Abstract

Recent studies have shown that languaging contributes to second language skill development. Feedback is often used in combination with languaging as a prompt of verbalization during writing revision, and this combination has shown the effect of increasing the quality of writing. The present study tested whether and how indirect feedback helps learners engage in languaging, and whether the effects continued with the second new writing on the same topic. Forty participants engaged in a three-stage writing task: writing a first draft, revision with languaging with/without feedback on specific grammatical or lexical errors, and writing the second draft. Writing was multidimensionally assessed in terms of syntactic complexity, grammatical accuracy, and fluency. The results showed that the participants focused more on grammar when they were given feedback and succeeded in more error correction than when they did not receive feedback. Learners improved in fluency and slightly in accuracy, but not in complexity, regardless of the existence of indirect feedback. Importantly, written languaging with feedback did not show superiority to written languaging without feedback in skill development. The findings suggest that even metalinguistic correction induced by feedback is not always necessarily effective, but languaging may have a positive effect on overall writing quality.

摘要

最近的研究表明，语言有助于第二语言技能的发展。反馈通常与语言结合使用，以作为写作修订过程中的口头表达，这种结合已显示出提高写作质量的效果。本研究测试了间接反馈是否以及如何帮助学习者进行语言学习，以及在同一主题的第二次新写作中效果是否继续。四十名参与者完成了一个三阶段的写作任务：编写第一稿，在有/没有针对特定语法或词汇错误的反馈的情况下进行语言版本的修订，以及编写第二稿。在语法复杂性，语法准确性和流利度方面对写作进行了多维评估。结果表明，与未收到反馈相比，参与者在获得反馈时更多地关注语法，并且在纠正错误方面更加成功。无论是否存在间接反馈，学习者的流利度和准确性都有所提高，但复杂度却没有提高。重要的是，具有反馈的书面语言在技能开发中没有表现出优于没有反馈的书面语言的优势。研究结果表明，即使是由反馈引起的元语言校正也不一定总是有效的，但是语言可能会对整体写作质量产生积极影响。有反馈的书面语言在技能开发中没有表现出优于没有反馈的书面语言的优势。研究结果表明，即使是由反馈引起的元语言校正也不一定总是有效的，但是语言可能会对整体写作质量产生积极影响。有反馈的书面语言在技能开发中没有表现出优于没有反馈的书面语言的优势。研究结果表明，即使是由反馈引起的元语言校正也不一定总是有效的，但是语言可能会对整体写作质量产生积极影响。