An Empirical Study on Listening Skill Building : Neurolinguistic Approach

全文

(1)AN ］invrPIRI CAL STUDY ON IISTENING・・SKILL−BUILDINq N］ruROIj1NGUISTIC APPROACH 一. A Thesis. Presented to. the Faculty of the Graduate Course at. Hyogo University of Teacher Education. In Partial YNilfillment. of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Edueation. by. Tadashi Takahashi December 1981.

(2) PRE］弘CE. Simon Belasc．o（1971） states that ”he was j olted by the. 「ea” ?｣th3t、’t’s poSslble t。 deVρユop so−caユ1ed’sp畔「，. i．ng’ ability and yet be virtually ineompetent in understanding 七he sp・ゆユ与卿ag・・“Th・「e seem81i㌻Ue e▽iゆCe to supP。「t the transfer of learning from ． productive aspect to recepVv，e aspect ．. Instead， a growing body of evidenee indicates ，that. forcing students to speak before they have．4．．pt，erp．alized the language， has de．t． rimehtal effects． on ，the acquisition of lan−. guage gompetenee． Based on the evidence which indicates that shifting. from a foeus on speaking to a focus on listening is advanta−. geous， the language learning process shouid be improved by the language teaehing profession． Mhis paper is divided into five ehapters．. ．エnChqPte「1・afte「「evi・wing th・ギ・r・ign lqnguag・in・伽・。 tipn in Japan， 1 tried，to p． res，ent the problem that the lan−. guage learning process should be shifted from a focus on speaking to a focus on listening． As the possible solutlpn， two instructional startegies bqsed on the concept of． delayed oral response were taken up and proposed to be reexamined in Japan．. エnChapt・r…th・．r噸・pt。f d・ユay・d・ra尊臼・Pp，nse i・d・qu一皿・nt・d by ru鵬riゆg what a「e七he「eactions again・t th・ audiQ・一lipgual approach， why delqy of Qral response is.

(3) iii. c。ns’de「ed’mp9「tant・. o。wユ。ng the、・。「aユ「espρ讐鮮副！“r手騨・. an母，噸t・a「e．・the efξrcts oμhi8 d夢ユay on thg langUage. learning proeess． In ehapter 1．11，．the documented instruetiQnal s，tr．ategi，es. advocg七ed i嚇r∫墜㌻♀d Stateρ．贈int「qduced with・ttte researeh eviddnce．工nChapte：r IV， th．e：result of the expe：riments is：reported and. the、 conc↓usi。n f。「est3埠i争＃ing a七entat坤p「ρ脚fo「 listening−skill building is shown． Chapter V is a lesson−by−lesson ：plan、which is based on ’七he. result of the experiments described in Chapter IV’． 1 wish ’to express my hearty gratitude to Professor. Shoroku Aoki for the gu，idanc e and encppragement he extended to me． Madashi Takahashi・. December 1981.

(4) 田AB：LE OF CON田ENTS PA GE. PREFACE ．．．．．．．．．．. ’ ii. ABSTRACT ．．．．．．・．．．．. ． v. I．. INTRODUCT工ON ．．．．．．．。．. II．. THE BASIC CONCEPT OF DELAYED ORAL RESPONSE. 1・︵∠︵∠. The Reaction Against the Audio一“ngual. Approach ．．．．．．．．．．．. Why Should Speaking Be Delayed？．．． How Long Should Speaking Be Delayed？．．. The Effeets of Delaying Oral Response ． III．. rvlETHODOLOG］ES BASE［D ON THE CONCEPT OF DE工」AYED ORA：L RESPONS：E ．．．．．. ●. The Total Physical Response Approach The Optimized Habit Reinforcement 工V．. THE EXPERIMENTS ］ibcperiment 1 ．. Experiment 2 ． Experiment 3 ． Experiment 4 ． Conclusion ．．. A. ●. ○. ■. ■. ■. ●. ■. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. O. ○. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ■. ■. ●. ●. ●. ●. ■. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. O. ■. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ■. ●. ●. ●. ●. ●. ■. ●. PROGRAM ：FOR：L工STENING・一SKI］⊃：L BUII」DING. BIBLIOGRAPHY. e e e 一一 e e − e 一一. ●. v．. 188226. CHAPTER. ●.

(5) ABS［E｝RACT. The Ministry of Education i s sued 21ts−e ggtyL1s1urse dgLf 1E1nug一．s！｝一li h. in 1952． The 「balanced knowユedge of Eng］．ish based on the fou：r skil：Ls with p：riori七y to o：ra＝L ski］ユs was expounded in it．. For that new phase of English education in Japan， American. linguists played a significant role in introducing the eral Approaeh based on the behaviorism and the structural linguis− tics．. Since the stimulus oriented methodologies were intro−. duced， it has been clairned that praetice in production is. one of the best means of developing recognition． Many teachers in the profession at present seem to believe that the primary skill to be taught in foreign language is speak− ing． Many a］一so seem to be］．ieve that the bes’七way ’七〇ユ．earn. to speak is to praetiee speaking． Some professionals in the past have even argued that speaking is one of the best ways. to develop recognition or listening ability． Char．les C． Fries（1945）， for example， expressed it. like this ；. This recognition of the difference between productive and receptive controls of language does not imply a mechan− ical separation of the materials into ”practicest’ in producing：fgr t4e sqke of． produetion only， and ’tpractieesft in．recog4itAi’04 for tbe sake of receiving’bnly． As a matter qf fact practice in production isV oneV of the best means of developing recognition．（p．8） Howdver， this assumption that praetiee in production. （speaking） is one of the best means of developing recognition （listening comprehension） is not a ”matter of fact or datai，． There seems little empirieal・・eSrtSde’ nee to support the transter.

(6) vi. of ］．ea：rning from speaking 七〇ユistening， t：rom produc七ive. aspect to regeptive aspec七・工nstead，尤here a：re a numbe：r of studies ’t；hat heユp. crea七e 七he idea of focusing on listening whiユe developing the o：ral ：response as an a1七ernative apP：roach to fo：reign じ. language teaching （Ashe：r， 1969， Pos七〇vsky， 1971， Wini七z，. 1973）・S・m・ ’wri七・r・ar・n・w indi・a七ing that th・y hav・n。七. found 七his type of transfer which ］hries took fo：r granted． Sim・n B・lasc。（1971）・f・r・xampl・・writes tha七h・ wa8 電蜜．．．jolted by the ：realization tha’七 it ：is possible to. q・v・1・P・・一caユ1・d’・p・aking’ability（v・cali・ing）and y・七 be viエ・七ually incompeten七 in unde：rstanding th『 spoken lan−. guage．駒 The audio−1ingual app：roach which Belasco uSed， has always pユaced listening fi：rst in ’七he sequence of ski］ユs， but. in practice this has la：rge：Ly been listening for speaking rathe：r than listening for unders’七anding。 The ba8ic idea has been fo：r the 8tudent to imitate 七he sounds by immediate】．y. r・p・at塊th・m aft・r th・y h・ar th・m・On・・f七he causes・f confusien may be unde：rstanding the role of imitat：ion． Many consider ：language learning to 『be a form of imita七ion・. Agrowing body of evidence indicates tha七fo：rcing ・七ud・n七・t。・p・昨b・f。r・th・y 4av・、int・rnalized七h・ユanguagρ・. has de七rimenta：L effect8』on the acquisi七ion of the language com：petence （Asher， 1969， E：rvins 1970，：Postovsky， 1971， Winitz， 1973，Fltirgu・。n，1974， Ga；y，．1 975）． Th・rdquir・m・nt t。 rer，. spond。「aliy imm・dia七・ly aft・r。n・h・ar・anative sp・ak・r’s. voice， as in the mimicry−memorization pattern practice of.

(7) vii. the audio. １ingual apP「oaeh．・9・m・t・r・duce th・rpt・n七i。n. of mate：ria：L．偲he ：reduction in：retention may be due to the effects of， stress， or it may ≧）e due to 七he ＝Lack of in七e：rnal. info「mation P「oc №唐唐奄獅〟E． O； it．may、be dpe t。 b。th of them・ The adVantages t。 shif七ing fr・m a f・eu・・n・peqking to a focus on ユistening a：re．．．1） the g：reater utiiity of listening ove：r 七he othe：r s1（i］ユ8， 2） the g：reate：r po8i七ive. transfe：【・from ：Listening to the othe：r 8ki1ユs，ろ＞ noこ． negao. tive transfe：r f：r◎m speaking to other skiユls， and 4） the. posi七ive at七itude even among those of］．ower aptitude foエ・ a1｝apprρach which seems to 七hem mo：【・e effec七ive．. When one’recognizes the need fo：rユis七ening skiils， it is necessary to ’bui：Ld up a lis七eningoski］ユ p著09：ram，. th：rough careful graded exposu ee just as it was fe＝Lt nece8− sa：ry to build up the o七he：r 8ki1＝Ls by caエpeful＝Ly graded. ・x・r・ise・Th・re ar・tw。 apP「。q・hes「ecently advoeated f。r listening−skill building in t纂e United States ： one is ’e The Total Physical Res：ponse Approach，t by Jame．s J． Ashe：r of San ド . Jose S七ate Unive：rsity， and the othe：r is tt．The Optimized. Habit R・inf。rcem・n．t ”（it・t・xt i・THE 1，EARNABLES）by Harris. Wini七z of the Universi七y of Missouri， Kansas Ci七y． They we：re examined 七hrough ex：periments in Japan・ In addi七ion to this， by eXamining 七he indieations ㌻ha．t （pmprehension mus七 be buil七 in tichunks曹， or ，雪pauses髄，. ahypo七hetic『，l gradation fo：r ：listening com：prehension would ’be p：【じopo8ed through the experiments on how ehunks o：r. pauses wo：rk onユiste：ning comprehension．.

(8) viii. These empirieal studies have been attempted with. acute hope that mueh more attention should be paid to listen− ing comprehension， and that drastie changes in ］1haglish lan− guage edueation in Japan rnust be made．’， lt should be estab−. lished， for example， that the course primarily focuSes on listening−skill building for a eertain amou4t of time！ especiaユ1y at the v・「y b．・ginning・taggr. Based on the conclusions derived from the experiments. and the evidence advocated by psycholinguists or neuro− linguists， a tentative prograrn for listening−skill building is deseribed．.

(9) CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. The purpose for foreign language education should. naturally be di￡fere．nt in each gountry refleeting her polit− ical’ ≠獅п@social’necessitY， and also be varied as time goes. on． We might roughly say that the origin of foreign lan− guage education in Japan started， in the Meiji Era， approx−. imately over a eentury qgo．・Judging from the situation at that time ln，Japan， we could ．imagine that the emphqsis in. foreign language instruction was placed on the written form of the ianguage rather than s ound form of the language in. order to catch up with the cultural development i．n foreign countries． We tried hard to absorb the knowledge of tecri一一. noユ。gy・which was fa「adv鱒ced in肋opern co耳n頓es and the Unitgd Stqtes， through written form of the material． But can we find the reason why the emphasis on reeep−. tive skill of reading remained for over a century in spitg of the． great；一social changes？ One of the reasons which made. a screen ，against the necgssity of direct eommunication through the sound form of ．the language ．was the ．geggraphical. isolqtion from other countri，es， especially far from English speaklng gountries． ln addition to this， shifting， from a focus． on r．eeeptive skill to produetive skill was affected by tl｝e isolationism tte had experieneed ln the Edo linra and during 七he Wo：r：ld Wa：【F II．. ぞ。「e’g叫an興e手n8伽ct’on．1’n gapan was e。甲㌻「a’1，rd.

(10) 2. by七h◎se exte「na1 e。ndi七ions・and wha㌻i8「wo「se Wa・thgt 七he his七〇ricaユ and socia：l chages we：re dis：rega：rded by such. ’nt・rnal・gnd’t’onr’a・m・七hodo’or斗rρ、P「oughF’n by．th・・anguag．・in・tru・t．・r・・An・th・nl r・a・ρ乎、w・haマ・．t。 r・ter t・. here ゴ，s 七he existence of ：English a8 a subject of e阜t：rance rx今ゆat斗・n七・．lhe， h’gh・r’n・即t’・n・・．．wh’とh Play・d a「・’r. in maintaining 七he g：【●ammar一七：ranslation rPethod・ In p：rewa：r Ja：pan linguist8 0f English on the whoユe. followed Danieユ Jones in phonetics， Ot’七〇 Jespe：rsen in gene：ral 七heo：ry and gramma：r t and Ha：【・old ：E． Palme：r in applied. linguis七ics． Aユ：though Pa］．mer made his best efforts，］ing＝Lish. lin即istics in Japan was gene「a1｝y ．c。nce「ned with the. wri七ten form of English。 In 1952， the Minist：ry of Education issued Mhe Cou：【・se. 亘塑in which balanced㎞owledge of English based on コ. the four skills with p：riori七y to o：ra：L ski：11s was expounded．：Fo：r・七ha七 new phase of Engユish educa七ion in Japan， American linguists such as Ftries， Twadde11， Ma：rckwa：rdt，且i：11 e七 a：L．. played a signifieant ：【。ole in in’troducing 七he Oral Approach based on 七he b、eha▽io：rism and the st：rmctural ユinguistics． pattd：【・n p：rac七ice， cont：rastive s七udies of English and Japanese，. and langUage laborato：ry deve：lopments we：【●e all int：roduced. and emphasized ’by those iinguists．田㎞ough a ユong his七〇：ry of foエ’eig尊 language ins七：rletion，. th・a七tenti。n hqs n・v・「been paid t・Engli・h a・amgan・…f direc七 communication as today。 Sinee the stimulus o：【・iented. methodologies we：re introdueed， it has been cユaimed 七hat.

(11) 3. practice in production is one of the best means of develop− in’ 〟@recogn’. 奄狽奄盾氏D Many teachers in the profession at present. seem to believe that the prilna：ry 8kiユ．l to be 七aught in. foreign language is speaking． Many also seem to believe that the ’best way to ユearn to speak is to practi．ce speaking．. Some professionals in the past have even argued that speaking is one of the best ways to develop recegnition or listening ability．. 1. Charles C． Rries（1945）， for example， expressed it like this ；. Mhis recognition of the difference between productive and reeeptive controls of language does not imply a mechanical separation of the materials into ”practicest’ in producing for the sake of produetion only， and’ iepraetices’t in reeognition for the sake of receiving only． produqtiop is one of the As a matter ef fact practice in best means of develoPing reeognition．（p．8） However， this assumption that praetice in produetion. （8peaking）is・ne・fl the best means。f deveユ・ping rec・gni七i。n （listening comprehension） is not a ”matter of fact or data．”. There seems little empirieai evidence to support the transfer 6f learning from speaking to ユistening， f：【・om p：roductive. aspect to receptive aspect． Instead， there are a number of studies that help cre−. ate the idea of focusing on listening while developing the o：【’aユresponse as an alterna七ive apProach to fo：reign language. teaching． Some writers are now indicating that they hav’e. 1 Charle8 C・：Fh？ie8，幽and 工幽幽素魚皇堕』」幽．A：nn Arbo：r， Michり The University of Michigan ］？ress， 1945． p‘8．.

(12) 4. not found this type of t：ransfe：r which ：FPri es took for．9：ranted． 2 ．．．. Simon Beユasco（1971）， fo：r example， w：rites tha・t；he was 闘．．．jol’七ed t）y ’七he ：realizatio：n that it i8 po8si「ble to develoP ・・一. 窒＝cd、．1rp・a＃’ng．：・ab’1’七y’（一”・’ng）．and yrV． b・v’rPu−. aユユy incompetent in unde：rs七anding the spoken：language．te The audio一＝Lingual approach which Beユasco used， has a：lway8 placed lis七ening fi：rst in 七he sequence of skills， but in p：raetice 七his has ユa：rgeユy been ユ：istening、 fo：r speaking：ra七he：r ドエロドジ. than ユistening for understanding． The 「basic idea has ’been. f。r the student t。 imitate the s・unds by i曲ediateユy repeat− ing them after they hear them． One of the cause8 0f con−. fusion may be understanding the ：ro＝Le of imitation． Many conside：r language learning 七〇 be a fo：rm of imitation．. A growing body of evidence indicate8 that forcing s七uden七s 七〇 speak befo：re they have inte：rna＝Lized the ＝Language，. has de七rimenta］． effeets on’t；he acquisition of ］．anguage competence （Asher，↑ウ69， Er▽in， 1970， Postovsky， 1971， Winitz， 197：5， Furguson， 1974， Gary， 1975，：Bandura， 1977）． The ：re−. quiremen七 to：respond．ora＝Lユy immediately after one hea：r8 a. na七ive speaker・s voice， as in the mimicryomemo：rization pattern p：rac七ice of the audiQ−1ingual app；roach see鵬／’to reduce the re七ention of ma尤e：rial． The ：reducti◎n in：reten七ion. 2 Simon Be＝Lasco， 1「Can Cogni七ion and Ve：rba：L Behavioエ・. Coexist？璽曾ユ詠口ggaga g． and 廷｝he田eache：r 3⊥三曲」ユェL螂；t2gevELs！ls｝Ei s t i e s， Vol． XVIL． T owards a Cognitive A ppr o ach to. Seco：【1d 工angUage Acquisitユons ed． Robe：rt C。 Lugton，. Philadelphia：Center for Curricuユum Deveユopment， lnc． 1971． p．194’．.

(13) 5. may． be due to the effects of stress， or it may be due to the ユack of inte：rnal info：㎝atioll I）：rocessing． Or i七 may be due. to both o￡ them．. There are numbers of studies which indicate that a. ユis七ener need8 time to pro6ess the・ilnfo：rmation received （locascio， 1972， Craik， 1973， Kappel et al．， 1973）． Much”. of this evidenee indicates that the longer this processing 七akes，七he greate：r 七he retention wi1ユ be．. Mhere are a nurnber of advantages to shifting from a. response oriented approach to a stimulus oriqnted approach， f：rom a focus on speaking 七〇 a fecus on ユistening． The advan−. tages are summarized as foilows ：’ 1 ’t；he gでeater utili七y ofユistening ove：r the othe：r skil18，. 2 the greater positive transfer’from Zistening to the other skills，. 3 no negative transfer from speaking to other skilis， 4 the positive attitude even among those of lower aptitude f。「an apP「oach which 8eems to七he興。「e effective・. When one recognizes 七he need fo：r listening 8kills，. one may react by reexamining the audio−lingual procedutre，. in whieh a student is generally exposed to a great amount of lis七ening opPo：rtunity， but an anaユysis indicates that it may not be very effe 刀@tlve， beqause iistening oppg． rtu．nity iS nOt alWayS eqUiValen七 tO ユiStening P：raCtiCe． It is necessary to build up listening一，skill， through. careful graded exposure just as it was felt necessary to build up the oth，er skills by cared. 撃魔?撃撃凵@graded e？ce；ciFe．. Therefore， this paper will focus primarily on the approaches.

(14) 6. recently adv・cated f。r listening−ski耳buildipg by七w・ outstanding schoユa：ns「in・、 the Uni七ed Sta七es ； one i8 te The To七aユ. Physical Response APproacht’ by James 」． As，her of San Jose. State University and the other is ”Mhe Optimized Habit Reinforeement”（its t ext ’is g！1tlliL；［［EE L］iUtRNABLES） by Harri s Wini t z. of the University of Missouri， Kansas City． By examining these two approaches through experiments in Japan， it will be dSseussed whether they share the same result with those in the United States or not．工n addition 七〇』七his， by examining the indica七ions. that eomprehension must be built up in t’chunksit or ’tpausest’，. a hypothetieal gradation for listening comprehension would be propos’ ?п@through the e．xperiments on how chunks or pauses. work on listening comprehension． These empirical studies have been attempted with. acute hope that much more attention should be paid to the. listening comprehension， and that drastic changes in English langvtage education in Japan must be made． It should be estab一一. lished ， for example， that the eourse primarily fo￠uses on ＝Listening−skiユ1 building fo：r a certain amount of time ； for one year， though i七 i白unde七ermina’bコ．e， especia：L＝Ly at the. very beginning stage． By foeusing our attention on listening comprehension. and by delaying oral response， the．language learning process can be imp：【’oved by theユangUage teaching p：rofession． Also，七he p：【rocess can「be made much mo：re effec七ive fo：r the. learne：r and fa：r mo：re enjoyabユe for both the teacher and the.

(15) 7. student． ln order to be on this stage， however， it ’will. take more than one person響s opinion based on thoseユimited findings． lt will take a massive movernent of the entire. profession to pay attentioh to the listening comprehension and to reexamine some of its most basie assumption．.

(16) CHAPTER I I. T且E BAS工C CO耳CEPT O：F DEI」AY：E］）ORA：L RES：PONSE. A． The Reaction Against the Audio−lingual Approach In reeent years eogniVve psyghologists havg， bggun to. challenge the basic principles of behavioristic theories of. learning． Their theories rest uPon neure−psychological bases of thought and language， and as suc4 are said to be mental−. istic． Learning is not viewed as an array of eonditioned. responses to previously met stimuli， but as the aequisition. and sterage of knowledge． Behavioristic psychologists focus on the individual’s response while cognitive psyehologists emphasize the mental processes underlying that response． The major complaints against the audip−lingual approaeh， in generai， are as fonowsi： 1．. Claims that ”New Key” procedures would produce biiin− 9Ual gradua七es are no尤「being reaユized．. 2．. Reユiance upon onユy o且e sense modaユity in begin：ningユa：n−. guage work may hinder some students who are more eye． oriented．. 3．. Meachers find it impossible to eliminate the mother. tongue from the elassroom ； nor do they feel that sueh apractice is desirabユe．． 4．. Avoiding any discussion of grammar untii the Structure has．been overlearned is time consuning and frustrating to the students．. 5．. The continuous repetition required for overlearning is. monotonous 七〇 the s七udents and places considerabユ．e. physical strain upon the teacher．. 1Ke㎜e七h Chastain，、一Secondr幽Skills： ⊆蟄So Practice， 2nd ed．， Rand MgNa＝L］．y Coユユege ］？ub：lishing Company， Chicago， 1976． pp．132−133．.

(17) 9. 加・ub。ユ（1964）2r。ject。七瓦e c。ndi七i。血9 th。。ry。f. Zearning saying， ”．．．it is evident that the use of the. conditioning paradigm to explain the proeess whereby repre− sentational meaning is．．acquired eonstitutes an unwarranted extension of principles that are valid for certain simpie kinds of learning to a more eomplex task and qualitatively different kind aer learning．tt Behavioristic theories， then， L. may explain simple levels of learning． However， they are. not sufficiently encompassing to explain sueh complex proc− sSes aS rep：resen’t；ationa：L lea：nning， i． e．9 七he abiユity to. symbolize the world through words．. 3. 1n fact， the model fer’learning whieh Ausubel（1968）. postulates is quite di￡ferent from behavioristie teehniques． He feels that the learning process must be one of ”meaning−. ful learning．” lnformation acquired in a rote fashion， i． e．， t’arbitrarily and verbatimt’ is of little use to the ユ．earne：r・and is quick＝Ly forgotten． The impo：rtant criterion. is whether the new knowledge can be’ incorporated， or ttsub− sumed’t， into the learner t s existing cognitive strueture， i． e．， wha’七 he aユ：ready lmows． In orde：r fo：r the learne：r to. relate new material to what he has learned previously this material must be “’relatable to his structure of knowledge. on a nonarbitrary and nonverbatim basis．” Mhe implieation. 2 工）avid P． Ausubei， ttAdults ve：rsus Child：ren in Secondr：La：nguage ：Lear：ning ：：Psychoユogicaユ Co：nsiderations，tt， Mode：rn ⊇塑皇 Jou．：rna］．， 48， 7， 1964． P。65．・. 3 David ：P． Ausubel， Educa七iona］．．幽：＿∠L yegg：o New York： Holt Rinehart’一Zind−WifitSI6hJ；ton 1 grmt8T．3s． nitive View．.

(18) 10. here is that the instructional materials should assist the studen七七〇unde：rs七and aユユ tha七he is 七〇ユearn and to：reユa七e. all new material七〇prior㎞owledge。田his newly「. ≠モ曹浮奄窒?. knolArl edge must not be learned in an arbitrary or verbatim fashio：n． In othe：r wo：rds，七he student must be abユe， af七er. learning， to state what he knows in his own terms． Ausubel 4. （1968）’again states that ”the acquisition of large bodies of knowledge is simply irnpossible in the absence of meaning− ful iearning．ie Mhe assumption based on behavioristic theories， has been that language i8 conditioned ve：rbaユ behavior． Howeve】：㌧. 1 ．！. many writers in language， psychology， and linguistics are now saying that language i s much mor−e c．omplex than had been. s. previousiy supposed． Spolsky（1966） draws an important dis− tinetion when he states， ttKnowing a langvtage involves not just the performanee of language−like behavi ors， but an. underlying competence that makes sueh performanee possible． By ignoring this， it has been easy to make exaggerated claims for the effectiveness of operant c．onditioning in second−. 6 ．. language teaching．” Chornsky（1966） questions the behavioristie interpretation of language learning saying， ’！．．．it seems to. me impossible to aceept the view that linguistic behavior. 4 David P． Ausubel， 1968． op． cit． p．61． 5 Be；nard Spolsky， ”A Psyeholinguistic Critique of. 覆野中。？o「e’gn ’anguage lnst「uct’。n・1．ユ幽、V・ユ・IV・. 雑1耀繋llhl凹凹舞e罵al量・驚allad，.

(19) 11. is a matter of habit， that it is slowiy aequired by rein−. forcement， association， and generalizqtion．．．” 工七層n・wapPears七hat th・infini七e variety・f p。ssible. communicative utterances in the native speaker’s repertoire cannot be aceounted fer the basis of stimulus−response. 7. 1。arning． Miユ1・r・t a1．（1960）・ay that if the c． Enditi・ning・. of stimulus−response cgnnections were the means of language acquisition， a chiユdhood 100 yea：res long wi七hout any inte：r−. ruption for sleeping， eating， etc．， and a perfect retention of eve：ry s七ring of 七wen七y words af七e：r one presen七a七ion wouユd. be necessary to aceount for the language skill． MeNeil. 8. （1965） seeonds this notion and emphasizes the ereative aspects of ：Language when he explains， ttThe use of language resembユes more writing a ：Pユay than pe：rfo：rining in one．rt g. Ohmann（1969） points out that the native speaker is. so farniZiar with his own langUage tha尤he is ユikely to be awa：re of the complexity of the skiユ1 he l）ossesses． He has. the ability to comprehend and to use an infinite variety of sentences， many of thern eompletely novel． To emphasize the compl exity of language Ohmannusss as an exampl e a situation. in which twenty−five native speaker．s are asked to deseribe. ，諏訪田n器i論黙：；1麦1雌曾「意・葛n幽晦蟹in・hart 8D：，IP g N e i l，tatm e 1TnguggEsh h t ．g1tL 2E1t1；1s1zr s t Jg1tsd Seeond Lan一. 羅守門畿；1驕。S．3弓a「va「d Un’v・r・’ty・σ・n七・r f・r. 墨垂R欝諸欝；羅難1藩辮’S.

(20) 12. a seene in which a tourist is waiting outside a telephone booth whiユe a bea：【・taユks on 七he phone． A compute：＝r a：rlaユysユ8. 0f the twenty−five descriptions showed that they contain enough linguistie data for ”19．8 billion一 sentenceS， all describing’ just one situatiQn．” He goes on to say that，. ’tWhen one reflects that the number of seconds in a century is enZy 3．2 billion， it is clear that no speaker has heard，. read， or spoken more than a tiny fraction of the sentences he could speak or understand， and that no one learns ］inglish. by learning any parti￠ular sentences of English．tt In addition to these reactions， more researeh evidence. of the detrimental effects of the oral response in the. audio−lingual approach will be deseribed next． B． Why Should Speaking Be Delayed？ An increasing evidence shows that speaking before. having internalized the language has detrimental effects on ユanguage acqu・isition． The redue七ion o：￡re七ention by 七he. immediate reprgduetion may be due to the psychological causes as mentioned before． There are a number of studies which indieatq that the depth of the cognitive processing of info：rmation ：received， clo8eユy relates to the ：retenti◎n （Craik，1973， L。・a8ci。，1972’ C KapP・ユ・t al．，1973， FtU，9U。。n， 1974）．. Action such as speaking right after hearing， as in. the mimicry−memorization pattern practiees of the audio一一. lingual approach seems to be detrimental to the depth of.

(21) 13. proeessing the information reeeived． Mhe study o f Craik （1973）10. 堰B e8peciaユユy h。ユpfu、 i＿d。rStanding七hi。 ph。＿一. enon。工n one expe：riment the subjec七8 we：re given a ：iist Qf. single words． About each word， they were asked Qne question， but not all of the questions were alike． Mhere were fiire questions， each designed to foree the． learner to process the word at a greater ”cognitive depth” than the questien. which preceded it． In this experiment， it was assuned that eaeh question. would force the student to， make a deeper decision about the. word．． Mhe deeper decisions required some additional time，. but this led to dramatically better performance on both a. ll. recognition 七ask and on a：recaユ1 ta8k． C：raik（1973）『beユieves. that when attention is diverted from an item that is in primary mernory， ’tit will be lost from primary memory and will bg forgotten．．．．at a rate appropriate to its level ．of analysis ． t．t. In related experiments， some−of the subjeets were. ；equired to pronounce aloud the words in a list while o，ther. subjeets only read the items silently or heard them spoken by the experimenter． The recaU of both gr．oups of subjects 12. was cornpared． One report concluded that，. 翻叢難：会iliぎ藷撫：轄難（郷y’” 11 lbid． p．51．. 12 P．M．．Tell and A．M． Ferguson， ”lnfluenee of Aetive end tL4ssiye−Vgcal．tz a t i on，． on Shor t T erin R e e all，”一lgtu1pa；Lurnal gLf. ＿エ旦幽， 102s． 1974． p．59．一，.

(22) 14 6．．i’t appears 七hat the requirement of ac七ive voca＝Li鼎. zation at presentation interferes with effeetive coding operations・ Active vocaユization may demand mOre attenロ. tion．．。璽he effect may not invoユve just the disrup七ion of rehea：rsal strategies，’bu七may instead ユessen the 8e鱒. le￠tive attentien capabUities that are necessqry for of effective encoding ih rnemory． Thus， the advantages hearing the word rather than pronouncing it oneself ane the ：Longer ：re七entiOn intervaユs， when the info：r− mainly a七 matipV氏@i’n echoic ifiemory has dissipated（ Mell and ］i‘urguson， 1974）．. 工n anothier study on associative reaction time in language 13. aequisition ， Ley and ：Locascio（1972） eome to a simiユa：r conclusion．．．．our research suggests that one must make associa−. tions to verbal materials during learning in order that. the materiaユ can be ユater recalled and tha七 some procedu：re. su￠h as repeatedly saying the materiai aloud inter￡ers with the．assoeiative Pro6ess， and therefore has a detri一・血1en七al effect on Zearning．. Fhnrther support for the Craik position eomes from 14. another study which presents evidence that， ”the nonvoiced. items in a serial recall task were processed to a deeper level 七han 七he voiced i七ems．●。（ Kappeユ e七 a：L．，1973） Craik has further evidence that the test of immediate recall sueh as oecurs in mimicry−memory drills， is of little value in ］．onge：r te：rm memo：ry sto：rage and thus in ：【retention of ユan繭. guage competence．. His key experiment began like many. 15 R． Ley and D． locaseio， Associative Reaction Mime. ip−Pangugge Aequisition， A Paper Presented at AERA， Chieago， 1972． p・5．. 14 S． Kappel， M． Harford， V．D． Burns and N．S． Andeエ’son， 1IEffects of Voca：】．ization on Short 田e：rm Melno：【・y. f。r Words，”ユ9哩． of ＿＿乙，つ01， 1973． p・316．.

(23) 45. 0thers ： subjects did free recall of word listi and the. probability ef reeall for each word was plotted against. its position in the series． As expected， when recaU began immediately， the last’ ??浴@words in the list were the most ］．ikeユy to l）e ：reca＝Lユed，七hat is， there was a s七rong. recency effect． Many experimenters have used this type of evidence to suggest techniques for studying． Craik， however， went further． At the end of going through a number of lists， in this fashion， Craik then required the subjects to try to recall all of the words from all of the lists with which the subjeets had dealt one at a time．. Mhis task produced a striking ”negative recency effectt’． Mhe very words which had occurred at the end of the. individual lists and which had been strongest in immediate. 15. free reeall now were least recalled． Craik（1975）． inter− p：reted this finding a8 showing that ttwoエ・ds originally. retrieved from primary memory were not well registered in the long term storage．，e. The eXperiments just reviewed were all done with. native speakers of the language． We may not be able there− fore to generaユize to fo：reign ユanguage lea：rning di：rectユy．. However， by analogy， there seems to be rnueh food for. thought in these experiments， and it would seem even more ・ユ・sely r・lat・d t・f。r・ignユanguag・teaching than。v。n. with one’s native language．. 15 F物rgus 工。M● Craik：， 1973・ op● ci七． p．55．.

(24) t6 16. 0ne study by Olユer（1971） may give u8 some clues of. how these experiments’・reiated to second−language learning． He demonstrated that sentenees are easier to learn if the. student rneets them in a meaningfu1 context． One explanation for this may be that the meaningful context permits，indeed demands more eompユex proeessing． A short experimen七 by Ashe：r may howeve：r be more ’七〇 the point， but it add8 another. potentia：L dimension not norma］ユy p：resent with na七ive speakers・. 17. Asher（1969） had two groups of students perform certain drill movernents by command in Russian． He found that the students who merely performed the eommands did so with a greater de−. gree of reliability than those who first repeated the commands oraユ：ly be：fo：re pe：rforming the necessary movern ent ． Whiユe the. effects of voicing on retention as indicated by the previ−p. ously reviewed experiments probably had some effects， Asher. 18. （1969） int：roduced 七he addi七iona：L facto：r of stress as a. factoエ・in the：retarding of listening fluency．．．．the st：res8 0f t：rying to pronounce the aユien utter−. ranc．e may．relard lirptening’flu．en’cy．．． The optimal strategy serial may be ユearning in which。ne achievesユistening. fluency just before. 七〇 speak． one attempts. 19. J． B．’Biggs（1968） has pointed out that stress has. an effect similar to that of voieing as found in the previ−. ously reviewed experiments．. 一in. 結i軍ユも望「lg鞭n離1ヨ早 gsgnd Foreign Language. tLi2，31；3Cat，￥ieS，Pgggge，，，．s−i7． ApPr・a・編a臨応身詮寮aglT麗艦夢蜜a罐呈rP儲．. 18 lbid． p．13．. rユーvi・↓1蹟舞S16塁慧吾三蓋nc暑響驚誹●.