二语习得：“普遍语法”怎么看？ - 英语教学法原著选读95（附原文语音讲解）

原创不易，公益翻译，请随手转发。感谢！

------------------------

以下英文原文取自上海外语教育出版社引进出版、授权转载的“外语教学法丛书”之九《语言学习机制》第二章“THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING（二语学习的几种理论解释）”：

原文（作者：Lightbown & Spada）

译文（翻译：Liz，审校：武太白）

Heading: THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

二语学习的几种理论解释

（本录音已上传至“喜马拉雅”电台，感兴趣的朋友搜索“武太白”，即可查找、收听。）

内生主义

INNATISIM

普遍语法

UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR

As we saw in Chapter 1, Chomsky's theory of language acquisition is based on the hypothesis that innate knowledge of the principles of Universal Grammar (UG) permits all children to acquire the language of their environment, during a critical period in their development. Chomsky has not made specific claims about the implications of his theory for second language learning. Nevertheless, some linguists working within this theory have argued that Universal Grammar offers the best perspective from which to understand second language acquisition (SLA). Others argue that, although it is a good framework for understanding first language acquisition, UG is no longer available to guide the acquisition of a second language in learners who have passed the critical period for language acquisition. In their view, this means that second language acquisition has to be explained by some other theory, perhaps one of the more recent psychological theories described below.

正如我们在第1章中看到的，乔姆斯基语言习得理论是基于一种假设提出的，即对普遍语法原则（UG）的先天理解能让所有儿童在生长发育的关键时期学会其所处环境的语言。乔姆斯基并没有具体说明他的理论对于第二语言的学习会产生怎样的影响。不过，一些研究这一理论的语言学家还是认为，普遍语法提供了理解第二语言习得（SLA）的最佳视角。其他人则认为，虽然UG是理解母语习得的良好（理论）框架，但它并不能指导已经过了语言习得关键期的学习者完成第二语言习得。在他们看来，这就意味着第二语言习得必须由某种其他理论来解释，也许是下面所描述的更近期的心理学理论之一。

Even those who believe that UG has an important explanatory role in SLA do not all agree on how UG works in second language development. Some argue that, even if second language learners begin learning the second language after the end of the critical period and even if many fail to achieve complete mastery of the target language, there is still a logical problem of (second) language acquisition: learners eventually know more about the language than they could reasonably have learned if they had to depend entirely on the input they are exposed to. They infer from this that UG must be available to second language learners as well as to first language learners. Some of the theorists who hold this view claim that the nature and availability of UG in SLA is no different from that which is hypothesized to guide first language learners. Others argue that UG may be present and available to second language learners, but that its exact nature has been altered by the acquisition of other languages.

甚至那些认为UG在SLA中起重要解释作用的人也不能就UG如何在第二语言习得中起作用达成一致。一些人认为，即使第二语言学习者在关键期结束后开始学习第二语言，或者，即使许多人没有完全掌握目标语言，（第二）语言习得的逻辑问题仍然存在：如果学习者必须完全依赖于他们所接触到的外界输入，那么他们最终对语言的掌握比他们所从情理推断上能学到的还要多得多。他们由此推断，UG可以对第二语言学习者和母语学习者发挥相同的作用。一些持有这种观点的人认为，SLA中UG的性质和可用性与指导母语学习者的假设并无差别。其他人认为UG对于第二语言的学习者而言是存在且可用的，但其确切性质已经被其他语言的习得过程改变了。

Researchers working within the UG framework also differ in their hypotheses about how formal instruction or error correction will affect the learner's knowledge of the second language. Some argue that, like young children, adult second language learners neither need nor benefit from error correction and metalinguistic information. They conclude that these things change only the superficial appearance of language performance and do not really affect the underlying systematic knowledge of the new language (Schwartz 1993 and see the discussion of Krashen's theory, on pages 38—40). Other UG linguists, especially those who think that UG has been affected by the prior acquisition of the first language, suggest that second language learners may need to be given some explicit information about what is grammatical in the second language. Otherwise, they may assume that some structures of the first language have equivalents in the second language when, in fact, they do not. (See further discussion and an example in Chapter 4.)

对于语言形式教学或纠错会如何影响学习者对第二语言的认知，同在UG框架下的研究人员也持有各种不同的假设。一些人认为，像年幼的儿童，成人第二语言学习者既不需要、也不会从纠错和元语言信息中获益。他们认为这些东西只会改变语言表现的表象，并不会真正影响新语言的基础系统知识（施瓦兹1993年提出，参见Krashen理论的讨论部分，页码38-40）。其他UG的语言学家，尤其是那些认为UG受先前母语习得影响的语言学家，则提出第二语言学习者可能需要在第二语言中哪些说法不合乎语法这方面得到明确的教导。否则，他们可能会认为母语的某些结构在第二语言中有对等结构，而事实上它们没有（参见第4章的进一步讨论和例子）。 

Researchers who study SLA from the UG perspective are usually interested in the language competence (knowledge) of advanced learners rather than in the simple language of early stage learners. They argue that, while a variety of different theories might be sufficient to explain some early language performance (use), a theory such as UG is necessary to explain Iearners' knowledge of complex syntax. They are interested in whether the competence which underlies the language performance of second language learners resembles the competence which underlies the language performance of native speakers. Thus their investigations often involve comparing the judgements of grammaticality made by the rwo groups, rather than observations of actual speaking. In doing this, they hope to gain insight into what learners actually know about the language, using a task which avoids at least some of the many things which affect the way we ordinarily use language. 

从UG角度研究SLA的研究人员通常对高级学习者的语言能力（知识）感兴趣，而非早期学习者的简单语言。他们认为，虽然各种不同的理论可能足以解释一些早期语言的表现（使用），但仍有必要用诸如UG这样的理论去阐释学习者的复杂句法知识。他们感兴趣的是第二语言学习者语言表现背后的能力能否与母语者语言表现背后的能力相提并论。因此，他们的测试往往包括对比两组的语法正误判断能力，而并非观察其实际的口语使用情况。在这个过程中，研究人员希望深入了解学习者对语言的了解情况，他们使用的任务至少避免涉及一部分对我们惯常使用语言的方式造成影响的因素（即确保我们对语言的自然使用不受影响）。