Cognition and Second Language Instruction: Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design
Cognition and Second Language Instruction: Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design
复制标题
认知和第二语言教学：能力、个体差异和教学设计
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Leila Ranta
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mark Sawyer;Leila Ranta
简介：SLA 研究中的悖论 尝试学习外语的个人在习得速度和最终成就方面存在巨大差异。这也许是我们目前掌握的有关 SLA 的最清楚的事实，当然，与学习率的相对均匀性和 L1 习得的最终成功相关，这一点尤其引人注目。 Bley-Vroman (1989) 等学者认为，这些差异表明潜在的 L1 和 L2 习得过程必定是根本不同的。无论 L1 和 L2 习得是否以完全不同的方式发展，尝试明确和理解导致第二语言 (L2) 学习者之间差异的根源无论从理论还是实践上都很重要。矛盾的是，尽管如此重要，但对个体差异 (ID) 来源的 L2 研究却远远落后于寻求普遍原则的研究。除了罗伯特·加德纳 (Robert Gardner) 所追求的关于动机和其他情感变量的社会心理学导向工作（参见 Gardner & MacIntyre, 1992, 1993, 概述）之外，尚未开发出专注于 ID 并将其集成到 SLA 模型中的主要研究项目。这部分是由于早期研究所青睐的相关研究设计固有的局限性，以及很难找到学习者特质和第二语言学习成果的可靠有效的衡量标准（Larsen-Freeman & Long，1991；Lightbown & Spada，1993）。
Introduction: a paradox in SLA research Individuals who attempt to learn a foreign language differ dramatically in their rates of acquisition and in their ultimate attainment. This is perhaps the clearest fact about SLA that we currently have, and of course it is particularly striking in relation to the relative uniformity of learning rate and ultimate success in L1 acquisition. Bley-Vroman (1989), among other scholars, has argued that these differences demonstrate that the underlying L1 and L2 acquisition processes must be fundamentally different. Whether or not L1 and L2 acquisition develop in completely different ways, it is important for both theoretical and practical reasons to attempt to specify and understand the sources that contribute to differences among second language (L2) learners. The paradox is that despite this importance, L2 research into the sources of individual differences (IDs) has lagged far behind research seeking universal principles. With the exception of the social psychologically oriented work on motivation and other affective variables pursued by Robert Gardner (see Gardner & MacIntyre, 1992, 1993, for an overview), no major research program focusing on IDs and integrating them within a model of SLA has yet been developed. This is partly due to limitations inherent in the correlational research designs favored by earlier studies, and the difficulty of finding reliable and valid measures of both the learner traits and the L2 learning outcomes (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991; Lightbown & Spada, 1993).