PAGESCHOOLOFFOREIGNSTUDIESSouthChinaNormalUniversity AnActionResearchofImprovingaJuniorEnglishPre-serviceTeacher’sTeacherTalk改進初中英語實習教師課堂話語的行動研究byHeGuijing20110201139AseniorthesissubmittedtoSchoolofForeignStudies,SouthChinaNormalUniversityinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthedegreeofBachelorofArtsMARCH,2015DeclarationofAuthorshipIdeclarethatthisseniorthesisismyownoriginalwork.IhavealreadyreadtheSCNUIdeclarethatthisseniorthesisismyownoriginalwork.IhavealreadyreadtheSCNU’spolicyonplagiarism.Nopartofthisseniorthesishasbeenorisbeingconcurrentlysubmittedforanyotherqualificationatanyotheruniversity.Icertifythatthedatacollectedforthisseniorthesisisauthentic.Ifullyunderstandthatfalsificationofdatawillresultinthefailureofthethesis.Name: __________________Signature: __________________Date: __________________AnActionResearchofImprovingaJuniorEnglishPre-serviceTeacher’sTeacherTalk__________________________________________________________________________PAGEIPAGEIABSTRACTTeachertalk(TTforshort)isnotonlyatoolforteacherstoconductteachingplan,butalsoasignificantsourceforstudents’languageinput.Therefore,teachertalkplaysacrucialpartinorganizingclassroomteachingandtheprocessoflanguageacquisitionoflearners.Thetargetsformostoftheresearchesthathavebeenconductedonteachertalkareallaboutin-serviceEnglishteachers,butlittleaboutpre-serviceteachers.Itisuniversallyacknowledgedthatthepre-serviceteachersinnormaluniversitiesarenotseniorlearnersofEnglish,butalsonewteacherswholackteachingexperience.Therefore,theresearchofteachertalkonstudentteacherembodiesgreatsignificance.GuidedbytheInputHypothesis,OutputHypothesis,InteractiveHypothesis,thepresentstudyisconductedtoanalyzetheTTbasedontheauthorherselfDuringfourmonthsofactionresearch,aseriesofmethods,likequestionnaires,interviewandinterpretingtheteachertalkandsoon,areused.Thisthesishasgreatsignificancebothinimprovingtheteachertalkoftheauthorherselfandmakingpreparationforthelaterteaching.Theresultshowsthat1)Task-BasedLanguageTeachingisusefulinEnglishclassteaching,whichenabletoincitestudentstotakepartintheclassroomactivities.2)Instructionalwords,asoneofthevitalpartsofTT,playanimportantpartinconnectingtheexchangesintheteachingsteps.Byusinginstructionalwords,teachercanclearlyillustratetherulesofsometasks,sostudentscanfinishthosetaskswithoutdifficulty.3)Itisveryimportantforteacherstointeractwithstudents,butnotjusttalktothem.Therefore,itisveryessentialforteacherstotrainthewayofquestioning,andthequestionsorinstructionthatteachersgivetostudentsshouldbeclearandstraighttothepoint.4)Asacrucialpartofteachertalk,appropriateteacherfeedbackcanhelpstudentsmasterthetargetlanguage.Byusingtheappropriateteacherfeedback,teacherscanstimulatestudents’motivationonstudy.5)Theimprovementofteachertalkcanhavepositiveresultonthestudents’scores.Thepresentstudyisonlyatentativeoneandtherearestillsomelimitations.Someotherproposalsareneededtoputforwardsoastotriggermorevaluablecontributionsinthisfield．Keywords:teachertalk;actionresearch;fourprinciplesofTTbyChengXiaotangPAGEPAGEIII中文摘要教師話語不僅是教師執行教學計劃的工具，而且是學生知識輸入的重要來源，因此教師話語在教師課堂組織和學生語言習得中起著至關重要的作用。以往的教師課堂話語研究大都是針對在職英語老師的課堂話語，很少涉及高校英語教育專業實習生的課堂話語。英語教育專業的實習生是特殊的英語使用者群體，既是高級階段的英語學習者，又是新手英語教師。因此，研究英語實習教師的課堂話語具有重要意義。本人在實習期間擔任廣州市長興中學的代課老師，代課時間為四個月。本研究以本人為研究對象，以Krashen的輸入假設、Swain的輸出假設和Long的交互假設為理論依據，通過問卷調查、訪談和課堂錄音轉錄等研究方法，進行為期四個月的教師話語特征的行動研究，探討自己作為實習教師的課堂話語特征，從而改善自己的教師話語，為今后的教學做準備。本研究得出的結論是：1）任務型教學法有利于提高教師話語，同時為學生提高真實的語境和與學生更好的互動交流。2）指令語作為教師用語非常重要的部分，是教學流程中聯系師生交流的紐帶。通過教師指令語的正確使用，教師可以準確無誤的傳達活動指令。3）在使用教師話語中，教師應該多跟學生互動，而不是自己講，要給學生足夠的時間表達自己的想法或觀點。4）適當的教師反饋有利于激勵學生學習，從而提高學生興趣。5）教師話語的提高可以激發學生的學習動機，同時提高學生的學習成績。本研究從結果中得到的啟示是：該研究僅為嘗試性研究、仍存在一定的局限性，期待相關領域的學者專家的深入探討。關鍵詞：教師課堂話語；行動研究；程曉堂教師話語分析四原則TableofContentsTOC\o"1-2"\h\u3802ABSTRACT I11216中文摘要 II29340ChapterOneIntroduction 1119971.1ResearchBackground 1192291.2PurposeandSignificanceoftheResearch 1149781.3OrganizationoftheThesis 214935ChapterTwoLiteratureReview 3167622.1TeacherTalk 315622.2StudiesonTTAbroad 582732.3StudiesonTTAtHome 5304192.4Summary 6111482.5ComprehensibleInputHypothesis 7116732.6TheComprehensibleOutputHypothesis 8112582.7TheInteractiveHypothesis 8132272.8Summary 98908ChapterThreeResearchDesign 10222053.1ActionResearch 10151363.2Participants 10165803.3Procedures 1015646ChapterFourImplementationandDataAnalysis 12284594.1PuttingForwardofProblem 12140524.2ImplementationandDataAnalysis 133214ChapterFiveResultandDiscussion 20291255.1MeasuresThatAreCarriedOuttoImproveTT 2063975.2PracticeMakesPerfect 20226385.3Motivation 217239ChapterSixConclusion 2288676.1MajorFindings 223676.2LimitationsoftheStudyandFutureDirectionoftheTopic 2313979AppendixI 2427864AppendixII 2729454References 2932215ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 31PAGEPAGE2ChapterOneIntroduction1.1ResearchBackgroundEnglishcurriculumstandardforcompulsoryeducationshowedthat,English,astheoneofthewidelyspokenlanguagearoundtheworld,hasbeenaveryimportanttoolforinternationalconnectionandcommunicationoftechnologyandculture(Theministryofeducation,2003).Meanwhile,openingEnglishcourseinthestageofcompulsoryeducationhasagreatsignificancetothefuturedevelopmentofteenagers.AsthemaintoolforstudentstolearnEnglish,Englishclassplaysanimportantpartinstudents’Englishlearning.TheyspendmostoftimelearningEnglishinclass.Therefore,wecastagreatdemandforteachers’teaching,aswellasteachertalk,asitisthemainwayforteacherstoimparthisknowledgetostudents.InEnglishclass,Englishisnotonlythetargetlanguagethatstudentshavetolearn,butalsoasacrucialtoolinteacher’steaching,thusteachertalkinthelimitedtimeofjuniorEnglishteachingisveryimportantforlearner’sEnglishlearning.Teachercontrolswhatgoesonintheclassroomsprimarilythroughtheiruseoflanguage.Usinglanguageproperlyinteaching,forexample,beingauthentic,interactive,logicandnormativeinteachertalkcanattractandinfluencestudents,makingtheclassatmospherebecomeveryactiveandimprovethelearninginterestofstudents.Atthesametime,ifteachersusetargetlanguagetoprovidelanguageinput,theycanfostertheirstudentstheabilityofusinglanguage.Thestudyonteachertalkboomedinwesterncountriesinthe1980s,whileinChina,therelatedresearchbeganrelativelylate,whichisfromabout1998.1.2PurposeandSignificanceoftheResearchWhyshouldtheauthorconductaresearchonteachertalkofhers?Firstofall,whentheauthorhadherinternshipatChangxinmiddleschoolinGuangzhou,shefoundthatshehaddifficultyinmakingherselfunderstood.ShetriedhardtouseEnglishtoexplainforstudents,butshefoundthatstudentdidn’treallyunderstandwhatshesaid.Thissituationconfusesher,soshewantstofindoutthereasonwhystudentscan’tunderstandherandhowshecanimproveherteachertalk.Secondly,studentteachersarenewresourceswhoaregoingtoteachtheirstudents.Theyarenotexperiencedenoughinteaching.Theymayhavesometroubleintheirteachertalk,forexample,theirauthenticity,interaction,logicandnormalizationarenotgoodenoughcomparedtothosequalifiedteacher.Therefore,iftheycanimprovetheirteachertalk,theycanmakepreparationfortheircareer.Lastbutnotleast,intheresearchesaboutteachertalkthathavebeenconducted,mostoftheresearchers’targetarein-serviceteachers,onlyfewofthemfocusonpre-serviceteachers,andnoneofthepre-serviceteacherstakethemselvesasthetarget.Therefore,byconductingthisactionresearch,theauthorintendstomakeimprovementfortheresearchofteachertalk,meanwhileaddsomethingnewtofilltheresearchgap.Ifteachersareabletoteachstudentsandorganizeclasseswithaccurateandbrieflanguage，theycanbemoresuccessfulintheirteachingcareer．Teachertalkisawaytostudyhowtoimproveforeignlanguageteaching．Teacherstrainthestudentshowtocommunicatewithothersinforeignlanguages.Theycanachievethisgoalbyimprovingtheirownteachertalksoastobeunderstood.TheEnglishclassinjuniorhighschoolisthecrucialplaceforteacherstocultivatestudents’comprehensiveabilityofusingEnglish,whichsetafoundationalstageforseniorhighschoollearning.thereforeitplaysanespeciallyimportantrole．"Notonlyfortheorganizationoftheclassroombutalsofortheprocessofsecondlanguageacquisition．Itisimportantfortheorganizationandmanagementoftheclassbecauseitisthroughspeechthatteacherseithersucceedorfailtoimplementtheirteachingplans．Intermsofacquisition，teachers’speechactsareimportantbecauseitisprobablythemajorsourceofcomprehensibletargetlanguageinputthelearnerislikelytoreceive”(Nunan1991：189)．1.3OrganizationoftheThesisThepresentstudyconsistsofsixparts.Itstartswithanintroductionasthefirstchapter,whichisaboutthebackgroundknowledge,andthepurposeandthesignificanceofthestudy.Chaptertwowillfocusonliteraturereview.Keyconceptionswillbedefinedandpreviousstudiesaretobeincluded,aswellasstudiesonteachertalkandbasictheoriesliketheInputHypothesis,theOutputHypothesis,andInteractionHypothesis.Chapterthreeisresearchdesign,whichincludestheresearchquestions,researchsubjects,methodsofthestudy,aswellasresearchprocedures.DiscussionandanalysisofthedataindetailwillcomeinChapterfour，whichisthemainpartofthewholestudy,wheretheauthorwillcarryouttheactionresearchandanalyzetheresult.Chapterfiveisdiscussion,analyzingthefactorsthatinfluencedtheimprovementofTT.Thethesiswillcometoanendinthelastchapter,whereconclusionsareobtainedwhileillustratingthelimitationsofthepresentstudyandprovidingsuggestionsforfutureresearch.ChapterTwoLiteratureReview2.1TeacherTalk2.1.1DefinitionofTeacherTalkTeachertalkisalanguagetypicallyusedbyforeignlanguageteachersintheprocessofteaching.InLongmanDictionaryofLanguageTeachingandAppliedLinguistics,teachertalkisdefinedas:Thevarietyoflanguageissometimesusedbyteacherswhentheyareintheprocessofteaching.Intryingtocommunicatewithlearners,teachersoftensimplifytheirspeech,givingitmanyofthecharacteristicsofforeignertalkandothersimplifiedstylesofspeechaddressedtolanguagelearners(Richards,2002:471).All-WrightandBaileyclaimedthat“talkisoneofthemajorwaysthatteachersconveyinformationtolearners,anditisalsooneoftheprimarymeansofcontrollinglearners’behavior.”(1991:139)AsforCook(2000),hethinksthatitreferstotheamountofspeechsuppliedbyteachersratherthanstudents.CookdemonstratedthatEnglishteacher’steachertalkinvolvestwodifferentaspects:one,asthetooloforganizingandcontrollingclassteaching;two,asthetargetlanguageofEnglishclassteaching,andthusbedistinguishedfromotherteachertalkofothersubject.Thedefinitionsofteachertalkaredifferentfromonetoanother,butthereissomethingincommon:theyareallthediscoursespokenbytheteachersinclass.Fromthediscussionabove,theauthorcomestotheconclusionthatteachertalkisaspecialcommunicativeactivityandakindofcommunication-basedorinteraction-basedtalkwhichhasitsownspecificgenreandfeatures.2.1.2FeatureofTeacherTalkWalsh(2006)consideredTThasfourfeatures:(1)theparadigmofcontrollingcommunication(thecontentandmeansandsoforthofthecommunicationintheclass);(2)instruction(teachersuseallkindsofwayslikequestioningtoinstructstudentstospeak);(3)correction(teacherscorrectthespeechofstudents);(4)adjustment(teachersadjustthewaysofspeakingtostudentsintermsofhisownsituation).ZhangZhengjuandLiShufen(1996)classifiedTTinanotherpointofview.TheythoughtthatthefeaturesofTTareasfollowing:(1)TThasadoublefunctionofteachinganddemonstrating;(2)Acceptabilityandcomprehensibility.Itissuggestedthatteacheradjustshisownlanguageaccordingtothelevelofstudents,soastohelpstudentsunderstandandaccept.(3)Repetitiveness.TherepetitionofTTistoarousestudents’attentiontosomeimportantpointsanddifficultpoints.(4)Teacher’scharacteristics.DifferentteachershavedifferentTTbecauseoftheircharacteristics;itdependsonteacher’sprofessionalskills,theabilityofmasteringthelanguageandtheunderstandingoftheTT.ChengXiaotang(2009)dividedTTintofouraspects:(1)authenticity(realuseoflanguage,sceneandcommunication);(2)interaction(forthepurposeofimprovingthedegreeofparticipationinclassandtheconstructionofknowledge;tohelplanguageinputofstudentsandorganizeclassactivities);(3)logicality(havelogicinpresentingandexplainlanguagepoint;coherenceandcohesionineverysectionofteaching);(4)normalization.(theEnglishteacherusedshouldbeaccurateandclear,andtobeunderstoodbystudents)Inthisthesis,theauthormainlyusesthefeatureofChengXiaotangasthebasesofherresearch.2.1.3FunctionofTTNunan(1991)statedthat“TTisquietimportantfortheorganizationofclassteachingandstudents’languageacquisition.Thatisnotjustbecausethattheteachingcontentcanonlyreachaidealteachingeffectthroughperfectorganizationofandimpartment,butbecausetheTTitselfplayamodelpartoftargetlanguage,whichisanessentialwaysforstudents’languageinput.”LuYanfen(2007)hadadiscussionaboutthefunctionofTT.Heropinionsareasfollowing:Teaching.Inforeignlanguageteaching,languageisnotonlyforthepurposeoflearning,butatoolforteaching,whilethefirstimportanttoolisimpartingknowledge.TTisthecarrierofknowledge.Demonstration.Teachers’dominantteachinglanguagewillproducearecessiveimpactonstudents.Suchsubtleinfluenceisthemainbasisforstudentstoimitate.Questioning.Ononehand,teachercanusequestioningtointeractandcommunicatewithstudents.Ontheotherhand,throughquestioning,teacherchecksstudentsunderstandingandmaintaintheirattention.Interaction.TTbuildsabridgeofinteractionandcommunicationbetweenteacherandstudent.Feedback.Teachercanmakeafeedbackfortheperformanceofstudents.Itcanbepositiveandnegative,butpositivefeedbackcanbetterimprovethebehavioroflearners.2.2StudiesonTTAbroadIthasbeennearlyhalfofthecenturysincetheAmericanstructuralistZelligHarrisbroughtuptheliterarytermDiscourseAnalysis(HuangGuowen,2006).Sincethen,amultitudeofscholarssetuptodoresearchaboutTT.In1970s,manyfamousexperts,likeSinclair&Coulthard(1975),Gaies(1979),Henzel(1979)begantomakeprofoundresearchonTT(TangYangyu&LiuShaozhong,2003).In1975,SinclairandcoultharddodeeperresearchandclassificationofTTintermsofitsinstruction,reactionandfeedback,andtheyrenewandbroughtupthethree-waysformatofI-R-F,whichengenderedgreatimpactatthattime.(YanGuidong,2013).Inaword,theclasstheyfocusonisstilltheteacher-orientedclass.Whenitcomesto1980s,thestudiesonteachertalkhaveenteredintoaboomingperiod.Withthedevelopmentofthestudyonlanguageacquisition,researchersmakeadeepandpainstakingmicro-analysisonteachertalkthroughwhichteachersandstudentscouldbettercreatelearningopportunitytogether.Clyne(1981),Freed(1980,1981),ChaudronandotherscholarshadgreatinterestonthemodificationofTT.Theyfocusedonthespeedmodificationandrhythmmodification(includingitstone,pronunciation,stressandstop)(ZhaoChangyou,2010).WhencomparedtheTTofsecondlanguageacquisitionclasswiththatofotherlanguagecontext,thespeedofTTinthesecondlanguagelearningclassroomisslower.Since1980,moreandmorescholarshavestartedtostudyteachertalkfromtheperspectiveofsemanticsandpragmatics.Somestudiespayattentiontotheexpressingeffectofteachinglanguagewhilesomelayemphasisonthebackgroundofusingteachinglanguage.TheanalysisofTTisnottoobserveeveryclassroomactionofteachers’,buttotaketheinteractionbetweenteacherandstudentasawhole,andlayemphasisonanalyzingthenatureandstructureofTT(Ellis,1990).Tosumup,afterreviewingtheresearchonTTabroad,conclusioncanbedrawnthatsince1950s,teachertalkhasgraduallybecameanewfieldwithwhichresearchersaremuchmoreconcerned,manyscholarsbegantoconductresearchonTTandthestudyonTThaveenteredintoaboomingperiodsince1980s.2.3StudiesonTTAtHomeInrecentyears,ChinesescholarshavemadesomeexperimentsontheprojectofEnglishclassroomteaching,andsomeofthemarerelatedtoTT.Yetsuchresearchhasn’tbeenpayingmuchattention,andmostoftheirworksareallabouttheintroductionandsummaryoftheresearchesabroad(LiLisheng&Gaoming,2011).Inordertochangethissituation,manyscholarshavebeentryinghardtomakesignificantattemptsandfinallygainsomeachievement(ZhouXing&ZhouYun,2002).WangYinquan(1999)madesidelightsontheannualmeetingofThethirty-thirdInternational

English

TeachersAssociation.Inhisstatement,hesaidthatTTcanengendereitherpositiveornegativeeffectonthelanguageinputoflearners.Teachersshouldnotonlypayattentiontothequantityofhistalkbutalsoshouldfocusonitsquality.InZhengjianguniversity,ZhouxingandZhouyun(2002)observedastudent-orientedEnglishclass.Theypublishedanarticle,whichthoroughlyanalyzedthecharacterofEnglishTTinuniversity.Theyfoundthatdiscussionisusefulandbeneficialforthecommunicationbetweenteacherandstudent.AccordingtoBloom’sclassificationofcognitivedevelopment,HeAnping(2003)didaninvestigationofthedemandoftheTT.Shedidacorpus-basedresearchofclassroominteractionontheteacherofsenior,juniorandprimaryschool.JiangYuhong(2004)didaresearchonthequantityofturn-talkingbetweenteacherandstudentintheEnglishclassroomteaching.Shedrawsaconclusionthatteacherhasprivilegeoftalkinginclassroom,butatthesametimestudentssharemorerightofautonomyandcontrolling.ChengXiaotangdividedTTintofouraspects:Authenticity,interaction,logicalityandnormalization,whichisbeneficialtotheorganizationofclassroomteaching,aswellaslanguageinput.Zhengyan(2014)didaresearchabouttenyears’(2003-2012)researchaboutEnglishTTathome.Shefoundthatinthelast10years,thereareabout44papersaboutTTinthe12kindsofimportantforeignlanguagejournalsathome,whichshowsthattherearenotmuchpaperabouttheresearchofEnglishTT,andourChinesescholarshaven’tpaymuchattentionaboutit.Inshort,thoughtheresearchofTTathomedevelopsmuchlaterthanabroad,westillgainsomeachievement,andnowmoreandmorescholarsbegintorealizetheimportanceofTTandmakedeeperinvestigationaboutit.2.4SummaryFromthepreviousresearches,wecanfindtheresearchaboutTThavemadesomeprogressbothathomeandabroad,thoughitdevelopedmuchlaterthanthatofwesterncountry.Moreover,fromtheresearchathome,wecanfindthatsomeimprovementisstillneeded.Firstofall,manyofourresearchesarejustaboutthecommentandsummaryofforeigncountry’sresearch.Weshouldmakeournewresearchandfindmorenovelresults.Secondly,thesubjectistoosimple.Fromthepreviousresearchathome,wecanfindthatmostofthesubjectofTTisallaboutin-serviceteachersinmiddleschoolandinuniversity,onlyfewoftheminvolveinstudentteachers.Asisknowntoall,studentteacherisaverycrucialpowerinteaching.Buttheyhavejustenteredthesocietyandbeginthecareerofteaching,sotheylackexperience.Therefore,doingresearchontheTTofstudentteacherscangivesomesuggestionsonteachingforstudentteachersandmakepreparationfortheirteachingcareer.Lastbutnotleast,fromthepreviousresearches,theauthorfindsthatnoneoftheresearchesathomeareaboutthestudentteachersthemselves.Discoveringthisresearchgap,theauthordecidestomakearesearchofTTbasedonhers,andtrytofindsomewaystoimproveherownTT.2.5ComprehensibleInputHypothesisKrashen(1981,1985)figuredoutfivehypothesisoflanguageacquisition:Languageacquisition-learninghypothesis,monitorhypothesis,thenaturalorderhypothesis,languageinputhypothesisandAffectiveFilterHypothesis.Amongthem,languageinputhypothesisisthecoreforlanguageacquisition.TheInputHypothesisstatesthatlearnersprogressintheirknowledgeofthelanguagewhentheycomprehendlanguageinputthatisslightlymoreadvancedthantheircurrentlevel．Krashencalledthislevelofinput“i+1”．Where“i”isthelanguageinputand“+1”isthenextstageoflanguageacquisition．TheAcquisition-LearningHypothesisclaimsthatthereisastrictseparationbetweenacquisitionandlearning；Krashensawacquisitionasapurelysubconsciousprocessandlearningasaconsciousprocessandclaimedthatimprovementinlanguageabilitywasonlydependentuponacquisitionandneveronlearning．TheMonitorHypothesisstatesthatconsciouslylearnedlanguagecanonlybeusedtomonitorlanguageoutput；itcanneverbethesourceofspontaneousspeech．TheNaturalOrderHypothesisstatesthatlanguageisacquiredinaparticularorderandthatthisorderdoesnotchangebetweenlearners，andisnotaffectedbyexplicitinstructionTheAffectiveFilterHypothesisstatesthatlearners’abilitytoacquirelanguageisconstrainediftheyareexperiencingnegativeemotionssuchasfearorembarrassment．Atsuchtimestheaffectivefilterissaidtobe“up”.TheInputHypothesishasbeenappliedinlanguageteachingpervasively.Ithasbeenfoundoutthat,atthebeginningleveloflearningalanguage，classtimeisfilledwithcomprehensibleoralinput;anditissuggestedteachersmodifytheirspeechSOthatitiscomprehensible.However,demandsforspeaking(output)arelow，forstudentsarenotforcedtospeakuntilready.Moreover,attheintermediatelevel,shelteredsubject—matterteachingthatusesmodifiedacademictextsaretakentoprovidecomprehensibleinput.2.6TheComprehensibleOutputHypothesisThelackofevidencethatcomprehensibleinputproduceshigherqualitylearneroutputhasledtothe“OutputHypothesis”,whichdevelopedbyMerrillSwain(1985).TheComprehensibleOutput(CO)Hypothesisstatesthatlearningtakesplacewhenencounteringagapinthesecondlanguageacquisition．Learnersarestretchedintheirproductioninordertomakethemselvesunderstoodandpushlearnerstoproducecomprehensibleaswellasgrammaticallyaccurateoutput.Swain(1995)definedthreefunctionsforcomprehensiveoutput:1.Noticingfunction：Learnersencountergapsbetweenwhattheywanttosayandwhattheyareabletosaysotheynoticewhattheydonotknoworonlyknowpartiallyinthislanguage．2.Hypothesis—testingfunction：Whenlearnerssaysomethingthereisalwaysahypothesisunderlyinge.g.aboutgrammar．Byutteringsomething，thelearnerstestthishypothesisandreceivefeedbackfromaninterlocutor．Thisfeedbackenablesthem，ifnecessary，toreprocesstheirhypothesis.3.Meta—linguisticfunction：Learnersreflectaboutthelanguagetheylearnandherebytheoutputenablesthemtocontrolandinternalizelinguisticknowledge．2.7TheInteractiveHypothesisTheInteractiveHypothesisproposedbyMichealLongisatheoryofsecond-languageacquisitionwhichstatesthatthedevelopmentoflanguageproficiencyispromotedbyfacetofaceinteractionandcommunication．SimilarlytoKrashen’sInputHypothesis，theInteractiveHypothesisclaimsthatcomprehensibleinputisimportantforlanguagelearning．Inaddition，itclaimsthattheeffectivenessofcomprehensibleinputisgreatlyincreasedwhenlearnershavetonegotiateformeaning．Thisoccurswhenthereisabreakdownincommunicationwhichinterlocutorsattempttoovercome．Long(1985:378)proposedthat:interactiveinputismoreimportantthannon-interactiveinputandcomprehensibleinputshouldbeprovidedtogetherwithinteraction.BasedonLong，theimprovementofforeignlanguageacquisitionmainlyreliesoninterpersonalcommunication．Accordingtothehypothesis,theaffectionfilterislowerwhentheyapproachthecomprehensiveinputandwhichinturnassiststheminlearningthelanguageandheattachedspecificimportancetomodifiedinput.Emphasizingthetwo-waycommunicationandnegotiatingofmeaning,InteractiveHypothesisnotonlyconnectsinputwithoutput，butalsoprovidestheoriesfortask-basedteachingandemphasizestheimportanceofinteractionandnegotiationinlanguagelearning．2.8SummaryTheInputHypothesis，th