EFL条件下任务类型和配对方式对意义协商和口语表现的影响实验研究

发布时间：2018-06-27 11:35

本文选题：任务类型 + 配对方式　；参考：《南京师范大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：任务在二语习得中的作用一直是二语习得研究的重点,研究者注重考察各种任务变量——如任务类型、任务复杂度、任务执行条件等对任务完成过程中的互动水平或语言表现的影响。以往研究主要采用认知心理的理论框架,多数研究只关注单一任务变量；其中,关于任务成员的组合配对方式这一变量的研究相对不足,其影响也没有一致结论。本研究从认知心理模式出发,也借助社会文化理论作为补充性视角,同步探究任务类型和配对方式对意义协商和口语表现的影响。本研究为2x2式设计,自变量分别为开放一闭合两种任务类型和同质组一异质组两种配对方式；因变量也包括两种,即学习者在任务完成过程中的意义协商与口语表现。研究问题为：1)任务类型和配对方式各自和交互对意义协商有何影响?2)任务类型和配对方式各自和交互对口语表现有何影响?因变量协商互动是从协商话步的数量和协商的触发类型来考量；口语表现作为任务类型的因变量由复杂度和准确度来考量,作为配对方式的因变量则以话轮长度为指标。研究对象为某高校非英语专业32名大三学生,其中8名较高水平学习者与8名较低水平学习者组成8组异质组,16名中等水平学习者随机组合组成8组同质组。16组受试均完成两种不同类型的任务,研究者对任务完成过程全程录音并将其转写。在进行核查获得有效数据后使用SPSS19.0分别对相关数据进行配对样本,独立样本T检验和双因素方差分析,得出以下结果。第一,就对意义协商的影响而言,1)受试在闭合型任务中比在开放型任务中产生了更多的意义协商,差异显著；2)就协商的触发因素来看,闭合型任务中由语言形式(词汇、发音、句法)触发的协商显著多于开放型任务,但由其他因素触发的协商数量在两种任务类型之间无显著差异；3)异质组比同质组产生了更多意义协商,差异显著；4)就协商的触发因素来看,异质组与同质组间无显著差异；5)任务类型和配对方式对协商片段以及发音和句法触发语数量存在交互作用。上述定量分析的结果得到会话片段质性分析的支持。第二,就对口语表现的影响而言,1)在语言复杂度上,被试在开放型任务中的表现显著好于闭合型任务； 2)在语言准确度上,被试在闭合型任务中的表现显著好于开放型任务； 3)就平均话轮长度而言,同质组和异质组无明显差别；4)任务类型和配对方式对准确度有交互影响,对复杂度和平均话轮长度没有交互影响。上述结果均得到质性分析的支持。研究启示有采用高低水平组合、完成具有共同目标的任务(闭合任务)时可以形成更多的协商互动,实现意义的“共建”；而各抒己见的任务(开放任务)有利于学习者使用更复杂的表达方式；教师应在课堂教学中酌情使用。
[Abstract]:The role of task in second language acquisition has always been the focus of second language acquisition. Researchers pay attention to the study of various task variables such as task type, task complexity. The impact of task execution conditions on the level of interaction or language performance during task completion. Previous studies mainly used the theoretical framework of cognitive psychology, most of which only focused on single task variables, among which, the research on the combination and pairing of task members was relatively inadequate, and there was no consistent conclusion. Based on the cognitive psychological model and the sociocultural theory, this study simultaneously explores the effects of task types and pairings on meaning negotiation and oral expression. This study was designed in 2x2 style with independent variables of open closed task type and homogenous group and heterogeneous group respectively. Dependent variables also included two types: meaning negotiation and oral performance of learners during task completion. The research question is: (1) how do task types and pairings and interactions affect meaning negotiation? 2) how do task types and pairings and interactions affect spoken language performance? The dependent variable negotiation interaction is based on the number of negotiation steps and the trigger type of negotiation; the dependent variable of oral expression as a task type is measured by complexity and accuracy, and the dependent variable as a pairing mode is measured by the length of the phone wheel. The subjects of the study were 32 non-English major junior students in a university. Among them, 8 high level learners and 8 lower level learners composed of 8 heterogeneous groups and 16 middle level learners randomly combined into 8 groups of homogeneous group. 16 groups of subjects all completed two different types of tasks. The researchers recorded and transcribed the completion of the task. After checking and obtaining valid data, we use SPSS 19.0 to carry out paired sample, independent sample T test and double factor analysis of variance respectively. The following results are obtained. First, as far as the effect on negotiation of meaning is concerned, 1) the participants have more negotiation of meaning in closed tasks than in open tasks. 2) in terms of the trigger factors of negotiation, the form of language is used in closed tasks. Articulation and syntax) triggered more negotiation than open task, but there was no significant difference in the number of negotiation triggered by other factors between the two task types. 3) Heterogeneity group produced more meaningful negotiation than homogeneous group, and the difference was significant. 4) in terms of the trigger factors of negotiation, there is no significant difference between heterogeneous group and homogeneous group. 5) there is interaction between task type and pairing mode on the number of negotiation fragments, pronunciation and syntactic triggers. The results of the above quantitative analysis are supported by the conversational fragment qualitative analysis. Second, in terms of the effect on oral performance, 1) in terms of language complexity, the subjects performed better in open tasks than closed tasks, 2) in terms of language accuracy, the subjects performed better in closed tasks than in open tasks; 3) in terms of average wheel length, there is no significant difference between homogeneous group and heterogeneous group (4) Task type and matching mode have interaction effect on accuracy, but on complexity and average wheel length. These results are supported by qualitative analysis. The research enlightenments include using the combination of high and low levels to complete the tasks with common goals (closed tasks), which can form more consultation interaction and realize the "co-construction" of meaning. The task of expressing one's own opinions (open task) is helpful for learners to use more complicated expressions, and teachers should use them in classroom teaching as appropriate.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：H09

【相似文献】