英语论文网

1.1 Background of the Research
这个问题与教师使用目标和第一语言在外语课堂关注每一个外语老师,和老师之间平衡,应该寻求使用TL和李娜在第二语言课堂是有争议的。自从上个世纪1960年代,使用李在语言教学中一直是一个争论的问题研究不仅在第二语言习得领域(SLA;如。,格思里,1987;Kharma & HalJAJ,1989;1996;&Wigglesworth Nizegorodcew斯托奇,2003;唐,2002年),而且在整个国际语言场。大多数的研究在国外进行了研究,并从理论角度证明(例如。特恩布尔和阿奈特2002)。应用语言学的发展,实证研究的实际使用李和TL在外语教学课堂最近已经收到其注意力。虽然针对使用李已成为近年来更少比以前严格,根据许多研究者的信念,主导方法在外语教学提倡不使用李在TL教室(如。,达夫& 1990)脊髓灰质炎。因此许多语言教学方法继续假设TL应该主要通过TL和,如果有资源去李,它应该尽可能地最小化(特恩布尔,2001)。这个问题变得棘手的如果一个人以动静极限的态度。一些人甚至可能认为,教师应该避免使用李完全使用它可能和戴利的教师和不足视为耻辱(问室,1992;库克,2001年,引用在朱利安&侯赛因2009)。那些负面的这个观点非常注意使用和可能的功能李,为避免误解,负迁移等等(安东&DiCamilla 1999;阿特金森1987;1993;2003年奥尔巴赫茨;库克2001)。根据研究,在教师的实际变化确实存在,并简化从总除外(罕见),多达90%的使用经常被发现,甚至李在教师教学情况明显相同的甚至当教师的母语是TL(利特尔伍德&玉2009)。
The issue related to teachers' use of the target and first language in foreignlanguage classroom concerns every foreign language teacher, and the balance thatteachers should seek between using the TL and the LI in the second languageclassroom is controversial.Since 1960s in the last century, the use of LI in language teaching has been anissue of ongoing debate study not only in the field of second language acquisition(SLA; e.g., Guthrie, 1987; Kharma & HalJAJ, 1989; Nizegorodcew, 1996; Storch &Wigglesworth, 2003; Tang, 2002), but also in the whole international linguistic field.Most of the research in foreign countries were studied and demonstrated fromtheoretical perspective (e.g. Turnbull & Arnett 2002). With the development ofapplied linguistics, the empirical study of actual use of LI and TL in foreignlanguage teaching classroom recently has received its attention. Although reactionsagainst the use of LI have become less strict in recent years than before，according tomany researchers' belief，the dominant approach in the foreign language teaching hasadvocated no use of LI in TL classroom (e.g.，Duff & Polio 1990, 1994). Thus manylanguage teaching approaches continue to assume that TL should be mainly throughthe TL and that if there is resource to LI, it should be minimized as much as possible(Turnbull, 2001). The question become thorny if one takes the all-or-none attitude.Some even may believe that instructors should avoid using LI altogether and thosewho use it may be inadequate pedagogues and considered as a shame (Q Chambers, 1992; Cook, 2001，cited in Julian & Hossein 2009). Those who have a negative valueof this viewpoint pay much attention to the use and possible functions of LI，foravoiding misunderstanding, negative transfer and so on (Anton &DiCamilla 1999;Atkinson 1987; Auerbach 1993; Belz 2003; Cook 2001).According to studies, the variation in teachers' actual practice did exist, and arange from total exclusions (which is rare) to as much as 90% use of LI wasregularly found, even amongst teachers in apparently similar teaching situations andeven when the teachers are native speakers of the TL (Littlewood & Yu 2009).

1.2 Purpose and Significance of the Research
Similar problems also existed in the foreign language teaching and learning inChina. The issues about whether LI could be applied or not and what the bestamount of TL and LI in the foreign language classroom is hotly debated and which isright or wrong can not be decided. According to a survey of related articles andforeign language teaching practice, it's not so hard to see that the amount of TL andLI that teacher use w本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。