英語教學法原著選讀總目錄（截至2016年）
二語習得：「普遍語法」怎麼看？ - 英語教學法原著選讀95（附原文語音講解）
原創不易，公益翻譯，請隨手轉發。感謝！
----
因今天的選文太長，加上最近我時間特別緊張，未能錄音，向大家致歉！下周我會繼續。上面「總目錄」連結中有「輸入假說」相關參考文章的列表，感興趣的朋友可以點進去看看。
----
以下英文原文取自上海外語教育出版社引進出版、授權轉載的「外語教學法叢書」之九《語言學習機制》第二章「THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING（二語學習的幾種理論解釋）」：
原文（作者：Lightbown & Spada）
譯文（翻譯：Liz，審校：武太白）
Heading: THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
二語學習的幾種理論解釋
Krashens 'monitor model'
克拉申的「監控模型」
An innatist theory of second language acquisition which has had a very great influence on second language teaching practice is the one proposed by Stephen Krashen (1982). Five 'hypotheses' constitute what Krashen originally called the monitor model. He claims that research findings from a number of different domains are consistent with these hypotheses: (1) the acquisition-learning hypothesis; (2) the monitor hypothesis; (3) the natural order hypothesis; (4) the input hypothesis; and (5) the affective filter hypothesis.
有一種二語習得的內生理論對第二語言教學實踐有很大影響，它就是克拉申提出的理論（1982）。五個假設構成了克拉申最初所說的監控模型。他聲稱不同領域的研究發現與這些假設是吻合的：1.習得與學習假設 2. 監控假設 3. 自然順序假設 4. 輸入假設 5. 情感過濾假設。
1 The acquisition-learning hypothesis
1.習得與學習假設
According to Krashen, there are two ways for adult second language learners to develop knowledge of a second language: acquisition and learning. In his view, we acquire as we are exposed to samples of the second language which we understand. This happens in much the same way that children pick up their first language—with no conscious attention to language form. We learn, on the other hand, via a conscious process of study and attention to form and rule learning.
根據克拉申的觀點，有兩種方法可以幫助成年的二語習得者掌握第二語言的知識：習得與學習。在他看來，當我們接觸到到自己理解的二語實例時，我們就習得。這和兒童學習他們的母語差不多——對語言形式沒有有意注意。另一方面，我們通過對形式和規則的有意研究和注意來學習。
For Krashen, acquisition is by far the more important process. He asserts that only acquired language is readily available for natural, fluent communication. Further, he asserts that learning cannot turn into acquisition. He cites as evidence for this that many speakers are quite fluent without ever having learned rules, while other speakers may 'know' rules but fail to apply them when they are focusing their attention on what they want to say more than on how they are saying it.
對於克拉申來說，目前為止習得是更重要的過程。他宣稱，只有習得的語言才能隨時用於自然且流暢的交流。而且他堅稱學習不能轉變為習得。為此他舉了個例子：許多人沒有學習規則但說得卻很流利，而其他人可能「知道」規則但不會應用，他們注意的是想表達什麼而不是怎麼去說。
2 The monitor hypothesis
2. 監控假設
Krashen argues that the acquired system acts to initiate the speaker’s utterances and is responsible for fluency and intuitive judgements about correctness. The learned system, on the other hand, acts only as an editor or 'monitor', making minor changes and polishing what the acquired system has produced. Moreover, Krashen has specified that learners use the monitor only when they are focused more on being 'correct' than on what they have to say, when they have sufficient time to search their memory for the relevant rules, and when they actually know those rules! Thus, writing may be more conducive than speaking to monitor use, because it usually allows more time for attention to form. He maintains that since knowing the rules only helps the speaker supplement what has been acquired, the focus of language teaching should be on creating conditions for acquisition rather than 'learning'.
克拉申認為習得系統可以引導人開口說話，並且是流暢度和對錯的直覺背後的原因。而學習系統只用作編輯和監控，做一些細小的改變並潤色習得系統產出的東西。而且，克拉申明確指出，只有當學習者注意的是正確度而不是他們必須說什麼，當他們有充足的時間去搜索關於相關規則的記憶，當他們真的知道這些規則的時候，學習者才使用監控！因此，對於使用監控來說，寫可能比說更適用，因為寫讓人有更多的時間來注意形式。他認為既然知道規則只能幫助說話者補充已經習得的東西，那麼語言教學的重點就在於創造環境來「習得」而不是「學習」。
It is very difficult to show evidence of 'monitor' use. In any given utterance, it is impossible to determine what has been produced by the acquired system and what is the result of monitor use. Krashen's claim that language which is produced quickly and apparently spontaneously must have been acquired rather than learned leaves us with a somewhat circular definition.
拿出監控使用的證據是很困難的。在任何給定的話語中，分清什麼是習得系統產生的，什麼是監控使用的結果，這是不可能的。克拉申稱快速產生的而且顯然是自發的語言必定是習得而非學習得來，這似乎給我們留下了一個循環定義。
3 The natural order hypothesis
3. 自然順序假設
Krashen based this hypothesis on the observation that, like first language learners, second language learners seem to acquire the features of the target language in predictable sequences. Contrary to intuition, the rules which are easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired. For example, the rule for adding an -s to third person singular verbs in the present tense is easy to state, but even some advanced second language speakers fail to apply it in rapid conversation. Further, Krashen observes that the natural order is independent of the order in which rules have been learned in language classes. Most of Krashen's original evidence for this hypothesis came from the 'morpheme studies', in which learners' speech was examined for the accuracy of certain grammatical morphemes. While there have been many criticisms of the morpheme studies, subsequent research has confirmed that learners pass through sequences or stages in development. In Chapter 4, we will look at some of these sequences in second language acquisition.
該假設基於克拉申注意到二語學習者像母語學習者一樣，似乎在按照可預測的順序習得目標語言的特徵。和直覺相反，最容易說明（因此容易「學習」）的規則並不一定是第一個習得的。例如，一般現在時的第三人稱單數加「s」很好說明，但是甚至有的高級第二語言學習者在快速談話中也沒有應用這個規則。而且，克拉申注意到自然順序獨立於在語言課程中學習到的規則順序之外。克拉申關於該假設的大多原始證據都來自於「詞素研究」，在該研究中學習者的話語被檢查，檢驗某些語法詞素的正確性。儘管對於詞素研究有很多的批評，後來的研究證實了學習者確實在發展中經歷一系列的階段。在第四章中，我們將介紹二語習得過程中的這些階段。
4 The input hypothesis
4. 輸入假設
Krashen asserts that one acquires language in only one way——by exposure to comprehensible input. If the input contains forms and structures just beyond the learners' current level of competence in the language (what Krashen calls 'i+1'), then both comprehension and acquisition will occur.
克拉申稱只能通過一種方式習得語言，那就是接觸可理解的輸入。如果輸入包括略超過學習者目前語言水平的形式和結構（克拉申稱作「i+1」）， 那麼就會有理解和習得。
Krashen cites many varied lines of evidence for this hypothesis, most of which appeal to intuition, but which have not been substantiated by empirical studies. In recent years, he has emphasized the value of undirected pleasure reading as a source of comprehensible input. While he acknowledges that some people who are exposed to extensive comprehensible input do not achieve high levels of proficiency in the second language, he retains his conviction that input is the source of acquisition. He points to the affective filter hypothesis to explain lack of success when comprehensible input is available.
關於該假設，克拉申引用了許多不同性質的論據，其中很多都是出於直覺，並沒有經過實證研究的證實。近年來，他強調作為理解性輸入的來源之一，無指導的興趣閱讀的價值。但是他承認有些人雖接觸大量的理解性輸入，仍然沒有很精通第二語言。他還是相信輸入是習得的來源。他用情感過濾假設來解釋有理解性輸入卻仍然習得失敗現象。
5 The affective filter hypothesis
5. 情感過濾假設
The 'affective filter' is an imaginary barrier which prevents learners from acquiring language from the available input. 'Affect' refers to such things as motives, needs, attitudes, and emotional states. A learner who is tense, angry, anxious, or bored may 'filter out' input, making it unavailable for acquisition. Thus, depending on the learner's state of mind or disposition, the filter limits what is noticed and what is acquired. The filter will be 'up' (blocking input) when the learner is stressed, self-conscious, or unmotivated. It will be 'down' when the learner is relaxed and motivated.
「情感過濾」是一個想像中的障礙，它阻止學習者從可用輸入中習得語言。「情感」指的是動機、需求、態度和情緒狀態。一個緊張、生氣、焦慮或者感到無聊的學習者可能會過濾掉輸入，使其不可用於習得。因此，取決於學習者的心態和情緒，過濾限制了注意到的和習得的東西。當學習者處於壓力中、難為情或者無學習動力時，過濾將升高（屏蔽輸入）。當學習者處於輕鬆狀態、有動力時，過濾將降低。
What makes this hypothesis attractive to practitioners is that it appears to have immediate implications for classroom practice. Teachers can understand why some learners, given the same opportunity to learn, may be successful while others are not. It also appeals intuitively to those who have tried unsuccessfully to learn a language in conditions where they felt stressed or uncomfortable. One problem with the hypothesis, however, is that it is difficult to be sure that affective factors cause the differences in language acquisition. It seems likely that success in acquisition may in itself contribute to more positive motivation or, in Krashen's terms, to a 'lowered affective filter'. In Chapter 3, we will discuss further the relationship between attitudes/motivation and success in second language learning.
對於教學從業者來說，該理論吸引他們的是它可以立即用於課堂實踐。教師可以理解為什麼在一樣的學習機會下，有的學習者可以成功而有的卻會失敗。它也從直覺上吸引那些因為感到有壓力和不自在而學習語言失敗的人。然而該假設存在的問題是，它很難保證情感因素引起了語言習得的差異。看起來可能習得成功會提供更積極的動力，或者，按照克拉申的話說，「降低情感過濾」。在第三章中，我們將進一步討論態度/動機和成功學習第二語言之間的關係。
Krashen's writing has been very influential in supporting communicative language teaching (CLT), particularly in North America. On the other hand, the theory has also been seriously criticized for failing to propose hypotheses which can be tested by empirical research. Most teachers and researchers see much which is intuitively appealing in his views. There is little doubt that communicative language teaching, with its primary focus on using language for meaningful interaction and for accomplishing tasks, rather than on learning rules, has won support from many teachers and learners. Nevertheless, it will be seen in Chapter 6 that some classroom-centred research shows that attention to language form may be more important than Krashen acknowledges. We will also see that instruction which focuses on language form can be incorporated within communicative language teaching.
克拉申的作品對交際法語言教學（CLT）的支持有很大的影響力，特別是在北美。另一方面，該理論也受到了嚴重的批評，因為其未能提出能夠被檢驗的假設。大多數的教師和研究者都看到了他的觀點中對直覺有很大吸引力的部分。毫無疑問，交際法語言教學主要關注使用語言來進行有意義的交流和完成任務而不是學習規則，贏得了許多老師和學習者的支持。然而，在第六章中，一些以課堂為中心的研究表明注意語言形式可能比克拉申所聲稱的更重要。我們也將看到注重語言形式的教學可以納入到交際法語言教學的範圍中去。