Task repetition is being increasingly examined in the fields of second language acquisition and task‐based language teaching, and the findings have revealed insightful theoretical and pedagogical implications for foreign language instruction. However, previous research has mainly focused on speaking tasks, and the role of different types of task repetition using collaborative writing tasks has received little attention. This study compared two task repetition types (exact task repetition and procedural repetition) on the quality of writing output (i.e., complexity and accuracy), learner attention to linguistic forms, and the learning of four Korean grammar features. Thirty‐eight Korean‐language learners were assigned to either an exact task repetition or a procedural repetition condition. They completed a pretest, two collaborative writing tasks, and a posttest over two weeks. Written output was analyzed for complexity and accuracy, and learners' oral interactions during collaborative writing were analyzed for the occurrence of language‐related episodes. Pretest and posttest responses were scored for suppliance and accuracy of target feature production. Results showed that exact task repetition benefitted syntactic complexity and the accuracy of target features. However, little evidence of benefits for global accuracy was found. The procedural repetition group performed less well during the second task performance than they did on the first task. However, they scored significantly higher on the posttest compared to the exact repetition group.

中文翻译：

---

任务重复在韩语作为外语教室中的作用：写作质量，对形式的关注以及对韩语语法的学习

在第二语言习得和基于任务的语言教学领域，越来越多地研究任务重复，这些发现揭示了对外语教学的深刻的理论和教学意义。但是，以前的研究主要集中在口语任务上，使用协作写作任务的不同类型任务重复的作用很少受到关注。这项研究比较了两种任务重复类型（精确任务重复和过程重复）在写作输出的质量（即复杂性和准确性），学习者对语言形式的关注以及四种韩国语法特征的学习方面。38名朝鲜语学习者被分配了确切的任务重复条件或程序重复条件。他们完成了一项预测，两项协作写作任务，并进行了为期两周的后期测试。分析书面输出的复杂性和准确性，并分析学习者在协作写作过程中的口头互动，以了解与语言有关的情节的发生。对测试前和测试后的反应对目标特征产生的顺应性和准确性进行评分。结果表明，精确的任务重复有益于语法复杂性和目标特征的准确性。但是，几乎没有证据表明整体准确性会带来好处。程序重复组在第二项任务执行期间的表现不如在第一项任务中执行的好。但是，与精确重复组相比，他们在后期测试中的得分明显更高。分析了协作写作过程中的口头互动，以了解与语言有关的情节的发生。对测试前和测试后的反应进行评分，以评估目标特征产生的顺应性和准确性。结果表明，精确的任务重复有益于句法复杂性和目标特征的准确性。但是，几乎没有证据表明整体准确性会带来好处。程序重复组在第二项任务执行期间的表现不如在第一项任务中执行的好。但是，与精确重复组相比，他们在后期测试中的得分明显更高。分析了协作写作过程中的口头互动，以了解与语言有关的情节的发生。对测试前和测试后的反应对目标特征产生的顺应性和准确性进行评分。结果表明，精确的任务重复有益于语法复杂性和目标特征的准确性。但是，几乎没有证据表明整体准确性会带来好处。程序重复组在第二项任务执行期间的表现不如在第一项任务中执行的好。但是，与精确重复组相比，他们在后期测试中的得分明显更高。结果表明，精确的任务重复有益于语法复杂性和目标特征的准确性。但是，几乎没有证据表明整体准确性会带来好处。程序重复组在第二项任务执行期间的表现不如在第一项任务中执行的好。但是，与精确重复组相比，他们在后期测试中的得分明显更高。结果表明，精确的任务重复有益于语法复杂性和目标特征的准确性。但是，几乎没有证据表明整体准确性会带来好处。程序重复组在第二项任务执行期间的表现不如在第一项任务中执行的好。但是，与精确重复组相比，他们在后期测试中的得分明显更高。