Previously, we were examining and looking at
the most important issues in the INPUT HYPOTHESIS; now, we want to link these
two hypotheses because it is important to think of the role of production in
English. From our point of view, output is closely related to the process of
production.
For Swain, constant practice facilitates the
learner to be conscious of her/his production. Output makes to move the learner
from the semantic processing to the complete grammatical processing for
accurate production.
According to Merrill Swain, “The output
hypothesis claims that the act of producing language (speaking or writing)
constitutes under certain circumstances, part of the process of second language
learning”1. As it can be noticed, there is a need for implementing
and improving the use of these two skills
which are different from the Input Hypothesis and that could be grouped
together, forming a whole construct
necessary for students to be able to convey meaning and communicate their
ideas.
According to this author there are three
specific functions of output; they are as follows:
1. The noticing/triggering function: It refers
to the awareness or “noticing” students find when they cannot say or write
exactly what they need for conveying meaning. With the use of this function,
learners realize there are some linguistics problems they need to manage, so
that, it pushes the student to look for the adequate knowledge they require for
completing the new discovered gap.
“Learners may notice that they cannot say what
they want to say in the target language” (Swain 1995) Noticing this “hole”
(Doughty and Williams 1998) may be an important step to noticing the gap. 2
2. The hypothesis-testing function: This function suggests learners may
use the method of “trial and error” for testing her /his production expecting
to receive a feedback. This feedback can be applied in two ways: recasts and
elicitations or clarifications requests. Example:
3. The metalinguistic (reflective function):
Language is seen as a tool conducive to reflection on the language used by the
teacher, their partners and the student himself/herself. (Vigotsky´s
sociocultural theory)
Stetsenko and Arievitch (1997:161) state:
“Psychological processes emerge first in collective behavior in co-operation
with other people, and only subsequently become internalized as the individual’s
own possessions.”
When explaining this theory, it is necessary to
highlight the importance of the negotiation of meaning, which is not simply
related to understand the meaning of the message the transmitter sends to the
receiver despite the problems in its structure, but a clear, precisely,
coherently and appropriately message=Pushed output. Pushed output example:
This theory
has a great importance since thanks to it, we can move from the input data
provided to the student from the environment to the capacity of the learner to
produce a clear and coherent language.
We
considered it is important to make our students to produce language through
writing exercises or activities and speaking interaction among students. If we
are able to store information in our student’s brain, they will have the
necessary background for conveying meaning and make their communication
activities an efficient practice.
Comprehensible
input + Comprehensible output = Effective Second language Acquisition.
Some important advantages applicable to the
classrooms when reflecting upon this hypothesis are the collaboration and
interaction necessary for students to feel comfortable and work together.
Language in this case will serve as a mediating tool, which allows students to
lead with the solving-problem process they encounter in the path of acquiring
the second language.
It is something of great importance to be
conscious of our role of individuals who have a more advanced conscious process
in contrast to our students and consequently the ones able to provide
correction for students applying new accurate and proper constructions when
providing feedback. This feedback is important in our context, especially,
because it is one of the few settings in which students have a contact to the
target language and they need advices and corrections for improving their
production.
1,2 Power Point Presentation: The output
hypothesis: Its history and its future. Merril Swain. Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education of the University of Toronto.
Posted by: Jessica B. Liberato