms. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 481–493. Robinson, P. 1995. Attention, memory, and the noticing hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 282-331. Rogoff, B. 1995. Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In James Wertsch, Pablo del Rio and Amelia Alvarez (eds), Sociocultural Studies of the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-164. 265 Sacks, H. 1984. Notes on Methodology. In J.M.Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 21-27. Sacks, H.; Schegloff, E, A. & Jefferson, G. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735. Schachter, D. L. 1998. Memeory and awareness. Science, 280, 59-60. Schegloff, E. A. Some sources in misunderstanding in talk -in-interaction. Linguistics, 1987(25): 201-218. Schegloff, E. A. 1991. Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and social structure. Cambridge: Polity Press，pp.44-70. Schegloff, E. A.,Koshik, I., Jacoby, S., & Oisher, D. 2002. Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 3-31. Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 206-226. Schmidt, R. 1995. Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning . Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, pp.1-63. Schemidt, R. 2001. Attention. In P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction . New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-32. Schwartz，J. 1977. Repair in Conversations between Adult Second Language Learners of English. Unpublished master's thesis. University of California, Los Angeles. Seedhouse, P. 1996. Classroom interaction: Possibilities and impossibilities. ELT Journal, 50,16-24. Seedhouse, P. 2005. Conversation analysis and language learning. Language Teaching, 38,165-187. 266 Slimani, A. 1989. The role of topicalization in classroom language learning. System, 17: 223-234. Slimani, A. 2001. Evaluation of classroom interaction. In Candlin, C. And Mercer, N. (eds.) English Language Teaching in its Social Contexts: A Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 287-305. Stivers, T. 2002. Participating in decisions about treatment: Overt parent pressure for antibiotic medication in pediatric encounters. Social Science and Medicine, 54, 1111–1130. Stone, C. A. 1993. What is missing in the scaffolding? In Faulkner, D., Littleton, K. and Woodhead, M. (eds.), 2004, Learning Relationships in the Classroom. Oxford, Routledge; The Open University, pp.156-168. Swain, M.1985. Communicative competence: Some roles if comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition . Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp. 236-244. Swain, M. 1993. The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164. Swain. M. 1995. Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (eds.), Principles and pract ice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson . Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 125-143. Swain, M. 1998. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. Acquisition. (eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.64-81. Swain, M. 2000. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning . New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 97-114. Swain, M. 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook on Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 471-484. 267 Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. 1998. Interaction and second language learning: two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 83 (3): 320-327. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. 2001. Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: exploring task effects. In Martin, B; Peter, S. & Merrill, S. (eds), Researching Pedagogical Tasks . London: Longman, pp. 99-118. Swain, M., & Lapki n, S . 2007. “Oh, I get i t now! ” From producti on t o com prehensi on in second l anguage l earni ng. In D. M. Brint on & O. Kagan ( eds.), Herit age l anguage acqui sit ion: A new fi eld emergi ng. Mahwah, NJ: Lawre nce Erl baum . Takashima, H. 1995. A study of focused feedback, or output enhancement, in promoting accuracy in communicative activities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University. Thompson, S. A., & Tao, H. Y. 1991. English backchannels in mandarin conversations: a case study of superstratum pragmatic 'interfrence'. Journal of Pragmatics, 16: 209-223. Truscott, J. 1998. Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. SLA Research, 14: 103-135. van Lier, L. 1991. Inside the classroom: learning processes and teaching procedures. Applied Language Learning, 2, 29-69. van Lier, L. 2001. Constraints and resources in classroom talk: Issues of equality and symmetry. In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer ( eds.), English Language Teaching in its Social Context: A Reader . New York: Routledge, pp. 90-107. Varonis, E. M. & Gass, S. M. 1985. Non-native/non-native conversation: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90. Waring, H. Z. 2008. Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. Modern Language Journal, 92, 577-594. Waring, H. Z. 2009. Moving out of IRF (Initiation -Response-Feedback)：A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59 (4): 796-824. 268 Wells, G. 1993. Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom. Linguistics and Education, 5, 1-37. Wells, G. 199. Using L1 to mater L2: A response to Antón & DiCamilla's 'Social-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. ' Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 343-353. Winegar, L. T. 1997. Can internalization be more than a magical phrase? Notes toward the constructive negotiation of this process. In C. Lightfoot and B. D. Cox (eds.), Sociogenetic perspectives on internationalization. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 25-44. Wode, H. 1980. Operating principles and 'universals' in L1, L2 and FLT. In Nehls, D. (ed.), Studies in Language Acquisition. Julius Groos Verlag. Wong, J. 2000. Delayed next turn repair initiation in native/non -native speaker English conversation. Applied Linguistics, 21(2): 244-67. Wood, D., Bruner, J. & Ross, G. 1976. The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 178, 89-100. Wu, L. 2009. Understanding SLA through Peer Interaction in Chinese Classroom: A Sociocultural Perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Hampshire. Young, R. F., & Miller, E. R. 2004. Learning as changing participation: Discourse roles in ESL writing conferences. Modern Language Journal, 88, 519-35. 269 [...]... field of Chinese language acquisition and teaching research This dissertation investigates student- directed talk, teacher s response and the related teacher -student interaction sequences in a Chinese as a second language (CSL) classroom of intermediate level Through the analysis of these key points from the data, this study explores the following questions: (1) What are the characteristics of student- directed. .. student- directed talk in a CSL comprehensive class? (2) What are the characteristics of teacher response to student- directed talk and their influence to interactional consequences? (3) What are the related teacher -student interaction patterns? (4) What is the relationship between student- directed talk and second language acquisition (SLA)? The study takes Sociocultural Theory as its conceptual framework, and also... Conversation Analysis to conduct data collection and research work The findings reveal that there are two categories of student- directed talk: initiated by teacher or initiated by students themselves Teacher s response also falls into two types: closed response and expandable response In chapter six, this dissertation induces teacher -student interaction patterns regarding student- directed talk in traditional...ABSTRACT Student- directed talk is one of the forms of student output in teacher -student interaction in second language classrooms, which means a new topic or additional information introduced by students Therefore, they enjoy initiative in turn-taking and turn-initiation to a certain extent However, there are very few studies conducted to explore this special kind of student talk, especially in. .. traditional Chinese language teaching classroom Last but not least, we elaborate the relationship between student- directed talk and SLA, mainly from the perspective of theory, which need further experimental research and exploration Eventually, we hope our findings have practical value in the field of Chinese language teaching Teachers are encouraged to provide ample learning opportunities for students,... IRE，即教师引发 —学生回应— 教师评价 Teacher Initiation Student Reply/Response Teacher Evaluation） （Mehan，1979；Cazden，1988） ；或者 IRF， 即教师引发 — 学生回应— 教师后续反应 Teacher Initiation Student Response— Teacher Follow-up） Wells，1993） （ 。我们可以看一个师生课堂互动的例 子（语料转写规则可参见 3.3.2 或者附件 1） ： 片 段 1-1： 1 T： 2 K： 3 T： ↑好，什么是“土地爷”？就是在中 [国的]= =[地方]的神帝。 （0）对，一个神，掌管 土地的神。 第 1、2、3 行分别就是主导结构中的 I，R，E/F 三步骤，这在语言 教学课堂互动中十分常见，特别是在由教师引导的课堂（ Teacher- led Lesson）中，教师控制了话题的发展，并决定谁拥有说话的权利，即下... Firth 和 Wagner 在 The Modern Language Journal（ 《现代语言期刊》 ）上发表的文章“On Discourse, Communication, and (some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA Research （ ” 《话语、 交际以及第二语言习得研究中一些基本概念》 ，这在当时以认知学派观点 ） 占主流的二语习得研究领域引起了轩然大波。随即在 1997 到 1998 年间， 以 Hall，Kasper，Liddicoat，Long，Poulisse，Rampton 和 Gass，作为论战 13 的另一方也在该语言期刊上发表了多篇文章，他们认为二语习得主要还是 一种学习个体的内化过程。双方争论的根本出发点在于第二语言习得到底 是一种个体内化了的认知发展，还是学习者通过使用目的语言进行交际从 而习得语言的社会过程（ Lafford，2007：735）... 方法学（Ethnomethodology）中对本族语者之间交际障碍修正研究的成果， 以及 Hatch 的通过互动过程学习第二语言的观点（ Ellis，1999：3） 。因此 21 我们不难发现互动假说中的核心互动形式 ——意义协商（Negotiation of Meaning） ，它是指人们在交际过程中发生沟通上的障碍（Breakdown）时， 采用一定的交际手段最终达致双方的相互理解， 这一概念源于 Long 1980） （ 的博士论文。他在研究本族语者（Native Speakers，简称 NS）和非本族语 者（Non-native Speakers，简称 NNS）的交际过程中，发现交际双方为了 保证会话的顺利进行会进行相互协商，并将这种沟通的技巧称之为交互调 整（Interactional Modification） 。由于这种会话的理解偏重意义层面，因此 后来也被称之为意义协商 （Varonis & Gass，1985） 。 该假说认为当学习者通过意义协商实现会话调整... 的言语水平，将输入变得更容 易理解。此后，为了测试这个推导式，第二语言习得的研究者们多年来进 行了大量实证性的工作（Pica，Young & Doughty，1987；Gass & Vironis， 1994；Loschky，1994；Ellis，Tanaka & Yamazaki，1994；Ellis，1999；顾 伟勤，2008） ，不过由于一些实验条件的不同，他们得出了不同的结论。 以下我们举例说明： Pica，Young 和 Doughty（1987）的研究用实践证明了 推导式中的第一 步。在他们的研究中，16 个以英语为第二语言的学习者被给予了两种不同 的输入：预先输入调整（ Premodified Input ）和交互输入调整 （Interactionally Modified Input） 。前者是指将语句简化，从而增加短句和 词语的数量，表达更冗余；后者则不进行语句调整，而是允许学习者与本... 到底只是社会属性还是认知属性的单纯区隔，而应该将其视为动态的、社 会认知的过程， 在这一过程中， 认知和社会因素相互渗透、 相互贯通 Ohta， （ 2001：21） 。 社会文化理论中与第二语言习得和教学相关的一些核心概念包括：调 节论（Mediation） 、内化（Internalization） 、最近发展区（Zone of Proximal Development，也简称为 ZPD） 、学习支架（Scaffolding） 、互解 （Intersubjectivity） 活动论 、 （Activity Theory） 个人自我中心言语 、 （Private 15 Speech）等。根据本文的研究内容和研究重点，我们在此对调节论、内化、 最近发展区、 学习支架、 互解在二语习得和教学中的运用研究做一些介绍。 调节论（Mediation） Lantolf（2000：1）在阐述社会文化学的理论 ： 时认为：社会文化学最基本的概念是人类心智活动都有 . interaction patterns regarding student-directed talk in traditional Chinese language teaching classroom. Last but not least, we elaborate the relationship between student-directed talk and SLA, mainly. language acquisition and teaching research. This dissertation investigates student-directed talk, teacher’s response and the related teacher-student interaction sequences in a Chinese as a. student-directed talk in a CSL comprehensive class? (2) What are the characteristics of teacher response to student-directed talk and their influence to interactional consequences? (3) What are the related