论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Krashen’s input hypothesis， also known as the monitor model， is one of the most influential hypotheses in the field of second language acquisition. It answers the question that how language acquisition occurs over time. It has great significance on language teaching and learning. So many linguists and educators pay much attention to it.
【Key words】Krashen； input hypothesis； English teaching
1. The Definition of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
In input hypothesis， Krashen claims that an important condition for language acquisition to occur is that the acquirers understand input language that is at “level i 1”. “i” represents the previous linguistic competence and extra-linguistic knowledge （such as the context） existed in the learners’ brain （the current level）， and the hypothesis claims that we move from “i” to “i 1” along the natural order by understanding input that contains “i 1”. The “i 1” represents their next level which is slightly higher than the current level and the “ 1” represents new knowledge or language structures that we should be ready to acquire. That is to say， in order to make sure that learners can understand most of the language but still be challenged to improve， the language that learners are exposed to should be suitable， neither too easy nor too difficult.
2. The Advantages of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
As the most influential theory， it has great directive function on second language acquisition. Firstly， it proves the conceptions of “learning” and “acquisition” which have great significance on second language teaching and learning. Secondly， the hypothesis redefines the relation between native language and second language， and states that native language may not only have negative functions on second language acquisition， but also positive functions. Thirdly， besides the importance of input， Krashen also emphasizes the significance of learners’ cognitive level， which suit for the principles in psychology and pedagogy. Finally， it also pays attention to learners’ affective aspects （such as motivation， confidence， anxiety and so on）， which can help to improve teaching and learning.
3. The Disadvantages of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
As we know， Krashen stresses the comprehensibility of input and the natural acquisition of language. However， a great number of scholars have pointed out the problems existing in Input Hypothesis. Firstly， the statement that “comprehensible input is the only causative variable in second language acquisition” ignores the learners and their own active engagement in the pursuit of language competence. Secondly， it does not distinguish input and interaction ignoring the function that interaction displays in L2 acquisition. Thirdly， this hypothesis is difficult to prove and it takes the process that language acquisition device modifies learners’ interlanguage system for granted. Besides， there is no clear definition and explanation of the state “i 1”， and whether the “i 1” formula can apply to all aspects of language including vocabulary and phonology as well as syntax remains unknown. 4. The Comprehensive Evaluation of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
All in all， Krashen’s input hypothesis analyzes the language acquisition process from the cognitive perspective. Though it is one of the most controversial theories and has got some criticisms and doubt， it still has great contribution to the cognition of language input and acquisition. And inspired by Krashen’s input hypothesis， more and more researchers give further studies on the basic topics about second language acquisition. To be honest， the further researches which derived from the hypothesis are more important than the hypothesis itself. So without ignorance， input hypothesis has great referential meaning on second language learning and teaching.
Conclusion
The same as many second language acquisition theories， Krashen’s input hypothesis is not perfect. It has been a bone of contention both in the field of education and second language acquisition since it was proposed. But it can’t be overlooked that Input hypothesis still has great significance on language learning and teaching.
References：
[1]H.D.Brown.Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 2002.
[2]胡壮麟.语言学教程[M].北京大学出版社，2011.
[3]冯淳林.克拉申语言输入假说综述[J].湖北广播电视大学学报，2010，30（8）：99-100.
作者简介：赵朝（1992.11-），女，汉族，河北宁晋人，西华师范大学，外国语学院硕士研究生，研究方向：学科教学英语。
【Key words】Krashen； input hypothesis； English teaching
1. The Definition of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
In input hypothesis， Krashen claims that an important condition for language acquisition to occur is that the acquirers understand input language that is at “level i 1”. “i” represents the previous linguistic competence and extra-linguistic knowledge （such as the context） existed in the learners’ brain （the current level）， and the hypothesis claims that we move from “i” to “i 1” along the natural order by understanding input that contains “i 1”. The “i 1” represents their next level which is slightly higher than the current level and the “ 1” represents new knowledge or language structures that we should be ready to acquire. That is to say， in order to make sure that learners can understand most of the language but still be challenged to improve， the language that learners are exposed to should be suitable， neither too easy nor too difficult.
2. The Advantages of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
As the most influential theory， it has great directive function on second language acquisition. Firstly， it proves the conceptions of “learning” and “acquisition” which have great significance on second language teaching and learning. Secondly， the hypothesis redefines the relation between native language and second language， and states that native language may not only have negative functions on second language acquisition， but also positive functions. Thirdly， besides the importance of input， Krashen also emphasizes the significance of learners’ cognitive level， which suit for the principles in psychology and pedagogy. Finally， it also pays attention to learners’ affective aspects （such as motivation， confidence， anxiety and so on）， which can help to improve teaching and learning.
3. The Disadvantages of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
As we know， Krashen stresses the comprehensibility of input and the natural acquisition of language. However， a great number of scholars have pointed out the problems existing in Input Hypothesis. Firstly， the statement that “comprehensible input is the only causative variable in second language acquisition” ignores the learners and their own active engagement in the pursuit of language competence. Secondly， it does not distinguish input and interaction ignoring the function that interaction displays in L2 acquisition. Thirdly， this hypothesis is difficult to prove and it takes the process that language acquisition device modifies learners’ interlanguage system for granted. Besides， there is no clear definition and explanation of the state “i 1”， and whether the “i 1” formula can apply to all aspects of language including vocabulary and phonology as well as syntax remains unknown. 4. The Comprehensive Evaluation of Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
All in all， Krashen’s input hypothesis analyzes the language acquisition process from the cognitive perspective. Though it is one of the most controversial theories and has got some criticisms and doubt， it still has great contribution to the cognition of language input and acquisition. And inspired by Krashen’s input hypothesis， more and more researchers give further studies on the basic topics about second language acquisition. To be honest， the further researches which derived from the hypothesis are more important than the hypothesis itself. So without ignorance， input hypothesis has great referential meaning on second language learning and teaching.
Conclusion
The same as many second language acquisition theories， Krashen’s input hypothesis is not perfect. It has been a bone of contention both in the field of education and second language acquisition since it was proposed. But it can’t be overlooked that Input hypothesis still has great significance on language learning and teaching.
References：
[1]H.D.Brown.Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 2002.
[2]胡壮麟.语言学教程[M].北京大学出版社，2011.
[3]冯淳林.克拉申语言输入假说综述[J].湖北广播电视大学学报，2010，30（8）：99-100.
作者简介：赵朝（1992.11-），女，汉族，河北宁晋人，西华师范大学，外国语学院硕士研究生，研究方向：学科教学英语。