Revisiting the Ambiguity of Recasts
کلیدواژه ها : recasts; uptake; feedback; errors
کلید واژه های ماشینی :
This article reports on an empirical investigation of the teachers’ correction of students’ spoken errors of linguistic forms in EFL classes, aiming at exploring the existing controversy in the literature regarding the ambiguity of recasts - a form of corrective feedback. More specifically, the focus of this study is to investigate why recasts might be taken simply as confirmation of meaning and non-corrective repetition rather than as a corrective reformulation. The database is drawn from transcripts of audio-recordings of 25 lessons from five teachers (five lessons from each teacher) totaling 31 hours and including 752 error correction exchanges. Analysis of the data suggested that ignoring the structural differences between various types of recasts and taking them as one single corrective feedback type might have given rise to two different views of recasts as to the extent to which recasts might be taken as feedback on form. Hence, recasts were divided into two distinct types of marked and unmarked ones. Uptake was taken as the criterion for measuring the effectiveness of recasts and the extent to which learners might ‘notice’ different types of recasts, though only at an observable verbal level. Findings indicate that the rate of uptake move following marked recasts is considerably higher than that of unmarked ones. The article concludes by arguing that marked recasts are less likely to be taken as confirmation of meaning rather than feedback on form. However, this possibility is much higher in unmarked recasts in which there is no added focus on the corrective reformulation to help the students recognise it as feedback on form.
- دریافت فایل ارجاع :
- (پژوهیار, , , )