课堂环境下基于任务支持的语篇听力理解研究
|
摘要
研究表明任务给听者带来的认知负荷可以通过任务实施方式的不同而改变。在听力课堂上，教师都会出于直觉地采用各种各样的支持形式以减轻学生的任务需求和认知负荷，但在课堂环境下，对任务支持形式是如何加强学生的听力理解的，效果如何，哪种（或哪些）支持形式是最有效的，它们的互动效应如何等等这些问题的研究并不多。
鉴于此，本文首先对任务进行了初步定义，进而将“任务支持”和“基于任务”中“任务”的作用区别开来。然后以“输入假说”、“注意假说”和Schmidt的“信息加工模式中的注意类型”等为基础，建立了课堂环境下基于任务支持的外语听力理解的描述模式。在这个理论框架下，本研究以任务支持形式为出发点，以学生的听力水平和任务的难度水平为调节变量，着重探究了三类任务支持形式（重复、预览问题、预览选项）对语篇听力理解的综合影响以及它们的相互作用。本研究具体围绕以下问题：
1.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对语篇听力理解的影响如何？
2.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对听力水平不同的学习者的语篇听力理解的影响如何？
3.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对难度水平不同的任务的影响如何？
4.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览的互动影响如何？所有这些问题的回答都需要实证研究数据的支持。
本研究的受试对象为河南科技大学的15个自然教学班（根据期末考试的听力测试成绩从76个教学班选出），他们被随机分成3个实验组，每个组有5个教学班组成。具体地讲，第一组既无问题预览也无选项预览，第二组仅预览问题，第三组既预览问题又预览选项，而每组内的5个班分别接受不同的输入频次（一次、二次、三次、四次、五次）。测试结束后，每个学生都要完成一个问卷调查，课下，对每个班选出的学生进行访谈，主要了解他们对不同的任务支持形式的感知和影响他们听力理解的因素。
对实验的结果采用定量与定性分析相结合的方法。根据分析结果，研究发现不同的任务支持形式不仅对不同水平的学习者和不同难度水平的任务产生不同的影响，而且不同的任务支持形式也影响学习者的听力理解加工模式。
首先，研究结果支持了这个观点：频次是语言学习的重要因素，但不是决定因素。
在没有其它任务支持形式的情况下，输入频次在听力理解过程中确实有积极作用；但并不是以直线发展的，在重复的过程中，有停滞，甚至后退。总之，并不是重复次数越多越好。
输入频次效应受学生听力水平和任务难度的影响。重复仅对中等水平的学习者产生了显著影响，对高水平和低水平学生的影响不明显。并且重复对中等任务难度的语篇有积极作用。
听力理解是一个复杂的过程，定量分析研究结果未发现最佳的听力理解输入频次。但结合定量与定性分析的结果发现，在课堂环境下，听力语篇的重复次数最多不宜超过4次。
第二，问题预览对难度水平不同的任务和听力水平不同的学生都产生了积极作用。它能有效地降低任务难度，减少学习者的认知负荷，提高听力效率。但在仅有问题预览的条件下，未发现明显的输入频次效应。
具体地讲，问题预览对较高水平的学习者（包括高水平和中等水平）的积极作用更显著；在预览问题的支持下，重复两次，学习者的听力理解就达到了最好表现。
第三，选项预览的作用与输入频次密切相关。在第一次和第二次输入时，选项预览对学习者的语篇听力理解没有影响，甚至起干扰作用，对低水平学生的干扰作用更明显；在第三次或第四次重复时，预览选项的积极作用才得以显现。且在可以预览选项的条件下，输入频次对所有水平的学习者都产生了效应。
另外，本研究也证明，在没有输入频次支持的情况下，仅预览问题与既预览问题又预览选项的效果几乎没有差异。这一研究结果支持和补充了Yanagawa和Green (2008)的研究结果。
本研究结果的意义主要表现在理论、方法和实践等三个方面。
在理论方面，本研究揭示了输入频次影响外语学习者听力理解发展的规律性和复杂性，这对我国二语习得领域有关频次作用的研究具有重要意义。同时，本研究建立的课堂环境下外语听力理解的描述性模式，对基于课堂的听力理解研究具有一定的指导意义。
在方法方面，在完全自然的课堂环境下，大样本的定量、定性实验设计在同类研究中是少有的，对今后关于听力理解的研究具有积极的借鉴意义。
在实践方面，本研究使人们认识到外语听力是需要教的。也就是说，教师在听力课上是需要有所为的。即教师应设计难度水平适中的任务，对不同水平的学生提供适当的任务支持形式；同时，希望本研究的结果对大学英语四、六级考试中听力理解测试的问题类型设计有一定指导意义。
本研究在设计上仍存在缺陷，主要表现在：受试对象为自然教学班，在自然的教学过程中难免会出现其它的影响因素；目前对听力水平的划分仍没有统一标准，本研究对学习者听力水平的划分还不尽科学，尤其是对中等水平学习者的划分。另外，研究中，15个班被认为听力水平相当，依据的主要是他们的整体听力水平，但班内难免存在较大的个体差异，因此，以班为单位得到的组内、组间的对比分析结果尚需进一步验证。
The present study mainly examined the effects of three task-supported forms (repetitionof input, question preview and answer option preview) on listening comprehension of thestudents at different listening proficiency levels and on the tasks with different difficultylevels and their interaction effects. Specifically, the present study was conducted aroundthe following questions: In the classroom setting
1. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on text listening comprehension?
2. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on text listening comprehension ofthe students at different listening proficiency levels?
3. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on the tasks with different difficultylevels?
4. What are the interaction effects of the three task-supported forms?
All the above questions will be difficult to be answered without empirical evidence.
The study involved15natural classes, which were selected from76classes; thestudents were903non-English majors at Henan University of Science and Technology.
The fifteen classes were allocated to three groups at random. The groups wererandomly assigned to different treatments. The classes in each group were assigned todifferent input frequency according to the timing of their class in which the experimentwas conducted. Immediately after the listening tasks, all the participants completed thefeedback of questionnaire as required. After class interviews were conducted individuallyaccording to the availability of each individual.
According to the analysis of results, the major findings are as follows:
First, input frequency does not always lead to listening comprehension performanceimprovement. After several repetitions, the effects of input frequency stop functioning andeven lead to decline in listening performance. In a word, more does not always lead to thebetter.
And input frequency produces more salient effects just for middle level students,whereas high level and low level learners benefit less from input frequency.
The optimal point in listening comprehension has not been found yet. On the basis of the analysis results, in view of the influence of affective factors, it is considered thatrepetition times of listening texts had better not exceed four times.
Second, question preview plays a facilitative role in listening comprehension task forall the students. But more proficient students benefit more. Under the conditions of onlypreviewing questions, the effects of input frequency are not found.
Third, answer option preview plays different roles with different input frequency. Atone and two exposures, answer option preview plays no positive role, even interferes withlistening comprehension, only when the listening texts are repeated three or four timesdoes answer option preview begin to be helpful to listening comprehension performance.And under the conditions of previewing both questions and answer options, all the studentsneed the support of repetition.
There is no significant difference between previewing both questions and answeroptions and only previewing stem questions without additional support of input frequency.
It is clear that this study suffers a few limitations in the research design. They aremainly in relation to the methodological issues.
First, the15experimental classes are intact natural classes that extraneous variablesmay have influenced the results.
Second, we need to be cautious in drawing conclusions about the influence of thestudents’ level of listening proficiency, because we made an essentially arbitrary divisionbetween three listening proficiency levels at the final listening exam score.
Third, analysis of the study took a class as a unit, but the comparisons of classeswithin a group or between groups in this study may not be well-grounded. Because thefifteen classes are regarded as equal only their overall listening comprehensionperformance is concerned.
鉴于此，本文首先对任务进行了初步定义，进而将“任务支持”和“基于任务”中“任务”的作用区别开来。然后以“输入假说”、“注意假说”和Schmidt的“信息加工模式中的注意类型”等为基础，建立了课堂环境下基于任务支持的外语听力理解的描述模式。在这个理论框架下，本研究以任务支持形式为出发点，以学生的听力水平和任务的难度水平为调节变量，着重探究了三类任务支持形式（重复、预览问题、预览选项）对语篇听力理解的综合影响以及它们的相互作用。本研究具体围绕以下问题：
1.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对语篇听力理解的影响如何？
2.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对听力水平不同的学习者的语篇听力理解的影响如何？
3.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览对难度水平不同的任务的影响如何？
4.课堂环境下，输入频次、问题预览和选项预览的互动影响如何？所有这些问题的回答都需要实证研究数据的支持。
本研究的受试对象为河南科技大学的15个自然教学班（根据期末考试的听力测试成绩从76个教学班选出），他们被随机分成3个实验组，每个组有5个教学班组成。具体地讲，第一组既无问题预览也无选项预览，第二组仅预览问题，第三组既预览问题又预览选项，而每组内的5个班分别接受不同的输入频次（一次、二次、三次、四次、五次）。测试结束后，每个学生都要完成一个问卷调查，课下，对每个班选出的学生进行访谈，主要了解他们对不同的任务支持形式的感知和影响他们听力理解的因素。
对实验的结果采用定量与定性分析相结合的方法。根据分析结果，研究发现不同的任务支持形式不仅对不同水平的学习者和不同难度水平的任务产生不同的影响，而且不同的任务支持形式也影响学习者的听力理解加工模式。
首先，研究结果支持了这个观点：频次是语言学习的重要因素，但不是决定因素。
在没有其它任务支持形式的情况下，输入频次在听力理解过程中确实有积极作用；但并不是以直线发展的，在重复的过程中，有停滞，甚至后退。总之，并不是重复次数越多越好。
输入频次效应受学生听力水平和任务难度的影响。重复仅对中等水平的学习者产生了显著影响，对高水平和低水平学生的影响不明显。并且重复对中等任务难度的语篇有积极作用。
听力理解是一个复杂的过程，定量分析研究结果未发现最佳的听力理解输入频次。但结合定量与定性分析的结果发现，在课堂环境下，听力语篇的重复次数最多不宜超过4次。
第二，问题预览对难度水平不同的任务和听力水平不同的学生都产生了积极作用。它能有效地降低任务难度，减少学习者的认知负荷，提高听力效率。但在仅有问题预览的条件下，未发现明显的输入频次效应。
具体地讲，问题预览对较高水平的学习者（包括高水平和中等水平）的积极作用更显著；在预览问题的支持下，重复两次，学习者的听力理解就达到了最好表现。
第三，选项预览的作用与输入频次密切相关。在第一次和第二次输入时，选项预览对学习者的语篇听力理解没有影响，甚至起干扰作用，对低水平学生的干扰作用更明显；在第三次或第四次重复时，预览选项的积极作用才得以显现。且在可以预览选项的条件下，输入频次对所有水平的学习者都产生了效应。
另外，本研究也证明，在没有输入频次支持的情况下，仅预览问题与既预览问题又预览选项的效果几乎没有差异。这一研究结果支持和补充了Yanagawa和Green (2008)的研究结果。
本研究结果的意义主要表现在理论、方法和实践等三个方面。
在理论方面，本研究揭示了输入频次影响外语学习者听力理解发展的规律性和复杂性，这对我国二语习得领域有关频次作用的研究具有重要意义。同时，本研究建立的课堂环境下外语听力理解的描述性模式，对基于课堂的听力理解研究具有一定的指导意义。
在方法方面，在完全自然的课堂环境下，大样本的定量、定性实验设计在同类研究中是少有的，对今后关于听力理解的研究具有积极的借鉴意义。
在实践方面，本研究使人们认识到外语听力是需要教的。也就是说，教师在听力课上是需要有所为的。即教师应设计难度水平适中的任务，对不同水平的学生提供适当的任务支持形式；同时，希望本研究的结果对大学英语四、六级考试中听力理解测试的问题类型设计有一定指导意义。
本研究在设计上仍存在缺陷，主要表现在：受试对象为自然教学班，在自然的教学过程中难免会出现其它的影响因素；目前对听力水平的划分仍没有统一标准，本研究对学习者听力水平的划分还不尽科学，尤其是对中等水平学习者的划分。另外，研究中，15个班被认为听力水平相当，依据的主要是他们的整体听力水平，但班内难免存在较大的个体差异，因此，以班为单位得到的组内、组间的对比分析结果尚需进一步验证。
The present study mainly examined the effects of three task-supported forms (repetitionof input, question preview and answer option preview) on listening comprehension of thestudents at different listening proficiency levels and on the tasks with different difficultylevels and their interaction effects. Specifically, the present study was conducted aroundthe following questions: In the classroom setting
1. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on text listening comprehension?
2. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on text listening comprehension ofthe students at different listening proficiency levels?
3. What are the effects of three task-supported forms on the tasks with different difficultylevels?
4. What are the interaction effects of the three task-supported forms?
All the above questions will be difficult to be answered without empirical evidence.
The study involved15natural classes, which were selected from76classes; thestudents were903non-English majors at Henan University of Science and Technology.
The fifteen classes were allocated to three groups at random. The groups wererandomly assigned to different treatments. The classes in each group were assigned todifferent input frequency according to the timing of their class in which the experimentwas conducted. Immediately after the listening tasks, all the participants completed thefeedback of questionnaire as required. After class interviews were conducted individuallyaccording to the availability of each individual.
According to the analysis of results, the major findings are as follows:
First, input frequency does not always lead to listening comprehension performanceimprovement. After several repetitions, the effects of input frequency stop functioning andeven lead to decline in listening performance. In a word, more does not always lead to thebetter.
And input frequency produces more salient effects just for middle level students,whereas high level and low level learners benefit less from input frequency.
The optimal point in listening comprehension has not been found yet. On the basis of the analysis results, in view of the influence of affective factors, it is considered thatrepetition times of listening texts had better not exceed four times.
Second, question preview plays a facilitative role in listening comprehension task forall the students. But more proficient students benefit more. Under the conditions of onlypreviewing questions, the effects of input frequency are not found.
Third, answer option preview plays different roles with different input frequency. Atone and two exposures, answer option preview plays no positive role, even interferes withlistening comprehension, only when the listening texts are repeated three or four timesdoes answer option preview begin to be helpful to listening comprehension performance.And under the conditions of previewing both questions and answer options, all the studentsneed the support of repetition.
There is no significant difference between previewing both questions and answeroptions and only previewing stem questions without additional support of input frequency.
It is clear that this study suffers a few limitations in the research design. They aremainly in relation to the methodological issues.
First, the15experimental classes are intact natural classes that extraneous variablesmay have influenced the results.
Second, we need to be cautious in drawing conclusions about the influence of thestudents’ level of listening proficiency, because we made an essentially arbitrary divisionbetween three listening proficiency levels at the final listening exam score.
Third, analysis of the study took a class as a unit, but the comparisons of classeswithin a group or between groups in this study may not be well-grounded. Because thefifteen classes are regarded as equal only their overall listening comprehensionperformance is concerned.
引文
Allwright, R. L. The Importance of Interaction in Classroom Language Learning [J].Applied Linguistics,1984,(5):156-171.
Arevart, S.,&Nation, P. Fluency Improvement in a Second Language [J]. RELC Journal,1991,22(1):84-94.
Bachman, L. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing [M]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1990.
Berne, J. How does Varying Pre-listening Activities Affect Second Language ListeningComprehension?[J]. Hispania,1995,(78):316-329.
Berne, J. The Effects of Text Type, Assessment Task, and Target Language Experience onForeign Language Learners’ Performance on Listening Comprehension Tests [D].University of Illinois at Urbana,1992.
Bobrow, D. G.,&Norman, D. A. Some Principles of Memory Schemata [A]. D. G.Bobrow,&A. M. Collins (eds.) Representation and Understanding: Studies inCognitive Science [C]. New York: Academic Press,1975.
Brindley, G. P. Factors Affecting Task Difficulty [A]. D. Nunan (ed.). Guidelines for theDevelopment of Curriculum Resources [C]. Adelaide National Curriculum ResourceCentre,1987,45-56.
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shilllock, R.,&Yule, G. Teaching Talk: Strategies for Productionand Assessment [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
Brown, G., Anderson, A. H., Shadbolt, N.,&Lynch, T. Listening Comprehension. ProjectJHH/190/1[Z]. Edinburgh: Scottish Education Department,1985.
Brown, G. Listening to Spoken English [M]. London: Longman,1990.
Brown, H. D. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy [M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents,1994.
Brown, G. Speakers, Listeners, and Communication [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1995,59-60.
Bruton, A. From Tasking Purposes to Purposing Tasks [J]. EFL journal,2002,(3):280-288.
Buck, G. Testing Second Language Listening Comprehension [J]. Language Testing,1990,(8):58-69.
Buck, G. The Test of Listening Comprehension: An Introspective Study [J]. LanguageTesting,1991,(8):67-91.
Buck, G. How to Become a Good Listening Teacher [A]. D. J. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin(eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second Language Listening [C]. San Diego, CA:Dominie Press,1995,113-131.
Buck, G., Tatsuoka, K., et al. The Sub-skills of Reading: Rule-space Analysis of aMultiple-choice Test of Second Language Reading Comprehension [J]. Languagelearning,1997,47(3):423-466.
Buck, G.,&Tatsuoka, K. Application of the Rule-space Procedure to Language Testing:Examining Attributes of a Free Response Listening Test [J]. Language Testing,1998,(15):119-157.
Buck, G. Assessing Listening [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2001.
Bygate, M. Effects of Task Repetition: Appraising the Developing Language of Learners[A]. J. Willis,&D. Willis (eds.). Challenge and Change in Language Teaching [C].London: Heinemann,1996,136-146.
Byrnes, H. The Role of Listening Comprehension: A Theoretical Base [J]. ForeignLanguage Annals,1994,17(4):317-329.
Candlin, C. N. Towards Task-based Language Learning [A]. C. N. Candlin,&D. F.Murphy (eds.). Language learning tasks [C]. London: Prentice Hall,1987,5-22.
Carroll, S.,&Swain, M. Explicit and Implicit Negative Feedback: An Empirical Study ofthe Learning of Linguistic Generalizations [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1993,(15):357-386.
Carroll, D. W. Psychology of Language (3rded.)[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teachingand Research Press,2000.
Cervantes, R. Say It again, Sam: The Effect of Repetition on Dictation Scores [Z].University of Hawai’i at Manoa,1983.
Cervantes, R.,&Gainer, G. The Effects of Syntactic Simplification and Repetition onListening Comprehension [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1992,(26):767-770.
Chang, C. S. The Effect of Repeated Listening on Different Levels of ESL Learners. In140Proceedings of the1stConference on Applied English Teaching [Z]. Taoyuan,Republic of China: Ming Chuan University, Department of Applied English.1999,72-80.
Chang, Y. L., Chang, T. S.,&Kou, C. H. Listening Difficulties and Learner Strategies ofNon-native Speakers [Z]. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on EnglishTeaching and Learning in the Republic of China. Taipei, Republic of China: Crane.1993,145-172.
Chang, A. C-S.,&Read, J. The Effects of Listening Support on the Listening Performanceof EFL Learners [J]. TESOL Quarterly,2006,(40):375-397.
Chaudron, C. A Method for Examining the Input/Intake Distinction [A]. S. Gass,&C.Madden (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: NewburyHouse,1985,1-21.
Chen Changyi. Making Our Listening Comprehension Activities More Meaningful andInteresting [Z]. English Teaching Forum,1989.
Chiang, C. C.,＆Dunkel, P. The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, andListening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning [J]. TESOL, Quarterly,1992,(26):345-374.
Chiang, C. S. Effects of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge and Listening Proficiencyon the Lecture Listening Comprehension of Chinese EFL Students [D]. PennsylvaniaState University,1990.
Coakley, C.,&Wolvin, A. Listening, Reading and Writing: Analysis and Application [Z].Middlebury, VT: NE Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Language,1986.
Cook, V. Repetition and Learning by Heart: An Aspect of Intimate Discourse, and ItsImplications [J]. ELT Journal,1994,48(2):133-141.
Corder, S. P. The Significance of Learners’ Errors [J]. IRAL,1967(5):161-170.
Coughlan, P.,&Duff, P. Same Task, Different Activities: Analysis an SLA Task from anActivity Theory Perspective [A]. J. Lantolf,&G. Appel (eds.). VygotskyanApproaches to Second Language Research [C]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex,1994,173-194.
Dahl, O. The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity [Z]. Studies in LanguageCompanion Series,71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2004.
Denzin, N. K.,&Lincoln, Y. S. Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded.)[M]. ThousandOaks: Sage Publications,2005.
Ding Yanren. Second Language Acquisition for English Majors [M]. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press,2004.
Doughty, C.,&Williams, J. Issues and Terminology [A]. C. Doughty,&J. Williams (eds.).Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition [C]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998,1-11.
Dunkel, P. Listening in the Native and Second/Foreign Language: Toward an Integration ofResearch and Practice [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1991,25(3):431-457.
Dunkel, P. The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge and Listening Proficiencyon EFL Lecture Learning [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1992,(26):345-374.
Ellis, R. The Roles of Practice in Classroom Language Learning [J]. AILA Review,1988,(5):20-39.
Ellis, R. Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Learning in the Classroom [M]. Oxford:Basil Blackwell Ltd,1991.
Ellis, R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1994.
Ellis, R. Non-reciprocal Tasks, Comprehension and Second Language Acquisition [A]. M.Skehan, P. Skehan,&M. Swain (eds.). Researching Pedagogic Tasks: SecondLanguage Learning, Teaching and Testing [C]. Harlow: Pearson Education,2001,49-74.
Ellis, R. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching [M]. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress,2003.
Ellis, N. C. Emergentism, Connectionism and Second Language Learning [J]. LanguageLearning,1998,(48):631-664.
Ellis, N. C. Frequency Effects in Language Processing: A Review with Implications forTheories of Implicit and Explicit Language Acquisition [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,2002,(24):143-188.
Eubank, L.,&Gregg, K. R. News Flash-Hume Still Dead [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2002,(24):237-247.
Faerch, C.,&Kasper, G. The Role of Comprehension in Second Language Learning [J].Applied Linguistics,1986,(7):165-178.142
Freedle, R.,&Fellbaum, C. An Exploratory Study of the Relative Difficulty of TOEFL’sListening Comprehension Items [A]. R. Freedle.,&R. Duran (eds.). Cognitive andLinguistic Analysis of Test Performance [C]. Norwood, NJ: Albex,1987,162-92.
Freedle, R.,&Kostin, I. The Prediction of TOEFL Listening Comprehension ItemDifficulty for Minitalk Passages: Implications for Construct Validity [Z]. ResearchReports56. Educational Testing Service. Princeton, New Jersey,1996.
Flowerdew, J. Academic Listening: Research Perspectives [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1994.
Flowerdew, J.,&Miller, L. Second Language Listening: Theory and Practice [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2005.
Gabriel, A. R. Aging, Memory and comprehension [J]. Current Directions in PsychologicalScience,1999,(8):49-53.
Gass, S. Integrating Research Areas: A Framework for Second Language Studies [J].Applied linguistics,1988,(9):198-217.
Gass, S. Input, Interaction and the Second Language Learner [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,1997.
Gass, S. M.,&Maekey, A. Frequency Effects and Second Language Acquisition [J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2002,(24):249-260.
Graham, S. Listening Comprehension: the Learners’ Perspective [J]. System,2006,(34):165-182.
Gregg, K. R. Krashen’s Monitor and Occam’s Razor [J]. Applied Linguistics,1984,(5):79-100.
Harrington, M.,&Dennis, S. Input-driven Language Learning [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,2002,(24):261-268.
Hatch, E. Psycholinguistics: A Second Language Perspective [M]. Rowley, MA: NewburyHouse,1983.
Hildyard, A.,&Olson, d. R. On the Comprehension and Memory of Oral VS WrittenDiscourse [A]. D. Tannen (ed.). Spoken and Written Language [C]. Norwood, NJ:Ablex,1982.
Honeyfield, J. Responding to Task Difficulty [A]. M. Tickoo (ed.). Simplification: Theoryand Practice [C]. Singapore: Regional Language Center,1993,127-138.
Hu Min. The Effect of Question Preview on Students’ Performance in ListeningComprehension Tests [D]. Beijing Language and Culture University,2005.
Hulstijn, J. H. A Cognitive View on Interlanguage Variability [A]. M. Eisenstein (ed.). TheDynamic Interlanguage [C]. New York: Plenum Press,1989,17-32.
Hulstign, J. H. What does the Impact of Frequency Tell Us about the Language AcquisitionDevice?[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2002,(24):269-273.
Imhof, M. What Makes a Good Listener? Listening Behavior in Instructional Settings [J].International Journal of Listening,1998,(12):81-105.
Jensen, E. D.,&Vinther, T. Exact Repetition as Input Enhancement in Second LanguageAcquisition [J]. Language Learning,2003,53(3):373-428.
Jensen, C.,&Hanson, C. The Effect of Prior Knowledge on EAP Listening Performance[J]. Language Testing,1995,(12):99-119.
Johnson, K. Communicative Approaches and Communicative Processes [A]. C. J. Brumfit,&K. Johnson (eds.). The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching [C].Oxford: Oxford University Press,1979.
Kelch, K. Modified Input as an Aid to Comprehension [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1985,(7):81-90.
Kiewra, K. A.,&Mayer, R. E. Effects of Repetition on Recall and Note-taking Strategiesfor Learning from Lectures [J]. Journal of Educational Psychology,1991,83(1):120-123.
Krashen, S. The Monitor Model for Second Language Acquisition [A]. R. Gingras (ed.).Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching [C]. Arlington, VA:Center for Applied Linguistics,1979,65-125.
Krashen, S. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning [M]. Oxford:Pergamon Press,1981.
Krashen, S. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford:Pergamon Press,1982.
Krashen, S.,&Terrell, T. The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press,1983.
Krashen, S. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications [M]. London: Longman,1985.
Krashen, S. We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence for the144Input Hypothesis [J]. The Modern Language Journal,1989,73(4):440-464.
Larsen-Freeman, D.,&Long, M. An Introduction to Second Language AcquisitionResearch [M]. New York: Longman,1991.
Larsen-Freeman, D. Making Sense of Frequency [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2002,(24):275-285.
Lee, J. F.,&VanPatten, B. Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen [M]. NewYork: McGraw Hill,1995.
Liu Shumin. The Effects of Question Preview in Multiple-choice ListeningComprehension test [D]. Shanghai Jiao Tong University,2009.
Leow, R. To Simplify or Not to Simplify: A look at Intake [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1993,(15):333-355.
Leow, R. Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior [J]. Language Learning,1997,(47):467-505.
Long, M. H. Does Second Language Instruction Make a Difference? A Review of theResearch [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1983,(17):359-382.
Long, M. H. Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory [A]. S. G. C. Madden (ed.).Input in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House,1985,377-393.
Long, M. H. Focus on form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching [A]. In K. de Bot, R.B. Ginsberg,&C. Kramsch (eds.). Foreign Language Research in Cross-culturalPerspective [C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,1991,39-52.
Long, D. R. What You Don’t Know Can’t Help You: An Exploratory Study of BackgroundKnowledge and Second Language Listening Comprehension [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,1990,(12):65-80.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (朗文当代英语词典)[Z].上海:世界图书出版公司,1993.
Lund, R. J. A Comparison of Second Language Listening and Reading Comprehension [J].The Modern Language Journal,1991,(15):196-204.
Lynch, T. Seeing What They Meant: Transcribing As a Route to Noticing [J]. ELT Journal,2001,(55):124-132.
McDonough, S. H. Strategy and Skill in Learning a Foreign Language [M]. London:Edward Arnold,1995.
McLaughlin, B. Theories of Second Language Learning [M]. London: Arnold,1987.
Mclaughlin, B.“Conscious” Versus “Unconsciousness” Learning [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1990,(24):617-634.
Mendelsohn, D. Applying Learning Strategies in the Second/Foreign Language ListeningComprehension Lesson [A]. D. J. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for theTeaching of Second Language Listening [C]. San Diego, CA: Dominie Press,1995,132-150.
Morley, J. Listening Comprehension in Second/Foreign Language Instruction [A]. M.Celce-Murcia (ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (2nd)[C].Boston: Heinle and Heinle,1991,81-106.
Morley, J. Current Perspectives on Improving Aural Comprehension [OL]. Available:http://WWW. Eslmag. com/modules, php? name=News&file=article&sid=19,1999.
Nation, I. S. P. Improving Speaking Fluency [J]. System,1989,17(3):377-384.
Nissan, S., DeVincenzi, F.,&Tang, K. L. Analysis of Factors Affecting the Difficulty ofDialogue Items in TOEFL Listening Comprehension. Research Reports51[R].Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey,1996.
Nunan, D. Task-based Language Teaching [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2004.
O’Malley, J., Chamot, A.U.,&Kupper, L. Listening Comprehension Strategies in SecondLanguage Acquisition [J]. Applies Linguistics,1989,(10):418-437.
O’Malley, J.,&Chamot, A.U. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1990.
Patton, M. Q. How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation [M]. Newbury Park,California: Sage Publication Inc,1991.
Perin, D. Repetition and Informational Writing of Development Students [J]. Journal ofDevelopmental Education,2002,26(1):2-7.
Read, J. The Use of Interactive Input in EAP Listening Assessment [J]. Journal of Englishfor Academic Purposes,2002,(1):105-199.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J.,&Weber, H. A. Dictionary of Applied Linguistics [M]. Beijing:146Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Richards, J. C.,&Rodgers, T. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nded.)[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2001.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity and Second Language Narrative Discourse [J]. LanguageLearning,1995a,(45):99-140.
Robinson, P. Attention, Memory, and the “Noticing” Hypothesis [J]. Language learning,1995b,45(2):283-331.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity, Task Difficulty and Task Production: Exploring Interactionsin a Componential Framework [J]. Applied Linguistics,2001,(22):27-57.
Robinson, P. Attention and Memory during SLA [A]. C. J. Doughty,&M. H. Long (eds.).The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition [C]. Blackwell Publishing Ltd,2003,631-678.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity, Cognitive Resources, and Syllabus Design: A TriadicFramework for Examining Task Influence on SLA [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognitionand Second Language Instruction [C].北京：世界图书出版公司,2007,287-318.
Rost, M. Listening in Language Learning [M]. London: Longman,1990.
Rost, M. Introducing Listening [M]. London, Penguin,1994.
Rost, M. Teaching and Researching Listening [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teachingand Research Press,2005.
Rott, S. The Effects of Exposure Frequency on Intermediate Language Learners’ IncidentalVocabulary Acquisition and Retention through Reading [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,1999,(21):589-619.
Rubin, J. A Review of Second Language Listening Comprehension Research [J]. ModernLanguage Journal,1994,(78):199-221.
Rubin, J. The Contribution of Video to the Development of Competence in Listening [A].D. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second LanguageListening [C]. San Diego: Dominie Press,1995,151-165.
Samuda, V.,&Bygate, M. Tasks in Second Language Learning [M]. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2010.
Schachter, J. Maturation and the Issue of Universal Grammar in Second LanguageAcquisition [A]. R. William,&T. Bhatia (eds.). Handbook of Language Acquisition[C]. New York: Academic Press,1996,159-193.
Schmidt, R.,&Frota, S. Developing Basic Conversational Ability in a Second Language:A Case Study of an Adult Learner of Portuguese [A]. R. Day (ed.). Talking to Learn:Conversation in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,1986,237-322.
Schmidt, R. The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning [J]. AppliedLinguistics,1990,(11):129-158.
Schmidt, R. Consciousness and Foreign Language Learning: A Tutorial on the Role ofAttention and Awareness in Learning [A]. R. Schmidt (ed.). Attention and Awarenessin Foreign Language Learning [C]. Manoa: University of Hawaii Press,1995,1-65.
Schmidt, R. Attention [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognition and Second Language Instruction[C].北京:世界图书出版公司,2007,3-32.
Schmidt, R. Attention, Awareness,‘Noticing’ and Foreign Language Learning [Z]. The4thNational Symposium on SLA in China,2010.
Schmidt-Rinehart, B. The Effects of Topics Familiarity on the Listening Comprehension ofUniversity Students of Spanish [D]. Ohio State University,1992.
Schwandt, T. A. Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms (2nded.)[M]. Thousand Oaks:Sage Publications,2001.
Scrivener, J. Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English Language Teachers [M].Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2002.
Shawood Smith, M. Comprehension versus Acquisition: Two Ways of Processing Input [J].Applied Linguistics,1986,(7):239-274.
Sharwood Smith, M. Input Enhancement and the Logic of Input Processing [Z]. PaperPresented at the6thEUROSLA, Nijmegen, June,1995.
Sherman, J. The Effect of Question Preview in Listening Comprehension Tests [J].Language Testing,1997,(14):185-213.
Shohamy, E. Does the Testing Method Make a Difference? The Case of ReadingComprehension.[J]. Language Testing,1984,(1):147-170.
Shohamy, E.,&Inbar, O. Validation of Listening Comprehension Tests: The Effect of Textand Question Type [J]. Language Testing,1991,(8):23-40.
Skehan, P. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning [M]. Oxford: Oxford University148Press,1998a.
Skehan, P. Task-based Instruction [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,1998b,(18):268-286.
Skehan, P.,&Foster, P. Cognition and Tasks [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognition andSecond Language Instruction [C].北京：世界图书出版公司,2007,183-205.
Swain, M. Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning [A]. G. Cook,&B.Seidlhofer (eds.). Principles and Practice in Applied Linguistics [C]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1995.
Swan, M. Legislation by Hypothesis: the Case of Task-based Instruction [J]. Appliedlinguistics,2005,(3):376-401.
Sweller, J. Cognitive Load during Problem Solving: Effects on Learning [J]. CognitiveScience,1988,(12):257-285.
Teng Hueichun. Effects of Question Type and Preview on Listening Assessment [Z].American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Stamford,1999.
Thompson, I.,&Rubin, J. Can Strategy Instruction Improve Listening Comprehension?[J].Foreign Language Annals,1996,29(3):331-342.
Thompson, I. Assessment of Second/Foreign Language Listening Comprehension [A].D. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second LanguageListening [C]. San Diego: Dominie Press,1995,31-58.
Tomlin, R. S.,&Villa, V. Attention in Cognitive Science and Second LanguageAcquisition [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1994,16,183-203.
Underwood, M. Teaching Listening [M]. London: Longman,1989.
Ur, P. Teaching Listening Comprehension [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
Ur, P. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice&Theory [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,2000.
Urwin, J. Second Language Listening Task Complexity [D]. Monash University,Melbourne, Australia,1999.
Vandergrift, L. Facilitating Second Language Listening Comprehension: AcquiringSuccessful Strategies [J]. ELT Journal,1999,(53):168-176.
Van den Branden, K. Task-based Language Teaching: from Theory to Practice [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2006.
VanPatten, B. Can Learners Attend to Form and Content While Processing Input?[J].Hispania,1989,(72):409-417.
VanPatten, B. Attending to Content and Form in the Input: An Experiment inConsciousness [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1990,(12):287-301.
VanPatten, B. Evaluating the Role of Consciousness in Second Language Acquisition:Terms, Linguistic Features&Research Methodology [J]. AILA Review,1994,(11):27-36.
VanPatten, B. Cognitive Aspects of Input Processing in Second Language Acquisition [A].P. Heshemipour, I. Maldonado,&M. van Naerssen (eds.). Festschrift for Tracy DavidTerrell [C]. New York: McGraw-Hill,1995,170-183.
VanPatten, B. Input Processing and Grammar Instruction: Theory and Research [M].Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation,1996.
VanPatten, B. Thirty Years of Input [A]. B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A.Klee,&E. Tarone (eds.). Social and Cognitive Factors in Second LanguageAcquisition [C]. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press,2000,287-311.
Velmans, M. Is Human Information Processing Conscious?[J]. Behavioral and BrainScience,1991,(14):651-669.
Weir, C. J. Understanding and Developing Language Tests [M]. London: Prentice Hall,1993.
Webb, S. The Effects of Repetition on Vocabulary Knowledge [J]. Applied Linguistics,2007,(28):46-65.
Williams, J. N.,&Rott, S. Learning without Awareness [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2005(27):269-304.
Witkin, B. R. Listening Theory and Research: The State of the Art [J]. Journal of theInternational Listening Association,1990,(4):7-32.
Wu Yi’an. What do Tests of Listening Comprehension Test?—A Retrospection Study ofEFL Test-takers Performing a Multiple-choice Task [J]. Language Testing,1998,(15):21-44.
Yanagawa, K.,&Green, A. To Show or Not to Show: The Effects of Item Stems andAnswer Options on Performance on a Multiple-choice Listening Comprehension Test150[J]. System,2008,(36):7-122.
Zhang Dan. The Effects of Four Listening Supports on the Listening Performance of EFLLearners [D]. Hu Nan University,2009.
Zhu Jing. Effects of Input Frequency on L2Learners’ Reading ComprehensionImprovement and Vocabulary Learning [D]. Nanjing University,2003.
贝晓越.写作任务的练习效应和教师反馈对不同外语水平学生写作质量和流利度的影响[J].现代外语,2009，（4）：389-398.
何莲珍,王敏.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[J].现代外语,2003,(2):171-179.
吕彬彬.任务型英语听力理解测试初探——一项从认知角度探讨测试任务难度的研究[D].黑龙江大学，2009.
秦晓晴.外语教学中的定量数据分析[M].武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2003.
王初明.应用心理语言学[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,1990.
王伟.英语专业四级听力测试的问题预览研究[J].西安工程大学学报,2011,(3):440-442.
魏永红.外语任务型教学研究[D].华东师范大学，2003.
夏晓听.听力输入频次对英语专业学生在故事复述中使用过去时的影响[D].扬州大学,2007.
徐庆利，王福祥.听写任务类型和语言水平对学习者语言输出准确度和任务难度评价的影响[J].解放军外国语学院学报，2010,(4):59-63.
周爱洁.论4/3/2活动对提高英语口语流利性和准确性的影响[J].外语教学，2002,23(5):78-83.
周丹丹.口语频次效应初探[M].南京：南京大学出版社,2009.
周卫京.基于学习任务的二语词汇习得实证研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,2007.
Arevart, S.,&Nation, P. Fluency Improvement in a Second Language [J]. RELC Journal,1991,22(1):84-94.
Bachman, L. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing [M]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1990.
Berne, J. How does Varying Pre-listening Activities Affect Second Language ListeningComprehension?[J]. Hispania,1995,(78):316-329.
Berne, J. The Effects of Text Type, Assessment Task, and Target Language Experience onForeign Language Learners’ Performance on Listening Comprehension Tests [D].University of Illinois at Urbana,1992.
Bobrow, D. G.,&Norman, D. A. Some Principles of Memory Schemata [A]. D. G.Bobrow,&A. M. Collins (eds.) Representation and Understanding: Studies inCognitive Science [C]. New York: Academic Press,1975.
Brindley, G. P. Factors Affecting Task Difficulty [A]. D. Nunan (ed.). Guidelines for theDevelopment of Curriculum Resources [C]. Adelaide National Curriculum ResourceCentre,1987,45-56.
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shilllock, R.,&Yule, G. Teaching Talk: Strategies for Productionand Assessment [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
Brown, G., Anderson, A. H., Shadbolt, N.,&Lynch, T. Listening Comprehension. ProjectJHH/190/1[Z]. Edinburgh: Scottish Education Department,1985.
Brown, G. Listening to Spoken English [M]. London: Longman,1990.
Brown, H. D. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy [M].Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents,1994.
Brown, G. Speakers, Listeners, and Communication [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1995,59-60.
Bruton, A. From Tasking Purposes to Purposing Tasks [J]. EFL journal,2002,(3):280-288.
Buck, G. Testing Second Language Listening Comprehension [J]. Language Testing,1990,(8):58-69.
Buck, G. The Test of Listening Comprehension: An Introspective Study [J]. LanguageTesting,1991,(8):67-91.
Buck, G. How to Become a Good Listening Teacher [A]. D. J. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin(eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second Language Listening [C]. San Diego, CA:Dominie Press,1995,113-131.
Buck, G., Tatsuoka, K., et al. The Sub-skills of Reading: Rule-space Analysis of aMultiple-choice Test of Second Language Reading Comprehension [J]. Languagelearning,1997,47(3):423-466.
Buck, G.,&Tatsuoka, K. Application of the Rule-space Procedure to Language Testing:Examining Attributes of a Free Response Listening Test [J]. Language Testing,1998,(15):119-157.
Buck, G. Assessing Listening [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2001.
Bygate, M. Effects of Task Repetition: Appraising the Developing Language of Learners[A]. J. Willis,&D. Willis (eds.). Challenge and Change in Language Teaching [C].London: Heinemann,1996,136-146.
Byrnes, H. The Role of Listening Comprehension: A Theoretical Base [J]. ForeignLanguage Annals,1994,17(4):317-329.
Candlin, C. N. Towards Task-based Language Learning [A]. C. N. Candlin,&D. F.Murphy (eds.). Language learning tasks [C]. London: Prentice Hall,1987,5-22.
Carroll, S.,&Swain, M. Explicit and Implicit Negative Feedback: An Empirical Study ofthe Learning of Linguistic Generalizations [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1993,(15):357-386.
Carroll, D. W. Psychology of Language (3rded.)[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teachingand Research Press,2000.
Cervantes, R. Say It again, Sam: The Effect of Repetition on Dictation Scores [Z].University of Hawai’i at Manoa,1983.
Cervantes, R.,&Gainer, G. The Effects of Syntactic Simplification and Repetition onListening Comprehension [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1992,(26):767-770.
Chang, C. S. The Effect of Repeated Listening on Different Levels of ESL Learners. In140Proceedings of the1stConference on Applied English Teaching [Z]. Taoyuan,Republic of China: Ming Chuan University, Department of Applied English.1999,72-80.
Chang, Y. L., Chang, T. S.,&Kou, C. H. Listening Difficulties and Learner Strategies ofNon-native Speakers [Z]. In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on EnglishTeaching and Learning in the Republic of China. Taipei, Republic of China: Crane.1993,145-172.
Chang, A. C-S.,&Read, J. The Effects of Listening Support on the Listening Performanceof EFL Learners [J]. TESOL Quarterly,2006,(40):375-397.
Chaudron, C. A Method for Examining the Input/Intake Distinction [A]. S. Gass,&C.Madden (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: NewburyHouse,1985,1-21.
Chen Changyi. Making Our Listening Comprehension Activities More Meaningful andInteresting [Z]. English Teaching Forum,1989.
Chiang, C. C.,＆Dunkel, P. The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, andListening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning [J]. TESOL, Quarterly,1992,(26):345-374.
Chiang, C. S. Effects of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge and Listening Proficiencyon the Lecture Listening Comprehension of Chinese EFL Students [D]. PennsylvaniaState University,1990.
Coakley, C.,&Wolvin, A. Listening, Reading and Writing: Analysis and Application [Z].Middlebury, VT: NE Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Language,1986.
Cook, V. Repetition and Learning by Heart: An Aspect of Intimate Discourse, and ItsImplications [J]. ELT Journal,1994,48(2):133-141.
Corder, S. P. The Significance of Learners’ Errors [J]. IRAL,1967(5):161-170.
Coughlan, P.,&Duff, P. Same Task, Different Activities: Analysis an SLA Task from anActivity Theory Perspective [A]. J. Lantolf,&G. Appel (eds.). VygotskyanApproaches to Second Language Research [C]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex,1994,173-194.
Dahl, O. The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity [Z]. Studies in LanguageCompanion Series,71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2004.
Denzin, N. K.,&Lincoln, Y. S. Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rded.)[M]. ThousandOaks: Sage Publications,2005.
Ding Yanren. Second Language Acquisition for English Majors [M]. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press,2004.
Doughty, C.,&Williams, J. Issues and Terminology [A]. C. Doughty,&J. Williams (eds.).Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition [C]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998,1-11.
Dunkel, P. Listening in the Native and Second/Foreign Language: Toward an Integration ofResearch and Practice [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1991,25(3):431-457.
Dunkel, P. The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge and Listening Proficiencyon EFL Lecture Learning [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1992,(26):345-374.
Ellis, R. The Roles of Practice in Classroom Language Learning [J]. AILA Review,1988,(5):20-39.
Ellis, R. Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Learning in the Classroom [M]. Oxford:Basil Blackwell Ltd,1991.
Ellis, R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1994.
Ellis, R. Non-reciprocal Tasks, Comprehension and Second Language Acquisition [A]. M.Skehan, P. Skehan,&M. Swain (eds.). Researching Pedagogic Tasks: SecondLanguage Learning, Teaching and Testing [C]. Harlow: Pearson Education,2001,49-74.
Ellis, R. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching [M]. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress,2003.
Ellis, N. C. Emergentism, Connectionism and Second Language Learning [J]. LanguageLearning,1998,(48):631-664.
Ellis, N. C. Frequency Effects in Language Processing: A Review with Implications forTheories of Implicit and Explicit Language Acquisition [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,2002,(24):143-188.
Eubank, L.,&Gregg, K. R. News Flash-Hume Still Dead [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2002,(24):237-247.
Faerch, C.,&Kasper, G. The Role of Comprehension in Second Language Learning [J].Applied Linguistics,1986,(7):165-178.142
Freedle, R.,&Fellbaum, C. An Exploratory Study of the Relative Difficulty of TOEFL’sListening Comprehension Items [A]. R. Freedle.,&R. Duran (eds.). Cognitive andLinguistic Analysis of Test Performance [C]. Norwood, NJ: Albex,1987,162-92.
Freedle, R.,&Kostin, I. The Prediction of TOEFL Listening Comprehension ItemDifficulty for Minitalk Passages: Implications for Construct Validity [Z]. ResearchReports56. Educational Testing Service. Princeton, New Jersey,1996.
Flowerdew, J. Academic Listening: Research Perspectives [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,1994.
Flowerdew, J.,&Miller, L. Second Language Listening: Theory and Practice [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2005.
Gabriel, A. R. Aging, Memory and comprehension [J]. Current Directions in PsychologicalScience,1999,(8):49-53.
Gass, S. Integrating Research Areas: A Framework for Second Language Studies [J].Applied linguistics,1988,(9):198-217.
Gass, S. Input, Interaction and the Second Language Learner [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,1997.
Gass, S. M.,&Maekey, A. Frequency Effects and Second Language Acquisition [J].Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2002,(24):249-260.
Graham, S. Listening Comprehension: the Learners’ Perspective [J]. System,2006,(34):165-182.
Gregg, K. R. Krashen’s Monitor and Occam’s Razor [J]. Applied Linguistics,1984,(5):79-100.
Harrington, M.,&Dennis, S. Input-driven Language Learning [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,2002,(24):261-268.
Hatch, E. Psycholinguistics: A Second Language Perspective [M]. Rowley, MA: NewburyHouse,1983.
Hildyard, A.,&Olson, d. R. On the Comprehension and Memory of Oral VS WrittenDiscourse [A]. D. Tannen (ed.). Spoken and Written Language [C]. Norwood, NJ:Ablex,1982.
Honeyfield, J. Responding to Task Difficulty [A]. M. Tickoo (ed.). Simplification: Theoryand Practice [C]. Singapore: Regional Language Center,1993,127-138.
Hu Min. The Effect of Question Preview on Students’ Performance in ListeningComprehension Tests [D]. Beijing Language and Culture University,2005.
Hulstijn, J. H. A Cognitive View on Interlanguage Variability [A]. M. Eisenstein (ed.). TheDynamic Interlanguage [C]. New York: Plenum Press,1989,17-32.
Hulstign, J. H. What does the Impact of Frequency Tell Us about the Language AcquisitionDevice?[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,2002,(24):269-273.
Imhof, M. What Makes a Good Listener? Listening Behavior in Instructional Settings [J].International Journal of Listening,1998,(12):81-105.
Jensen, E. D.,&Vinther, T. Exact Repetition as Input Enhancement in Second LanguageAcquisition [J]. Language Learning,2003,53(3):373-428.
Jensen, C.,&Hanson, C. The Effect of Prior Knowledge on EAP Listening Performance[J]. Language Testing,1995,(12):99-119.
Johnson, K. Communicative Approaches and Communicative Processes [A]. C. J. Brumfit,&K. Johnson (eds.). The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching [C].Oxford: Oxford University Press,1979.
Kelch, K. Modified Input as an Aid to Comprehension [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1985,(7):81-90.
Kiewra, K. A.,&Mayer, R. E. Effects of Repetition on Recall and Note-taking Strategiesfor Learning from Lectures [J]. Journal of Educational Psychology,1991,83(1):120-123.
Krashen, S. The Monitor Model for Second Language Acquisition [A]. R. Gingras (ed.).Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching [C]. Arlington, VA:Center for Applied Linguistics,1979,65-125.
Krashen, S. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning [M]. Oxford:Pergamon Press,1981.
Krashen, S. Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition [M]. Oxford:Pergamon Press,1982.
Krashen, S.,&Terrell, T. The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press,1983.
Krashen, S. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications [M]. London: Longman,1985.
Krashen, S. We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence for the144Input Hypothesis [J]. The Modern Language Journal,1989,73(4):440-464.
Larsen-Freeman, D.,&Long, M. An Introduction to Second Language AcquisitionResearch [M]. New York: Longman,1991.
Larsen-Freeman, D. Making Sense of Frequency [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2002,(24):275-285.
Lee, J. F.,&VanPatten, B. Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen [M]. NewYork: McGraw Hill,1995.
Liu Shumin. The Effects of Question Preview in Multiple-choice ListeningComprehension test [D]. Shanghai Jiao Tong University,2009.
Leow, R. To Simplify or Not to Simplify: A look at Intake [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,1993,(15):333-355.
Leow, R. Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior [J]. Language Learning,1997,(47):467-505.
Long, M. H. Does Second Language Instruction Make a Difference? A Review of theResearch [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1983,(17):359-382.
Long, M. H. Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory [A]. S. G. C. Madden (ed.).Input in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House,1985,377-393.
Long, M. H. Focus on form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching [A]. In K. de Bot, R.B. Ginsberg,&C. Kramsch (eds.). Foreign Language Research in Cross-culturalPerspective [C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,1991,39-52.
Long, D. R. What You Don’t Know Can’t Help You: An Exploratory Study of BackgroundKnowledge and Second Language Listening Comprehension [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,1990,(12):65-80.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (朗文当代英语词典)[Z].上海:世界图书出版公司,1993.
Lund, R. J. A Comparison of Second Language Listening and Reading Comprehension [J].The Modern Language Journal,1991,(15):196-204.
Lynch, T. Seeing What They Meant: Transcribing As a Route to Noticing [J]. ELT Journal,2001,(55):124-132.
McDonough, S. H. Strategy and Skill in Learning a Foreign Language [M]. London:Edward Arnold,1995.
McLaughlin, B. Theories of Second Language Learning [M]. London: Arnold,1987.
Mclaughlin, B.“Conscious” Versus “Unconsciousness” Learning [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1990,(24):617-634.
Mendelsohn, D. Applying Learning Strategies in the Second/Foreign Language ListeningComprehension Lesson [A]. D. J. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for theTeaching of Second Language Listening [C]. San Diego, CA: Dominie Press,1995,132-150.
Morley, J. Listening Comprehension in Second/Foreign Language Instruction [A]. M.Celce-Murcia (ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (2nd)[C].Boston: Heinle and Heinle,1991,81-106.
Morley, J. Current Perspectives on Improving Aural Comprehension [OL]. Available:http://WWW. Eslmag. com/modules, php? name=News&file=article&sid=19,1999.
Nation, I. S. P. Improving Speaking Fluency [J]. System,1989,17(3):377-384.
Nissan, S., DeVincenzi, F.,&Tang, K. L. Analysis of Factors Affecting the Difficulty ofDialogue Items in TOEFL Listening Comprehension. Research Reports51[R].Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey,1996.
Nunan, D. Task-based Language Teaching [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2004.
O’Malley, J., Chamot, A.U.,&Kupper, L. Listening Comprehension Strategies in SecondLanguage Acquisition [J]. Applies Linguistics,1989,(10):418-437.
O’Malley, J.,&Chamot, A.U. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1990.
Patton, M. Q. How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation [M]. Newbury Park,California: Sage Publication Inc,1991.
Perin, D. Repetition and Informational Writing of Development Students [J]. Journal ofDevelopmental Education,2002,26(1):2-7.
Read, J. The Use of Interactive Input in EAP Listening Assessment [J]. Journal of Englishfor Academic Purposes,2002,(1):105-199.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J.,&Weber, H. A. Dictionary of Applied Linguistics [M]. Beijing:146Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Richards, J. C.,&Rodgers, T. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nded.)[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2001.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity and Second Language Narrative Discourse [J]. LanguageLearning,1995a,(45):99-140.
Robinson, P. Attention, Memory, and the “Noticing” Hypothesis [J]. Language learning,1995b,45(2):283-331.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity, Task Difficulty and Task Production: Exploring Interactionsin a Componential Framework [J]. Applied Linguistics,2001,(22):27-57.
Robinson, P. Attention and Memory during SLA [A]. C. J. Doughty,&M. H. Long (eds.).The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition [C]. Blackwell Publishing Ltd,2003,631-678.
Robinson, P. Task Complexity, Cognitive Resources, and Syllabus Design: A TriadicFramework for Examining Task Influence on SLA [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognitionand Second Language Instruction [C].北京：世界图书出版公司,2007,287-318.
Rost, M. Listening in Language Learning [M]. London: Longman,1990.
Rost, M. Introducing Listening [M]. London, Penguin,1994.
Rost, M. Teaching and Researching Listening [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teachingand Research Press,2005.
Rott, S. The Effects of Exposure Frequency on Intermediate Language Learners’ IncidentalVocabulary Acquisition and Retention through Reading [J]. Studies in SecondLanguage Acquisition,1999,(21):589-619.
Rubin, J. A Review of Second Language Listening Comprehension Research [J]. ModernLanguage Journal,1994,(78):199-221.
Rubin, J. The Contribution of Video to the Development of Competence in Listening [A].D. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second LanguageListening [C]. San Diego: Dominie Press,1995,151-165.
Samuda, V.,&Bygate, M. Tasks in Second Language Learning [M]. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2010.
Schachter, J. Maturation and the Issue of Universal Grammar in Second LanguageAcquisition [A]. R. William,&T. Bhatia (eds.). Handbook of Language Acquisition[C]. New York: Academic Press,1996,159-193.
Schmidt, R.,&Frota, S. Developing Basic Conversational Ability in a Second Language:A Case Study of an Adult Learner of Portuguese [A]. R. Day (ed.). Talking to Learn:Conversation in Second Language Acquisition [C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,1986,237-322.
Schmidt, R. The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning [J]. AppliedLinguistics,1990,(11):129-158.
Schmidt, R. Consciousness and Foreign Language Learning: A Tutorial on the Role ofAttention and Awareness in Learning [A]. R. Schmidt (ed.). Attention and Awarenessin Foreign Language Learning [C]. Manoa: University of Hawaii Press,1995,1-65.
Schmidt, R. Attention [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognition and Second Language Instruction[C].北京:世界图书出版公司,2007,3-32.
Schmidt, R. Attention, Awareness,‘Noticing’ and Foreign Language Learning [Z]. The4thNational Symposium on SLA in China,2010.
Schmidt-Rinehart, B. The Effects of Topics Familiarity on the Listening Comprehension ofUniversity Students of Spanish [D]. Ohio State University,1992.
Schwandt, T. A. Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms (2nded.)[M]. Thousand Oaks:Sage Publications,2001.
Scrivener, J. Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English Language Teachers [M].Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2002.
Shawood Smith, M. Comprehension versus Acquisition: Two Ways of Processing Input [J].Applied Linguistics,1986,(7):239-274.
Sharwood Smith, M. Input Enhancement and the Logic of Input Processing [Z]. PaperPresented at the6thEUROSLA, Nijmegen, June,1995.
Sherman, J. The Effect of Question Preview in Listening Comprehension Tests [J].Language Testing,1997,(14):185-213.
Shohamy, E. Does the Testing Method Make a Difference? The Case of ReadingComprehension.[J]. Language Testing,1984,(1):147-170.
Shohamy, E.,&Inbar, O. Validation of Listening Comprehension Tests: The Effect of Textand Question Type [J]. Language Testing,1991,(8):23-40.
Skehan, P. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning [M]. Oxford: Oxford University148Press,1998a.
Skehan, P. Task-based Instruction [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,1998b,(18):268-286.
Skehan, P.,&Foster, P. Cognition and Tasks [A]. P. Robinson (ed.). Cognition andSecond Language Instruction [C].北京：世界图书出版公司,2007,183-205.
Swain, M. Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning [A]. G. Cook,&B.Seidlhofer (eds.). Principles and Practice in Applied Linguistics [C]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1995.
Swan, M. Legislation by Hypothesis: the Case of Task-based Instruction [J]. Appliedlinguistics,2005,(3):376-401.
Sweller, J. Cognitive Load during Problem Solving: Effects on Learning [J]. CognitiveScience,1988,(12):257-285.
Teng Hueichun. Effects of Question Type and Preview on Listening Assessment [Z].American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Stamford,1999.
Thompson, I.,&Rubin, J. Can Strategy Instruction Improve Listening Comprehension?[J].Foreign Language Annals,1996,29(3):331-342.
Thompson, I. Assessment of Second/Foreign Language Listening Comprehension [A].D. Mendelsohn,&J. Rubin (eds.). A Guide for the Teaching of Second LanguageListening [C]. San Diego: Dominie Press,1995,31-58.
Tomlin, R. S.,&Villa, V. Attention in Cognitive Science and Second LanguageAcquisition [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1994,16,183-203.
Underwood, M. Teaching Listening [M]. London: Longman,1989.
Ur, P. Teaching Listening Comprehension [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1984.
Ur, P. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice&Theory [M]. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,2000.
Urwin, J. Second Language Listening Task Complexity [D]. Monash University,Melbourne, Australia,1999.
Vandergrift, L. Facilitating Second Language Listening Comprehension: AcquiringSuccessful Strategies [J]. ELT Journal,1999,(53):168-176.
Van den Branden, K. Task-based Language Teaching: from Theory to Practice [M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2006.
VanPatten, B. Can Learners Attend to Form and Content While Processing Input?[J].Hispania,1989,(72):409-417.
VanPatten, B. Attending to Content and Form in the Input: An Experiment inConsciousness [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,1990,(12):287-301.
VanPatten, B. Evaluating the Role of Consciousness in Second Language Acquisition:Terms, Linguistic Features&Research Methodology [J]. AILA Review,1994,(11):27-36.
VanPatten, B. Cognitive Aspects of Input Processing in Second Language Acquisition [A].P. Heshemipour, I. Maldonado,&M. van Naerssen (eds.). Festschrift for Tracy DavidTerrell [C]. New York: McGraw-Hill,1995,170-183.
VanPatten, B. Input Processing and Grammar Instruction: Theory and Research [M].Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation,1996.
VanPatten, B. Thirty Years of Input [A]. B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A.Klee,&E. Tarone (eds.). Social and Cognitive Factors in Second LanguageAcquisition [C]. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press,2000,287-311.
Velmans, M. Is Human Information Processing Conscious?[J]. Behavioral and BrainScience,1991,(14):651-669.
Weir, C. J. Understanding and Developing Language Tests [M]. London: Prentice Hall,1993.
Webb, S. The Effects of Repetition on Vocabulary Knowledge [J]. Applied Linguistics,2007,(28):46-65.
Williams, J. N.,&Rott, S. Learning without Awareness [J]. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition,2005(27):269-304.
Witkin, B. R. Listening Theory and Research: The State of the Art [J]. Journal of theInternational Listening Association,1990,(4):7-32.
Wu Yi’an. What do Tests of Listening Comprehension Test?—A Retrospection Study ofEFL Test-takers Performing a Multiple-choice Task [J]. Language Testing,1998,(15):21-44.
Yanagawa, K.,&Green, A. To Show or Not to Show: The Effects of Item Stems andAnswer Options on Performance on a Multiple-choice Listening Comprehension Test150[J]. System,2008,(36):7-122.
Zhang Dan. The Effects of Four Listening Supports on the Listening Performance of EFLLearners [D]. Hu Nan University,2009.
Zhu Jing. Effects of Input Frequency on L2Learners’ Reading ComprehensionImprovement and Vocabulary Learning [D]. Nanjing University,2003.
贝晓越.写作任务的练习效应和教师反馈对不同外语水平学生写作质量和流利度的影响[J].现代外语,2009，（4）：389-398.
何莲珍,王敏.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[J].现代外语,2003,(2):171-179.
吕彬彬.任务型英语听力理解测试初探——一项从认知角度探讨测试任务难度的研究[D].黑龙江大学，2009.
秦晓晴.外语教学中的定量数据分析[M].武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2003.
王初明.应用心理语言学[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,1990.
王伟.英语专业四级听力测试的问题预览研究[J].西安工程大学学报,2011,(3):440-442.
魏永红.外语任务型教学研究[D].华东师范大学，2003.
夏晓听.听力输入频次对英语专业学生在故事复述中使用过去时的影响[D].扬州大学,2007.
徐庆利，王福祥.听写任务类型和语言水平对学习者语言输出准确度和任务难度评价的影响[J].解放军外国语学院学报，2010,(4):59-63.
周爱洁.论4/3/2活动对提高英语口语流利性和准确性的影响[J].外语教学，2002,23(5):78-83.
周丹丹.口语频次效应初探[M].南京：南京大学出版社,2009.
周卫京.基于学习任务的二语词汇习得实证研究[M].北京：对外经济贸易大学出版社,2007.