An Investigation of Chinese Students’ Acquisition of Oral and Written English through the Measurement of Processability Theory

Hao Tang, Yanyin Zhang

Abstract


Processability Theory (PT) believes that L2 learner can not understand and produce those linguistic forms which are beyond the current stage of the language processor (Pienemann, 2007). Based on the understanding of the architecture of the language processor and how L2 is acquired under it, teachers can not only better predict the learners’ L2 developmental stages, explain the learners’ acquiring variations, but also indicate some constructive and objective guidelines for L2 teaching. So this study adopts the hierarchy of processing procedures applied to English (Pienemann, 1998) as the instrument to explore the two aspects of the English language acquisition. The final results support that Chinese college students’ written English is better than their oral English. Besides, there is indeed a positive relationship between Chinese college students’ written and oral English.

 


Keywords


Processability Theory, oral English, written English, emergency criteria

Full Text:

PDF

References


Chafe, W., & Tannen, D. (1987). The relation between written and spoken language. Annual Review of Anthropology, 16 (1), 383-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.16.1.383

Hakansson, G., & Norrby, G. H. C. (2007). Processability theory applied to written and oral Swedish. In F. Mansouri (Ed.), Second Language Acquisition Research: Theory-Construction and Testing (pp. 81-94). United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Lenzing, A. (2008). Teachability and learnability: An analysis of primary school textbooks. In J. Keßler (Ed.), Processability Approaches to Second Language Development and Second Language Learning (pp.221-241). United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Wlliams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp.15-41). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2006). Guidelines for Junior College English Teaching. Beijing: Higher Education Press.

Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2007). University English Teaching Syllabus. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Press.

Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (1), 109-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001047

Pallotti, G. (2007). An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28 (3), 361-382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm018

Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6 (02), 186-214.

Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10 (1), 52-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100005015

Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Pienemann, M. (2005). Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Spada, N., & Lightbown P. M. (1999). Instruction, first language influence, and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 83 (1), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00002

Ur, P. (1988). Grammar practice activities: a practical guide for teachers, United Kingdom:Cambridge University.

VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. J. (2006). Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction, United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis Group.

Yuan, F., & Ellis R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and onLine planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24 (1), 1-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1

Zhu, X. (2008). Is syntactic maturity a reliable measurement to investigate the relationship between English speaking and writing? The Asian EFL Journal, 10 (1), 133-153.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.2p.207

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2020 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.