| As it is generally regarded as the result rather than a means of acquisition,writing is usually used either as an instrument for testing foreign language proficiency or as a language skill to be acquired,which has caused the long-time neglect of its role in foreign language learning and teaching.However,writing can indeed be used to create a more favorable environment for language development than fleeting oral output,where authentic communication occurs.Fortunately,the language learning potential of L2 writing came to be recognized by the academic community towards the end of the last century,though enquiries on this issue have virtually been theoretical in nature and empirical studies are still scarce,especially those which included individual differences in their research framework.Considering the current state of research in this field,the present study,by comparing written output with oral output,attempts to investigate the modality effects,moderated by thinking style,on the syntactic accuracy and complexity of Chinese EFL learners’ written English,with a view to testifying the language learning potential of L2 writing.To this end,a quasi-experiment with the “pretest-treatment-immediate posttest-delayed posttest” design was conducted,and think-aloud protocols and interviews were also employed.Twenty subjects were evenly divided into a“Reading+Writing” group and a “Reading+Discussion” group,each consisting of five linear thinkers and five non-linear thinkers.The research questions are as follows:1)Can output help to improve the syntactic accuracy and complexity of Chinese EFL learners’ written English?2)Which output modality,oral or written,has more advantages in improving accuracy and complexity?3)Do individual differences in thinking style moderate the effects of output on foreign language learning?The following findings were obtained.First,after 5 weeks’ treatment,the syntactic accuracy and complexity of both groups’ English improved greatly,indicating that output may contribute to language development by automatizing existing knowledge and making tacit knowledge explicit as it triggers learners’ experience in language learning and enhances their awareness of the gaps between their interlanguage system and the target language,which in turn engages them insyntactic processing.Second,the syntactic accuracy and complexity of the“Reading+Writing” group improved much more greatly than those of the“Reading+Discussion” group,suggesting that writing has advantages over oral output in facilitating language development,which may be due to the traits of writing such as slow pace,visibility,low cognitive demand and high requirement for accuracy.Slow pace of writing and visibility of the written text provide learners more opportunities to notice the gaps and holes in their knowledge and reflect on their interlanguage;low cognitive demand in the composing process induces less anxiety;high requirement for accuracy urges them to allocate more attentional resources to the processing of linguistic forms,thus refining their language expression.Third,learners’ thinking styles had an impact on the effects of output in language learning.Specifically,the syntactic accuracy and complexity of the subjects with linear thinking style improved more significantly than those of the subjects with non-linear thinking style,implying that the analytic and reasoning ability of linear thinkers may have a positive effect on their L2 development.Theoretically,these findings rectify the traditional belief that output,oral and written,is only the result of acquisition and meanwhile reveal the language learning potential of L2 writing,thereby confirming the interface between second language writing and second language acquisition.Pedagogically,the current study sheds fresh light on foreign language teaching in China by helping to create a natural setting for real-life communication in the non-target language context,through which the role of writing in L2 learning can be exploited effectively. |
PDF Full Text Request