文体与长度对EFL写作的影响
|
摘要
自任务教学法出现以来，任务类型和任务条件对语言产出的影响受到越来越多的关注和研究。本文旨在研究三种不同的写作文体(叙述文，解说文，议论文)和不同的作文长度(一百五十字和三百字)对作文的复杂度和准确度的影响。
本文采用陈慧嫒和吴旭东的书面语产出模式分析了三种文体的难度，并对三种文体在两种条件下对复杂度和准确度可能产生的影响进行了预测。
一百二十四某校外语学院英语专业的学生参加了此次实验。他们的写作任务相同，但写作要求不同。两个班的学生要求每篇字数在一百五十字左右，用二十分钟完成。另两个班的学生要求三百字左右，用四十分钟完成。随后，从每个班随机抽取十名学生组成两组：长作文组和短作文组，每组各二十名学生。
实验结果表明，文体对复杂度产生了较大的影响。在两种条件下议论文的复杂度都是最高，叙述文其次，解说文最低。长度对复杂度也有影响。长度的增加能导致复杂度的增加。长度对复杂度的影响具有选择性。文体的难度越低，其复杂度受长度的影响越大。文体和长度对准确度有一定的影响，但其影响都很小。准确度并不总是表现出和复杂度反向的对应关系。长度的增加也并不一定导致准确度的降低。
本文最后部分对这些结果进行了解释，并对本研究对外语教学和研究以及外语测试的启示意义进行了讨论。
EFL writing is an essential part in language tests in China. It is regarded as a useful tool to fully demonstrate one's language ability. The influence of task type and task condition on writing performance has been investigated heavily in language teaching and language testing. As for task type, the previous researches have examined different types of writing tasks classified by different criteria according to the researchers' preference. The researches on the influence of task condition mainly focus only on two conditions: playing vs. no-planning and time-constrained vs. time-unconstrained. This present study explores the influence of three discourse modes and length on Chinese students' writing performance, which is assessed by measures of complexity and accuracy.
One hundred and twenty-four English-major sophomores from four classes of a university participated in this research. Two classes are required to write about 150 words for each of the three tasks (narrative, expository, argument) within twenty minutes. The other two classes are required to write about 300 words for the same three tasks within forty minutes. Then ten students are randomly chosen from each class. These twenty students who write about 150 words form Group A and the other twenty students who write about 300 words form Group B. The complexity and the accuracy of the students' written texts are measured by C/T (Clauses per T-unit) and EFC/C (Error-Free Clauses per Clause) respectively. T-tests will be performed to analyze the relationships between the variables. The significance level is at 0.05 level.
When analyzing the difficulty of each task, Chen Huiyuan and Wu Xudong's model of written language production is adopted. This model consists of three parts: conceptualizer, formulator, and transcriber. By this model, the cognitive load of each task in this study is discussed and their corresponding influences on complexity and accuracy are also predicted.
The findings show that both discourse mode and length do have an influence on complexity. Either in the short or the long writing condition, different discourse modes display different complexity, with the argument task
being associated with the greatest complexity, the expository task the least complexity and the narrative task in between. The influence of length on complexity is that with the length increase of a written text, the complexity of the written text will also increase. This is especially evident in the less difficult discourse modes like the narrative or the expository.
As for their influence on accuracy, neither discourse mode nor length has much influence. The accuracy of each discourse mode doesn't always correspond negatively to its complexity in both conditions. With the length increase of a written text, the accuracy of the written text does not always decrease as expected, In all, accuracy remains stable either in different discourse modes or in different length conditions.
At last, some implications of this study for language teaching and testing are also given in the last chapter.
本文采用陈慧嫒和吴旭东的书面语产出模式分析了三种文体的难度，并对三种文体在两种条件下对复杂度和准确度可能产生的影响进行了预测。
一百二十四某校外语学院英语专业的学生参加了此次实验。他们的写作任务相同，但写作要求不同。两个班的学生要求每篇字数在一百五十字左右，用二十分钟完成。另两个班的学生要求三百字左右，用四十分钟完成。随后，从每个班随机抽取十名学生组成两组：长作文组和短作文组，每组各二十名学生。
实验结果表明，文体对复杂度产生了较大的影响。在两种条件下议论文的复杂度都是最高，叙述文其次，解说文最低。长度对复杂度也有影响。长度的增加能导致复杂度的增加。长度对复杂度的影响具有选择性。文体的难度越低，其复杂度受长度的影响越大。文体和长度对准确度有一定的影响，但其影响都很小。准确度并不总是表现出和复杂度反向的对应关系。长度的增加也并不一定导致准确度的降低。
本文最后部分对这些结果进行了解释，并对本研究对外语教学和研究以及外语测试的启示意义进行了讨论。
EFL writing is an essential part in language tests in China. It is regarded as a useful tool to fully demonstrate one's language ability. The influence of task type and task condition on writing performance has been investigated heavily in language teaching and language testing. As for task type, the previous researches have examined different types of writing tasks classified by different criteria according to the researchers' preference. The researches on the influence of task condition mainly focus only on two conditions: playing vs. no-planning and time-constrained vs. time-unconstrained. This present study explores the influence of three discourse modes and length on Chinese students' writing performance, which is assessed by measures of complexity and accuracy.
One hundred and twenty-four English-major sophomores from four classes of a university participated in this research. Two classes are required to write about 150 words for each of the three tasks (narrative, expository, argument) within twenty minutes. The other two classes are required to write about 300 words for the same three tasks within forty minutes. Then ten students are randomly chosen from each class. These twenty students who write about 150 words form Group A and the other twenty students who write about 300 words form Group B. The complexity and the accuracy of the students' written texts are measured by C/T (Clauses per T-unit) and EFC/C (Error-Free Clauses per Clause) respectively. T-tests will be performed to analyze the relationships between the variables. The significance level is at 0.05 level.
When analyzing the difficulty of each task, Chen Huiyuan and Wu Xudong's model of written language production is adopted. This model consists of three parts: conceptualizer, formulator, and transcriber. By this model, the cognitive load of each task in this study is discussed and their corresponding influences on complexity and accuracy are also predicted.
The findings show that both discourse mode and length do have an influence on complexity. Either in the short or the long writing condition, different discourse modes display different complexity, with the argument task
being associated with the greatest complexity, the expository task the least complexity and the narrative task in between. The influence of length on complexity is that with the length increase of a written text, the complexity of the written text will also increase. This is especially evident in the less difficult discourse modes like the narrative or the expository.
As for their influence on accuracy, neither discourse mode nor length has much influence. The accuracy of each discourse mode doesn't always correspond negatively to its complexity in both conditions. With the length increase of a written text, the accuracy of the written text does not always decrease as expected, In all, accuracy remains stable either in different discourse modes or in different length conditions.
At last, some implications of this study for language teaching and testing are also given in the last chapter.
引文
Bereiter, C. & M. Scardamalia. 1987. The Psychology of Written Composition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Crookes, G. 1989. Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language acquisition 11: 367-383.
Crookes, G. 1990. The utterance, and the other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics 11: 183-199.
Ellis, R. 1987. Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9:12-20.
Engilhard, G., Gordon, B. & S. Gabrielson. 1991. The influence of discourse mode, experiential demand, and gender on the quality of student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 26/3: 315-336.
Foster, P. & P. Skehan. 1996. The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 299-323.
Fulcher, G. & R. M. Reiter. 2003. Task difficulty in speaking tests. Language Testing 20/3:321-344.
Grabe, W. & R. B. Kaplan. 1996. Theory and Practice of Writing: An Applied Linguitics Perspecitve. New York: Longman.
Kegley, P. H. 1986. The effect of discourse mode on student writing performance: Implications for policy. Educational Evaluation and policy Analysis 8/2:147-154.
Peyton, J. K., Staton, J. Richardson, G, & W. Wolfram. 1990. The influence of writing task on ESL students' written production. Research in the Teaching of English 24/2: 143-171.
Powers, D. E. & M. E. Fowles. 1996. Effects of applying different time limits to a proposed GRE writing test. Journal of Educational Measurement 33/4: 433-452.
Prater, D. L. & W. Padia. 1983. Effects of modes of discourse on writing performance in grades four and six. Research in the Teaching of English 17: 127-134.
Prater, D. L. 1985. The effects of modes of discourse, sex of writer, and attitude toward task on writing performance in grade 10. Educational and Psychological Research 5: 241-259.
Robinson, P. 1995. Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning 45: 99-140.
Robinson, P. 2001. Task complicity, task difficulty, and task production: exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22:27-57.
Schachter, J. 1974. An error in error analysis. Language Learning 24: 205-214.
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11:17-46.
Silva, T. 1993. Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly 27: 657-677.
Skehan, P. 1996. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics 17/1: 38-63.
Smagorinsky, P. 1991. The writer's knowledge and the writing process: A protocol analysis. Research in the Teaching of English 25/3: 339-365.
Towell, R., Hawkins, R. & N. Bazergui. 1996. The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics 17: 84-119.
VanPatten, B. 1990. Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12: 287-301.
Wolfe-Quintero, K. et al. (eds.). 1998. Second Language Development in Writing: Measures of Accuracy, Complexity and Fluency. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
Woods, A., Fletcher, P. & A. Hughes. 1986. Statistics in Language Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
陈慧媛，吴旭东(1998)，任务难度与任务条件对EFL写作的影响，《现代外语》，第二期，27-39。
桂诗春，宁春岩(1998)，《语言学方法论》，外语教学与研究出版社，北京。
何迎珲，闵华玲(1989)，《数理统计》，高等教育出版社，上海。
何莲珍，王敏(2003)，任务复杂度，任务难度及语言水平对中国学生语言表达准确度的影响，《现代外语》，第二期，171-179。
刘先勇，袁长迎等编著(2002)，《SPSS 10.0统计分析软件与应用》，国防工业出版社。
马广惠(2002)，中美大学生英语作文语言特征的对比分析，《外语教学与研究》，第五期，345-349。
邵继荣(2003)，任务类型和任务条件对EFL写作的影响，《国外外语教学》，第二期，28-34。
王育祥(1996)，限时作文和不限时作文在检验写作能力中的有效性研究，《外语界》，第一期，23-26页。
吴旭东(1997)，外语学习任务难易度确定原则，《现代外语》，第三期，33-43页。
修旭东(2002)，英语写作测试中“理论效度”的理论依据模式，《外语与教学》，第十一期，57-60页。
Crookes, G. 1989. Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language acquisition 11: 367-383.
Crookes, G. 1990. The utterance, and the other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics 11: 183-199.
Ellis, R. 1987. Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9:12-20.
Engilhard, G., Gordon, B. & S. Gabrielson. 1991. The influence of discourse mode, experiential demand, and gender on the quality of student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 26/3: 315-336.
Foster, P. & P. Skehan. 1996. The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18: 299-323.
Fulcher, G. & R. M. Reiter. 2003. Task difficulty in speaking tests. Language Testing 20/3:321-344.
Grabe, W. & R. B. Kaplan. 1996. Theory and Practice of Writing: An Applied Linguitics Perspecitve. New York: Longman.
Kegley, P. H. 1986. The effect of discourse mode on student writing performance: Implications for policy. Educational Evaluation and policy Analysis 8/2:147-154.
Peyton, J. K., Staton, J. Richardson, G, & W. Wolfram. 1990. The influence of writing task on ESL students' written production. Research in the Teaching of English 24/2: 143-171.
Powers, D. E. & M. E. Fowles. 1996. Effects of applying different time limits to a proposed GRE writing test. Journal of Educational Measurement 33/4: 433-452.
Prater, D. L. & W. Padia. 1983. Effects of modes of discourse on writing performance in grades four and six. Research in the Teaching of English 17: 127-134.
Prater, D. L. 1985. The effects of modes of discourse, sex of writer, and attitude toward task on writing performance in grade 10. Educational and Psychological Research 5: 241-259.
Robinson, P. 1995. Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning 45: 99-140.
Robinson, P. 2001. Task complicity, task difficulty, and task production: exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22:27-57.
Schachter, J. 1974. An error in error analysis. Language Learning 24: 205-214.
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11:17-46.
Silva, T. 1993. Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly 27: 657-677.
Skehan, P. 1996. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics 17/1: 38-63.
Smagorinsky, P. 1991. The writer's knowledge and the writing process: A protocol analysis. Research in the Teaching of English 25/3: 339-365.
Towell, R., Hawkins, R. & N. Bazergui. 1996. The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics 17: 84-119.
VanPatten, B. 1990. Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12: 287-301.
Wolfe-Quintero, K. et al. (eds.). 1998. Second Language Development in Writing: Measures of Accuracy, Complexity and Fluency. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
Woods, A., Fletcher, P. & A. Hughes. 1986. Statistics in Language Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
陈慧媛，吴旭东(1998)，任务难度与任务条件对EFL写作的影响，《现代外语》，第二期，27-39。
桂诗春，宁春岩(1998)，《语言学方法论》，外语教学与研究出版社，北京。
何迎珲，闵华玲(1989)，《数理统计》，高等教育出版社，上海。
何莲珍，王敏(2003)，任务复杂度，任务难度及语言水平对中国学生语言表达准确度的影响，《现代外语》，第二期，171-179。
刘先勇，袁长迎等编著(2002)，《SPSS 10.0统计分析软件与应用》，国防工业出版社。
马广惠(2002)，中美大学生英语作文语言特征的对比分析，《外语教学与研究》，第五期，345-349。
邵继荣(2003)，任务类型和任务条件对EFL写作的影响，《国外外语教学》，第二期，28-34。
王育祥(1996)，限时作文和不限时作文在检验写作能力中的有效性研究，《外语界》，第一期，23-26页。
吴旭东(1997)，外语学习任务难易度确定原则，《现代外语》，第三期，33-43页。
修旭东(2002)，英语写作测试中“理论效度”的理论依据模式，《外语与教学》，第十一期，57-60页。