The Relationship Between“Form-focused Approach”and “Language Proficiency”

劉晉池

In recent years，language researchers and teachers are paying more attention to form-focused language teaching approach. Second language teaching developed from an extreme of Focus of Forms to another extreme of Focus on Meaning. After the failure of two extremes， researchers synthesize the advantages and disadvantages of both methods and show more interests in Focus on Form (Hereinafter referred to as“F on F”). A good deal of scholars from all over the world start doing further researches into F on F. However， related studies of the relationship between Fon F and Language Proficiency are deficient. Based on the previous theories and researches of F on F， this article talks about the definitions of F on F and Language Proficiency respectively and analyses the relationship between F on F and Language Proficiency. Moreover， the author comes up with some problems existing in language teaching in current China and throws a sprat to further researches.

Focus on FormLanguage ProficiencyRelationshipⅠIntroduction

In the research field of second language acquisition， more and more researchers shift their attention to second language teaching. They try to study the influence second language teaching has on learners' Language Proficiency and strive to find out the effective language teaching methods. Some theories and practices show that in communicative classrooms， F on F method can effectually promote the development of learners' interlanguage system and ensure the sound effects of acquisition. Hence， in recent years， F on F， the new model of teaching has been the main stream of current teaching researches. Michael Long first came up with the teaching principle of F on F， which is different from the methods of Focus on Forms(Hereinafter referred to as "F on FS") and Focus on Meaning. F on F is a integration of the advantages of these two methods.

This article first analyses the definition of F on F and the difference between F on F and F on FS. Also， the classification of F on F is mentioned. Then， the author talks about the definition of Language Proficiency and its development. Finally， this article explores the relationship between F on F and Language Proficiency and come up with some problems existing in language teaching system in current China.

1.Focus on Form

The theoretical basis of F on F is from Interaction Hypothesis of Long. The Interaction hypothesis is a theory of second-language acquisition which states that the development of Language Proficiency is promoted by face-to-face interaction and communication (Long， 2001). It also claims that comprehensible input is important for language learning. The effectiveness of comprehensible input is greatly increased when learners have to negotiate for meaning (Ellis&Rod， 1997).

Long defined F on F as: "in the context of a communicative interaction， the attention of learners learning a second language is drawn to the form of specific language features"(Long， 1998). Obviously， this definition focuses on theoretical exploration， and does not give any specific suggestions for classroom teaching. Later， he gave a more practical definition which is convenient for classroom operation. F on F refers to "how focal attentional resources are allocated" to linguistic forms (Long and Robinson 1998).

endprint

2.Language Proficiency

Language Proficiency is a complicated concept， which is related to a series of factors including learning environment， learners' characteristics， learning process， learning results， learning conditions and so on. According to Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching&Applied Linguistics， Language Proficiency is defined as the skills of using a language for certain purposes. Proficiency means the degree of competence， like reading， writing， speaking， listening or understanding a language.

As Lado defined， Language Proficiency is a complex system of communication with various levels of complexity involving intricate selection and ordering of meanings， sounds， and larger units and arrangements (Lado 1961， p. 2). He held that language is composed of components called phonemes， morphemes， phrases， clauses， and sentences. Lado's definition of Language Proficiency is a great improvement towards previous ones.

ⅡThe relationship between F on F and Language Proficiency

1.The influence F on F has on Language Proficiency.Does F on F influence language equivalence? What kind of influence it is? What kind of language teaching methods are effective? More and more scholars try to study the relationship between F on F and Language Proficiency to answer those questions.

2.The influence F on F has on overall Language Proficiency. In Long's opinion， a lot of researches prove that language teaching makes a difference in Language Proficiency. When language learners combine language learning in class with communicative language in society and pay attention to language forms and language meanings simultaneously， their Language Proficiency may improve rapidly.

3.The influence F on F has on the accuracy of language output. The influence F on F has on the accuracy of language output reflects whether Form focused approach has direct effects on language teaching. Pica's research is a typical one. He divided 18 English learners whose mother tongue is Spanish into 3 groups according to their English learning experiences. The first group learned English naturally. The second group learned English in class. The third group learned English both in and out of class. She found that there were interesting differences between three groups. She asserted that the influence F on F has on Language Proficiency relies on the language structure. If the language being taught is simple in grammar structure and transparent in function， form focused approach will help to improve the accuracy of language using. By contrast， if the grammar structure is simple while function is complicated， F on F will make language learners acquire language forms but make mistakes when using it. However， if the grammar structure is not prominent and the function is simple， language teaching does not make any differences. Pica's research shows that classroom teaching makes the language output different between language learners in and out of class. When the structure of target language is easy to be acquired， the influence classroom teaching has on language output accuracy is obvious. Therefore， we can conclude that F on F can help to improve the accuracy of language output. Nevertheless， an essential （下轉第84頁）

endprint