二语习得：“普遍语法”怎么看？ - 英语教学法原著选读95（附原文语音讲解）
原创不易，公益翻译，请随手转发。感谢！
------------------------
因今天的选文太长，加上最近我时间特别紧张，未能录音，向大家致歉！下周我会继续。上面“总目录”链接中有“输入假说”相关参考文章的列表，感兴趣的朋友可以点进去看看。
------------------------
以下英文原文取自上海外语教育出版社引进出版、授权转载的“外语教学法丛书”之九《语言学习机制》第二章“THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING（二语学习的几种理论解释）”：
原文（作者：Lightbown & Spada）
译文（翻译：Liz，审校：武太白）
Heading: THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
二语学习的几种理论解释
Krashens 'monitor model'
克拉申的“监控模型”
An innatist theory of second language acquisition which has had a very great influence on second language teaching practice is the one proposed by Stephen Krashen (1982). Five 'hypotheses' constitute what Krashen originally called the monitor model. He claims that research findings from a number of different domains are consistent with these hypotheses: (1) the acquisition-learning hypothesis; (2) the monitor hypothesis; (3) the natural order hypothesis; (4) the input hypothesis; and (5) the affective filter hypothesis.
有一种二语习得的内生理论对第二语言教学实践有很大影响，它就是克拉申提出的理论（1982）。五个假设构成了克拉申最初所说的监控模型。他声称不同领域的研究发现与这些假设是吻合的：1.习得与学习假设 2. 监控假设 3. 自然顺序假设 4. 输入假设 5. 情感过滤假设。
1 The acquisition-learning hypothesis
1.习得与学习假设
According to Krashen, there are two ways for adult second language learners to develop knowledge of a second language: acquisition and learning. In his view, we acquire as we are exposed to samples of the second language which we understand. This happens in much the same way that children pick up their first language—with no conscious attention to language form. We learn, on the other hand, via a conscious process of study and attention to form and rule learning.
根据克拉申的观点，有两种方法可以帮助成年的二语习得者掌握第二语言的知识：习得与学习。在他看来，当我们接触到到自己理解的二语实例时，我们就习得。这和儿童学习他们的母语差不多——对语言形式没有有意注意。另一方面，我们通过对形式和规则的有意研究和注意来学习。
For Krashen, acquisition is by far the more important process. He asserts that only acquired language is readily available for natural, fluent communication. Further, he asserts that learning cannot turn into acquisition. He cites as evidence for this that many speakers are quite fluent without ever having learned rules, while other speakers may 'know' rules but fail to apply them when they are focusing their attention on what they want to say more than on how they are saying it.
对于克拉申来说，目前为止习得是更重要的过程。他宣称，只有习得的语言才能随时用于自然且流畅的交流。而且他坚称学习不能转变为习得。为此他举了个例子：许多人没有学习规则但说得却很流利，而其他人可能“知道”规则但不会应用，他们注意的是想表达什么而不是怎么去说。
2 The monitor hypothesis
2. 监控假设
Krashen argues that the acquired system acts to initiate the speaker’s utterances and is responsible for fluency and intuitive judgements about correctness. The learned system, on the other hand, acts only as an editor or 'monitor', making minor changes and polishing what the acquired system has produced. Moreover, Krashen has specified that learners use the monitor only when they are focused more on being 'correct' than on what they have to say, when they have sufficient time to search their memory for the relevant rules, and when they actually know those rules! Thus, writing may be more conducive than speaking to monitor use, because it usually allows more time for attention to form. He maintains that since knowing the rules only helps the speaker supplement what has been acquired, the focus of language teaching should be on creating conditions for acquisition rather than 'learning'.
克拉申认为习得系统可以引导人开口说话，并且是流畅度和对错的直觉背后的原因。而学习系统只用作编辑和监控，做一些细小的改变并润色习得系统产出的东西。而且，克拉申明确指出，只有当学习者注意的是正确度而不是他们必须说什么，当他们有充足的时间去搜索关于相关规则的记忆，当他们真的知道这些规则的时候，学习者才使用监控！因此，对于使用监控来说，写可能比说更适用，因为写让人有更多的时间来注意形式。他认为既然知道规则只能帮助说话者补充已经习得的东西，那么语言教学的重点就在于创造环境来“习得”而不是“学习”。
It is very difficult to show evidence of 'monitor' use. In any given utterance, it is impossible to determine what has been produced by the acquired system and what is the result of monitor use. Krashen's claim that language which is produced quickly and apparently spontaneously must have been acquired rather than learned leaves us with a somewhat circular definition.
拿出监控使用的证据是很困难的。在任何给定的话语中，分清什么是习得系统产生的，什么是监控使用的结果，这是不可能的。克拉申称快速产生的而且显然是自发的语言必定是习得而非学习得来，这似乎给我们留下了一个循环定义。
3 The natural order hypothesis
3. 自然顺序假设
Krashen based this hypothesis on the observation that, like first language learners, second language learners seem to acquire the features of the target language in predictable sequences. Contrary to intuition, the rules which are easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired. For example, the rule for adding an -s to third person singular verbs in the present tense is easy to state, but even some advanced second language speakers fail to apply it in rapid conversation. Further, Krashen observes that the natural order is independent of the order in which rules have been learned in language classes. Most of Krashen's original evidence for this hypothesis came from the 'morpheme studies', in which learners' speech was examined for the accuracy of certain grammatical morphemes. While there have been many criticisms of the morpheme studies, subsequent research has confirmed that learners pass through sequences or stages in development. In Chapter 4, we will look at some of these sequences in second language acquisition.
该假设基于克拉申注意到二语学习者像母语学习者一样，似乎在按照可预测的顺序习得目标语言的特征。和直觉相反，最容易说明（因此容易“学习”）的规则并不一定是第一个习得的。例如，一般现在时的第三人称单数加“s”很好说明，但是甚至有的高级第二语言学习者在快速谈话中也没有应用这个规则。而且，克拉申注意到自然顺序独立于在语言课程中学习到的规则顺序之外。克拉申关于该假设的大多原始证据都来自于“词素研究”，在该研究中学习者的话语被检查，检验某些语法词素的正确性。尽管对于词素研究有很多的批评，后来的研究证实了学习者确实在发展中经历一系列的阶段。在第四章中，我们将介绍二语习得过程中的这些阶段。
4 The input hypothesis
4. 输入假设
Krashen asserts that one acquires language in only one way——by exposure to comprehensible input. If the input contains forms and structures just beyond the learners' current level of competence in the language (what Krashen calls 'i+1'), then both comprehension and acquisition will occur.
克拉申称只能通过一种方式习得语言，那就是接触可理解的输入。如果输入包括略超过学习者目前语言水平的形式和结构（克拉申称作“i+1”）， 那么就会有理解和习得。
Krashen cites many varied lines of evidence for this hypothesis, most of which appeal to intuition, but which have not been substantiated by empirical studies. In recent years, he has emphasized the value of undirected pleasure reading as a source of comprehensible input. While he acknowledges that some people who are exposed to extensive comprehensible input do not achieve high levels of proficiency in the second language, he retains his conviction that input is the source of acquisition. He points to the affective filter hypothesis to explain lack of success when comprehensible input is available.
关于该假设，克拉申引用了许多不同性质的论据，其中很多都是出于直觉，并没有经过实证研究的证实。近年来，他强调作为理解性输入的来源之一，无指导的兴趣阅读的价值。但是他承认有些人虽接触大量的理解性输入，仍然没有很精通第二语言。他还是相信输入是习得的来源。他用情感过滤假设来解释有理解性输入却仍然习得失败现象。
5 The affective filter hypothesis
5. 情感过滤假设
The 'affective filter' is an imaginary barrier which prevents learners from acquiring language from the available input. 'Affect' refers to such things as motives, needs, attitudes, and emotional states. A learner who is tense, angry, anxious, or bored may 'filter out' input, making it unavailable for acquisition. Thus, depending on the learner's state of mind or disposition, the filter limits what is noticed and what is acquired. The filter will be 'up' (blocking input) when the learner is stressed, self-conscious, or unmotivated. It will be 'down' when the learner is relaxed and motivated.
“情感过滤”是一个想象中的障碍，它阻止学习者从可用输入中习得语言。“情感”指的是动机、需求、态度和情绪状态。一个紧张、生气、焦虑或者感到无聊的学习者可能会过滤掉输入，使其不可用于习得。因此，取决于学习者的心态和情绪，过滤限制了注意到的和习得的东西。当学习者处于压力中、难为情或者无学习动力时，过滤将升高（屏蔽输入）。当学习者处于轻松状态、有动力时，过滤将降低。
What makes this hypothesis attractive to practitioners is that it appears to have immediate implications for classroom practice. Teachers can understand why some learners, given the same opportunity to learn, may be successful while others are not. It also appeals intuitively to those who have tried unsuccessfully to learn a language in conditions where they felt stressed or uncomfortable. One problem with the hypothesis, however, is that it is difficult to be sure that affective factors cause the differences in language acquisition. It seems likely that success in acquisition may in itself contribute to more positive motivation or, in Krashen's terms, to a 'lowered affective filter'. In Chapter 3, we will discuss further the relationship between attitudes/motivation and success in second language learning.
对于教学从业者来说，该理论吸引他们的是它可以立即用于课堂实践。教师可以理解为什么在一样的学习机会下，有的学习者可以成功而有的却会失败。它也从直觉上吸引那些因为感到有压力和不自在而学习语言失败的人。然而该假设存在的问题是，它很难保证情感因素引起了语言习得的差异。看起来可能习得成功会提供更积极的动力，或者，按照克拉申的话说，“降低情感过滤”。在第三章中，我们将进一步讨论态度/动机和成功学习第二语言之间的关系。
Krashen's writing has been very influential in supporting communicative language teaching (CLT), particularly in North America. On the other hand, the theory has also been seriously criticized for failing to propose hypotheses which can be tested by empirical research. Most teachers and researchers see much which is intuitively appealing in his views. There is little doubt that communicative language teaching, with its primary focus on using language for meaningful interaction and for accomplishing tasks, rather than on learning rules, has won support from many teachers and learners. Nevertheless, it will be seen in Chapter 6 that some classroom-centred research shows that attention to language form may be more important than Krashen acknowledges. We will also see that instruction which focuses on language form can be incorporated within communicative language teaching.
克拉申的作品对交际法语言教学（CLT）的支持有很大的影响力，特别是在北美。另一方面，该理论也受到了严重的批评，因为其未能提出能够被检验的假设。大多数的教师和研究者都看到了他的观点中对直觉有很大吸引力的部分。毫无疑问，交际法语言教学主要关注使用语言来进行有意义的交流和完成任务而不是学习规则，赢得了许多老师和学习者的支持。然而，在第六章中，一些以课堂为中心的研究表明注意语言形式可能比克拉申所声称的更重要。我们也将看到注重语言形式的教学可以纳入到交际法语言教学的范围中去。
联系客服
