Chapter One Introduction引言
1.1 Research Background探讨背景 第二语言习得（SLA）的系统探讨始于20世纪60年代末。SLA探讨的主要目标是揭示支配学习外语/第二语言的过程中的准则。由于这个过程是心理上的，因此无法直接观察到。很多语言学家，在他们的企图理论化的语言学习，英语论文题目，英语论文，他们通过实证略论获得了一定的优势：The systematic study of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) started at the endof 1960s. The main goal of SLA research is to uncover the principles that govern theprocess of learning a foreign/second language. As this process is mental and therefore not directly observable, many linguists, in their attempts theorizing about language learning, usually make advantage of the following sources of evidence: 1) the datafrom the learner’s natural performance; 2) the learner’s self-report throughintrospection; 3) language tests designed specifically for the research purposes; and 4)the linguists’ own experience and intuition(Li,1999,p.1). It is held by many linguiststhat study of learner language could provide better illustration of what goes on in theprocess of learner language development and what are involved in the very process oflanguage production.Since the concept “Interlanguage” became the very important theory in SecondLanguage Acquisition (SLA) (Selinker, 1972), the Second Language Learners’(SLL)Interlanguage Developmental Pattern (IDP) has been the hot topic in the field.However, this problem has been satisfiedly solved neither in theory nor in practice. R.Ellis (1999:74) divided the IDP researches into two modes. One is for the purpose ofexploring the developmental order about the characteristics/structures of the TargetLanguage(TL), in other words, which grammar item or language structure is acquiredearlier or later in SLA; the other one is aimed for the developmental sequence thatSLL experienced in the process of acquiring TL. Early in 1970s, scholars began tostudy SLL acquiring sequence of the grammatical structure(Dulay ＆ Burt, 1973,1974b; Bailey, Madden ＆Krashen, 1974; Larsen-Freeman, 1975; 1976; Krashen ＆Scarcella, 1978,etc.), according to these researches, Krashen (1977) put forward theNatural Order Hypothesis (NOH). These researches made great progress meanwhilemuch critical sounds also were heard, especially on the research methodology,Lightbrown (1984) pointed out the common weak points--difficulty in replication,sample area is too small, the conclusion mainly depended on qualitative analysis noton quantitative analysis, and so on.Because of the limits, developmental pattern research can hardly made muchfurther and deeper study. At the end of 1980s, with the fast development of thecomputers’ hardware and software, building and studying corpus has been the newfield of Applied Linguistics and at the same time provided new research method andnotion for studying developmental pattern and regulation. The learner corpora providegreater access for the SLA and EFL researchers to the totality of the learnerperformance, provided that larger corpora involving more media (both written andspoken) and greater learner variables are made available and controllable. Muchinsight can be obtained from the data of both quantity and quality that has never beenmade available ever before. Long before the term “corpus linguistic” appeared at theearly 1980s (Leech, 1992:105), corpus-based approach has a long history. In 1930s-1940s, under the influence of Behaviorism and Positivism, American Structuralismlinguists, represented by Bloomfield, took setting the rigid approach of collecting andanalyzing real language material as a g |
