The Importance of Input， Interaction and Output in SLA and Its mplication for College English Teaching

張以

【Abstract】Input interaction and output， all of them are important for the language learning. This assertion has pedagogical implication for our College English teaching.

【Key words】Input； Interaction； Output； English teaching Textbook

1. Introduction

Children can develop their language without effort， but why are we still struggling in the foreign language classroom？（Meisel， 2011）. Both teachers and students complain it a lot and desire to find a way out. Given the importance of input， interaction and output in the process of learning a second or foreign language， this paper is going to review the roles of input， interaction and output in the second （foreign） learning and then analyze its pedagogical implication for the College English teaching.

2. Input， interaction and output in SLA

Krashen （1982， 1985） proposes the Input Hypothesis， which believes that exposure to “i+1” is sufficient to guarantee acquisition. Swain （1985， 1995） argues that Krashen oversimplifies considerably the processes of acquisition， and downplays the role of output and proposed the Output Hypothesis to emphasize the status of output in SLA. In regard to the study of the Interaction Hypothesis， it is the interaction （negotiating for meaning） that helps realize the comprehensible input and output and connects them as a whole because what the learners should master includes both declarative knowledge （know what）， and procedural knowledge （know how） （Gass & Selinker， 2010）， Ultimately the learners have to engage in communication （interaction） using what they have learned. Given the difference between acquisition and learning suggested by Krashen in 1982， which holds that only language knowledge acquired through real communication can be produced， but learning is just about “knowing”. Many foreign language teachers and researchers take the idea into account in their foreign language learning and teaching. Gass and Mackey （2006， p.3） point out “exposure to language （input）”， “production of language （output）”， and “feedback production （through interaction）” are primary components for second language learning. And Vanpatten （2007） suggests that teachers should facilitate more input， interaction and output in the language classroom to make it acquisition-oriented.

Therefore， we should attach importance to all of them， which has important pedagogical implication for English language teaching in the classroom.

3. Implication for our College English teachingendprint

3.1 To make the input comprehensible

As the most direct input and medium of some other input， “teacher talk”， which is used to guide students activities and regarded as “a source of input for acquisition” （Ellis and Shintani， 2014， p. 168） and believed to be very important to foreign language teaching in classroom settings. Teachers thus should adjust and modify their speaking according to students level of comprehension （Cook， 2000）.

Besides， the textbook—as another essential source of input in the English classroom of China （Wu， 2001）—is designed according to the national curriculum， which does not fully consider the requirements of less-developed areas. Therefore， it is beyond some students understanding to some extent. Therefore， what measures should we take to make the textbook more comprehensible and acceptable is also an issue worth of exploring.

3.2 To facilitate meaningful interaction

Interaction in the classroom cannot be simply understood as questions and answers or greetings between teachers and students or pair work or group discussion between students. It is should be regarded as the “meaning-based” interaction with a communicative goal （Vanpatten， 2007）.

For example， without a doubt， there must be a gap between English teachers language and students understanding， which is supposed to be the “trigger for negotiation” （Gass， 2011， p.108）. The process of negotiating for meaning is definitely a good opportunity for students to practice their oral English. Therefore teachers should consider how to carry out activities to facilitate the occurrence of this process.

And group discussion is a primary sort of interaction usually adopted among students in the classroom. But measures should be taken to make sure it is carried out with real meaning but is not just a mere formality， otherwise it cannot function well in second or foreign language learning.

No matter what kind of interaction we are going to promote in our classroom， it is quite important to care about its real meaning and effectiveness.

3.3 To emphasize students output

It is widely accepted that English is a global language in China （Lin & Block， 2011）， we should thus study English with the purpose of using it as a tool for communication， which requires the English competence to receive and deliver messages accurately （Liao， 2004， Dai， 2001）. According to Swain （1985， 1995）， only comprehensible output， which emphasizes that the learners should deliver a message “precisely， coherently and appropriately” can stimulate SLA. So， teachers should pay close attention to the quality of students output.endprint

4. Conclusion

Input， interaction and output—all of them are important in the development of a second or foreign language. This assertion has pedagogical implications for English language teaching. As a college English teacher in an underdeveloped region， due to the lack of teaching resources and opportunity for students to practice their English， it is even more important for us to facilitate students English learning by giving full play to the role of each of the three aspects in our language classrooms.

References：

[1]Dai，W.D.（2001）.goujian juyou zhongguo tese de yingyu jiaoxue “yi tiao long” tixi.（The Constructing of a Connected Sequence System of English Teaching with Chinese Characteristics.）Foreign Language Teaching and Research（5），322-327.

[2]Ellis，R.，&Shintani，N.（2014）.Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research.London：Routledge.

[3]Gass，S&Mackey，A.（2006）.Input，interaction and output：An overview.AILA Review，19，3-17.

[4]Gass，S.&Selinker，L.（2008）.Second language acquisition：an introductory course.New York，NY：Routledge.

[5]Gass，S.（2011）.Input and Interaction，and the Second Language Learner.New York：Routledge.

[6]Krashen，S.（1982）.Principles and practice in second language acquisition.Oxford：Pergamon Press.

[7]Krashen，S.（1985）.The Input Hypothesis：Issues and implications.London：Longman.

[8]Liao，X.Q.（2004）.The need for Communicative Language Teaching in China.ELT Journal，58（3），270-273.

[9]Meisel，J.（2011）.First and second language acquisition.Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.

[10]Swain，M.（1985）.Communicative competence：Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development.In S.Gass and C.Madden（Eds.）Input in second language acquisition（pp.235-253）.Rowley，MA：Newbury House.

[11]Swain，M.（1995）.Three functions of output in second language learning.In G.Cook and B.Seidlehofer（Eds.）.For H.G. Widdowson：Principles and practice in the study of language.Oxford：Oxford University Press.

[12]VanPatten，B.（2007）.From input to output：a teachers guide to second language acquisition.（English-Chinese bilingual adapted edition）.Beijing：World Book Publishing Company.

[13]Wu，Y.A.（2001）English language teaching in China：Trends and challenges.TESOL Querterly，35（1），191-194.endprint