Journal of Advances in Education Research
The Output Hypothesis and Its Implications for Language Teaching
Download PDF (270.5 KB) PP. 129 - 134 Pub. Date: August 1, 2020
Author(s)
- Weiwei Sun*
School of Foreign Languages and Literature, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Abstract
Keywords
References
[1] Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 285-301.
[2] Fang, L. l. (2004). The application of the length approach in college English teaching. Foreign Language World, (3), 40-45.
[3] Hong, L. (2012). An experimental study of output and retelling in second language acquisition. Education Research Monthly, (10), 108-110.
[4] Izumi, S. (1999). Promoting noticing and SLA: An empirical study of the effects of output and input enhancement on ESL relativization (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
[5] Izumi, S. & M. Bigelow, M. Fujiw ara, & S. Fearnow. (1999). Testing the output hypothesis:effects of output on noticing and second lan-guage acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 421-452.
[6] Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition?. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239-278.
[7] Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis:Issues and Implications. Harlow: Longman.
[8] Krashen, S. (1998). Comprehensible output?. System, 26(2), 175-182.
[9] la Fuente, D., & José, M. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 81-112.
[10] Li, H. (2002). The cognitive foundations of the Output Hypothesis. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (02), 10-12.
[11] Li, P. (2006). Review of the research on the Output Hypothesis. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (07), 60- 64.
[12] Lv, L. S. & Cai, L. P. (2004). Two hypotheses and English writing. Journal of Guangzhou University (Social Science Edition), (07), 48-50.
[13] Ma, L. (2017). The application of recitation-input model in writing teaching practice. Language Planning, (32), 8-9.
[14] Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405- 430.
[15] Mackey, A. (2007). Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
[16] McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners’ responses on esl question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 79-103.
[17] Nie, Q. P. (2002). The input and output of language and foreign language teaching. Journal of Shandong Normal University (Social Science Edition), (04), 123-125.
[18] Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
[19] Shehadeh, A. (2002). Comprehensible output, from occurrence to acquisition: An agenda for acquisitional research. Language Learning, 52(3), 597-647.
[20] Shen, D. & Lu, G, J. (2019). Research on the effect of "output" based on UNIPUS autonomous learning platform on students’ English vocabulary acquisition in applied undergraduate colleges. Journal of Jishou University (Social Science Edition), 40(1), 170-177.
[21] Song, X. P., & Dai, W. D. (2009). A study on input enhancement, output and noticing. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, (10), 5-9.
[22] Swain, M.(1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehen-sible input and comprehensible output in its development. Rrowley, M: New bury House.
[23] Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis:Just speaking and writing aren’ t enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, (50), 158-164.
[24] Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[25] Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: theory and research. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
[26] Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371-391.
[27] Swain, M. (1997). The output hypothesis, focus on form and second language learning. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
[28] Swain, M. (1999). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative Tasks. In W.a.Renandya & C.S. Ward (Eds.), Language teaching: New insights for the language teacher (pp. 125-147). Singapore: Regional Language Center.
[29] Swain, M. (2001). Integrating Language and Content Teaching Through Collaborative Tasks. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(1), 44-63.
[30] Swain, M.(2005). The output hypothesis:theory and research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[31] Swain, M., & Yang, L. X. (2008). Output hypothesis: Its history and its future. Foreign Language Teaching and Research (bimonthly), 40(1), 45-54.
[32] Wang, C. M. (2005a). The Length Approach to Foreign Language Learning. Foreign Languages in China, (01), 45-49.
[33] Wang, S. D. (2001). Input and output: The analysis of non-fluency in English class conversation. Journal of Hengyang Normal University (Social Science Edition), (1), 122-124.
[34] Wang, Y. (2005). The psycholinguistics foundation of the Output Hypothesis. Foreign Language Education, (04), 18-22.
[35] You, Q. D. (1997). An analysis of “input” and “output”. Foreign Language World, (04), 50-53.
[36] You, Q. D. (2001). The emphasis of input and output in language application ability. Foreign Language World, (06), 40-43.
[37] Zhong, L. & Wang, T, F. (2008). The influence of the length approach on English writing ability factors-A research report of the length approach in English writing teaching practice. Humanities & Social Sciences Journal of Hainan University, (02), 230-236.
[38] Zhong, M. (2010). Organic combination of “input” and “output” to promote students’ effective learning. Journal of Southwest Minzu University (Humanities and Social Science), 31(1), 37-40.