英语教学法原著选读14 二语习得监控假说 上
本篇选自克拉申《第二语言习得的原则与实践(Principles and Practice in SLA）》第二章“第二语言习得理论”A节“有关第二语言习得的五个假说”第三个假说，武太白翻译。
定期不定期翻译英语教学法原著，也希望能够得到朋友们的认可。如您觉得这样的信息有用，敬请转载到您的QQ空间、分享到您的朋友圈吧！也欢迎朋友们和你们的朋友们都来关注我的公众账号“武太白金星人”，这是对我最大的鼓励和奖赏！
------------------------
-----------------------
原文
While the acquisition-learning distinction claims that two separate processes coexist in the adult, it does not state how they are used in second language performance. The Monitor hypothesis posits that acquisition and learning are used in very specific ways. Normally, acquisition "initiates" our utterances in a second language and is responsible for our fluency. Learning has only one function, and that is as a Monitor, or editor. Learning comes into play only to make changes in the form of our utterance, after is has been "produced" by the acquired system. This can happen before we speak or write, or after (self-correction). Figure 2.1 models this process.
Fig. 2.1. Acquisition and learning in second language production.
表2.1 二语输出过程中的习得与学得
Conscious learning is available only as a "Monitor", which can alter the output of the acquired system before or after the utterance is actually spoken or written. It is the acquired system which initiates normal, fluent speech utterances.
The Monitor hypothesis implies that formal rules, or conscious learning, play only a limited role in second language performance. These limitations have become even clearer as research has proceeded in the last few years. This research, reviewed in Chapter IV, strongly suggests that second language performers can use conscious rules only when three conditions are met. These conditions are necessary and not sufficient, that is, a performer may not fully utilize his conscious grammar even when all three conditions are met. I list these conditions here, with a brief description. We will discuss them in greater detail in Chapter IV:
(i) Time. In order to think about and use conscious rules effectively, a second language performer needs to have sufficient time. For most people, normal conversation does not allow enough time to think about and use rules. The over-use of rules in conversation can lead to trouble, i.e. a hesitant style of talking and inattention to what the conversational partner is saying.
(ii) Focus on form. To use the Monitor effectively, time is not enough. The performer must also be focussed on form, or thinking about correctness (Dulay and Burt, 1978). Even when we have time, we may be so involved in what we are saying that we do not attend to how we are saying it.
(iii) Know the rule. This is a very formidable requirement. Linguistics has taught us that the structure of language is extremely complex, and they claim to have described only a fragment of the best known languages. We can be sure that our students are exposed only to a small part of the total grammar of the language, and we know that even the best students do not learn every rule they are exposed to.
The evidence for the production schema shown in Fig. 2.1 comes originally from the natural order studies. (Confirming evidence has been also produced from other sources, see, for example, Bialystok and Frohlich, 1977, 1978a, 1978b.) These studies are consistent with this generalization: we see the natural order for grammatical morphemes, that is, the child's (second language) difficulty order (similar to the order of acquisition; Krashen, 1977), when we test subjects in situations that appear to be "Monitor-free", where they are focused on communication and not form. When we give our adult subjects tests that meet the three conditions, i.e. a pencil and paper "grammar"-type test, we see "unnatural" orders, orders unlike the child L2 order of acquisition or difficulty order. The interpretation of this result is that the natural order reflects the operation of the acquired system alone, without the intrusion of the conscious grammar, since adult second language acquisition is posited to be similar to child (second) language acquisition. When we put people in situations where the three conditions are met, when they have time, are focused on form, and know the rule, the error pattern changes, reflecting the contribution of the conscious grammar.
-----------------------
译文
习得与学得之别指出在成人的语言学习过程中有两个过程分别存在，但这一假说并未说明在第二语言运用中二者如何使用。监控假说提出，习得和学得的使用各有其道。通常，是习得“生成”了我们的二语言语，并决定着我们语言的流利程度。学得只有一种功能，即作为“监控”存在，或者说是“编辑”。学得只有在对我们言语的形式进行修改的时候才起作用，此时言语已经由习得系统“生成”了。这在我们说话或写作之前或之后（自行修改）都有可能发生。表2.1给出了这一过程的模型。
有意识的学得仅作为“监控”可用，能够在言语实际说出或写出前对其进行修改。是习得系统生成了正常的、流畅的言语。
监控假说意味着形式规则，或有意识的学习，在二语运用中仅起到有限的作用。随着研究在过去几年中不断进展，这些限制也变得越来越清晰。此类研究将在第四章中进行评述。研究强烈显示，二语运用者仅在三种条件都满足时才能运用有意识学得的规则。这些条件必要但不充分，即运用者不一定能完全运用其有意识学得的语法知识，即便三个条件都具备。以下列出这三个条件，并进行简单描述。我们在第四章中再进行详细探讨：
（i）时间。要思考并有效运用有意识学得的规则，二语运用者需要有充足的时间。对绝大部分人来说，正常的对话中没有足够的时间来思考、运用规则。在对话中过度使用规则会导致问题，比如说起话来吞吞吐吐，对谈话对方的言语心不在焉等。
（ii）对语言形式的专注。要有效地使用“监控”，有时间还不够。运用者必须对语言形式专注，或者说，要想着语言对不对（杜雷和波特，1978）。即便我们有时间，也可能因为对所说的东西极投入而对说话的方式不加注意。
（iii）知道规则。这一规则非常令人生畏。语言学告诉我们，语言的结构是极其复杂的，即便是对于研究最透的语言，语言学本身也只描述了其一小碎片。我们可以确信的是，学生所接触到的仅仅是语言所有语法的一小部分，而即便是最好的学生，也未必能把接触到的每一条规则都学会。
表2.1所示语言输出图解，原本来自于自然顺序研究。（其他渠道也已拿出确证的证据，如可参见比亚里斯托克和弗洛赫利奇1977，1978上，1978下。）这些研究与如下总结一致：在看来“无监控”的情形——他们关注的是交流而非语言形式——下对受试者进行测试时，我们就能看到语法词素的自然顺序，即儿童的（二语）困难等级（与习得顺序类似；克拉申，1977）。当我们对成人受试者进行满足三个条件的测试时，即进行的是纸笔“语法”型测试，我们看到的是“非自然”顺序，与儿童二语习得顺序或困难等级不相类似。对这一结果的解释是，自然顺序反映的是习得系统的单独作用，不受有意识学得语法的侵袭，因为成人二语习得也被设定与儿童（第二）语言习得过程类似。当我们把人们置于上述三个条件都满足的情景之下时，当他们有时间、关注的是形式，也知道规则时，错误的类型就改变了，也就反映出了有意识学得语法的影响。