不同二语习得理论中书面纠正反馈的轨迹

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature Pub Date : 2021-07-31 DOI:10.22452/jml.vol31no1.6
E. Abbaspour
{"title":"不同二语习得理论中书面纠正反馈的轨迹","authors":"E. Abbaspour","doi":"10.22452/jml.vol31no1.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whether corrective feedback is effective in L2 writing has always been a controversial issue among Second Language Acquisition (SLA) scholars despite a vast body of research investigating the issue. This conflict is rooted in the fact that different researchers subscribe to different theories of SLA which are at times contradictory in nature. The present article reviews and investigates major SLA theories with respect to their views and stance toward the efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and error correction in second language writing. Many of these theories do not address the role of corrective feedback explicitly or merely focus on the role of oral feedback. Polio (2012) and Bitchener and Ferris (2012) have partially investigated the issue at stake reviewing a number of SLA theories. In this study, however, attempt is made to shed light on the role of WCF especially in the theories which are not directly concerned with L2 writing.","PeriodicalId":53718,"journal":{"name":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The locus of written corrective feedback in various SLA theories\",\"authors\":\"E. Abbaspour\",\"doi\":\"10.22452/jml.vol31no1.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Whether corrective feedback is effective in L2 writing has always been a controversial issue among Second Language Acquisition (SLA) scholars despite a vast body of research investigating the issue. This conflict is rooted in the fact that different researchers subscribe to different theories of SLA which are at times contradictory in nature. The present article reviews and investigates major SLA theories with respect to their views and stance toward the efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and error correction in second language writing. Many of these theories do not address the role of corrective feedback explicitly or merely focus on the role of oral feedback. Polio (2012) and Bitchener and Ferris (2012) have partially investigated the issue at stake reviewing a number of SLA theories. In this study, however, attempt is made to shed light on the role of WCF especially in the theories which are not directly concerned with L2 writing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53718,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22452/jml.vol31no1.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/jml.vol31no1.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

纠正反馈在二语写作中是否有效一直是二语习得学者争论的问题,尽管有大量的研究对这一问题进行了调查。这种冲突的根源在于不同的研究者认同不同的二语习得理论,这些理论有时在本质上是矛盾的。本文回顾和研究了主要的二语习得理论对二语写作中书面纠正反馈和纠错效果的看法和立场。许多这些理论没有明确地解决纠正反馈的作用,或者仅仅关注口头反馈的作用。小儿麻痹症(2012)、Bitchener和Ferris(2012)对一些SLA理论进行了部分调查。然而,在本研究中,我们试图阐明WCF的作用,特别是在与二语写作不直接相关的理论中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The locus of written corrective feedback in various SLA theories
Whether corrective feedback is effective in L2 writing has always been a controversial issue among Second Language Acquisition (SLA) scholars despite a vast body of research investigating the issue. This conflict is rooted in the fact that different researchers subscribe to different theories of SLA which are at times contradictory in nature. The present article reviews and investigates major SLA theories with respect to their views and stance toward the efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) and error correction in second language writing. Many of these theories do not address the role of corrective feedback explicitly or merely focus on the role of oral feedback. Polio (2012) and Bitchener and Ferris (2012) have partially investigated the issue at stake reviewing a number of SLA theories. In this study, however, attempt is made to shed light on the role of WCF especially in the theories which are not directly concerned with L2 writing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
50.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
Metadiscourse Markers in Abstracts of Linguistics and Literature Research Articles from Scopus-Indexed Journals An Exploratory Analysis of Linking Adverbials Used by Filipino, Pakistani, and Thai Writers of English Privacy Policy Pop-up: A Genre Analysis of Journal Websites’ HTTP Cookies Female Circumcision in Malaysia: Challenges and Lessons Learned in Using Focus Groups through an NGO-Academia Collaboration Prosodic Marking of New and Given Information in English and Mandarin by Chinese Speakers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1