Output Hypothesis

Output
hypothesis
Prepared by:
Emily Gan Hui Fang
Emily Teng Jie Ling
Kelly Wong Ing Swan
Voon Suk Fong
Zechrist Anak Zachariah
Output hypothesis
• Developed by Merill Swain
• According to the hypothesis, students learn
language when they realize there is a gap in
their language skills.
• The learner becomes aware and may be able
to modify his output  he learns something
new about the language.
• For example, a student makes a language
mistake, becomes aware of the mistake
because of feedback, and then tries again.
Producing the correct message through trial
and error enables the student to modify
language appropriately in the future.
• The output hypothesis proposes that through
prucing language, either spoken or written,
language acquisition may occur. (Swain, 1985).
• Language production provides the
opportunity for meaningful practice of one’s
linguistic resources permitting the
development of automaticity in their use. (Use
the language as frequently as possible.)
Three Function of Output in L2
Learning
Hypothesis-
testing
function
Metalinguis
Noticing tic
function /reflective
function
Noticing function
• It refers to the awareness or “noticing”
students find when they cannot say or write
exactly what they need for conveying
meaning.
Hypothesis-testing function
• This function suggests learners may use the method of
“trial and error” for testing his production expecting to
receive a feedback.
• By uttering something, the learner tests this hypothesis
and receives feedback from an interlocutor.
• Comprehensible output hypothesis – understandable
• Feedback is important, 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.
• Can I say it that way?
• I don’t know if that is right. Is it?
• Trying it out – see if that works
Short-Term (Working) Memory
• Act as a temporary scratch pad, or Post-It notes in our
brain
• Held some pieces of information temporarily, like
numbers when we do a maths calculation
• Simultaneous translation, interpreter store information
one language L1 and translate it into another language
L2.
• Short-term memory do not store concepts but links or
pointers e.g words.
• It will disappear if we do not make effort to retain it.
• It is a necessary step toward the next step of retention,
long-term memory.
Short-Term to Long-Term
• It is a necessary step toward the next step of
retention, long-term memory.
• Transfer to Long-Term memory, facilitated by
mental repetition of the information, or by
giving it meaning, or association.
• Motivation is also a key to help retain in Long-
Term memory.
METALINGUISTIC FUNCTION/
REFLECTIVE FUNCTION
Learners reflect on
the language they
learn, and thereby
the output enables
them to control and
internalize linguistic
knowledge.
• Language production aids learners in acquiring a L2 in four different
ways:
1. Provide opportunities for meaningful practice, allowing the

development of automatic linguistic behaviours
2. Force the learners to switch from semantic mental processes to

syntactic ones
 As Krashen (1982) suggested: "In many cases, we do not utilize syntax in
understanding, we often get the message with a combination of
vocabulary, or lexical information plus extra-linguistic information".
 Whereas in an understanding process the use of syntax may not be
essential, it is in the production stages that learners are forced to consider
syntactic aspects of the target language.
• Language production aids learners in acquiring a L2 in
four different ways:
3. Through testing hypothesis

 Output provides students with the opportunity to test their
own hypothesis and withdraw their own conclusion – “trial
and error”
4. Responses of other speakers of the language (especially

native ones)
 Give learners information on how comprehensible or well-
formed their utterances are
INPUT HYPOTHESIS (KRASHEN)
VS
OUTPUT HYPOTHESIS (MERRYL SWAIN)
Input Hypothesis Output Hypothesis
• Through language input • Through language output/
production (speaking & writing), SLA
(Listening & reading), SLA would be more likely to occur
would be more likely to occur • Learners realise what they know and
what they don’t
• Stress on comprehensible  “Gap” between what one can say and
input what one would like to be able to say
• Learners are motivated towards
• Regards language production modifying their output – to learn sth
as not necessary, as sth that new abt the TL
should not be forced, since it • Feedback
• Challenge learners to focus on means
will appear naturally after a of expression when they realize it is
certain amount of necessary to enhance and develop
comprehensible input the TL level
REFERENCES
Luis, P.W. (2016). Second Language Acquisition:
Swain’s output VS Krashen’s input. Retrieved
on 11 February, from
http://eslarticle.com/pub/english-as-a-
second-language- esl/139016-Second-
Language-Acquisition-Swain-s-Output-Vs-
Krashen-s-Input.html
Implications of Output Hypothesis for
Second Language Learning
• Provide learners with considerable in-class
opportunities to speak or write  Provide
feedback  Students reflect on their output
and consider ways of modifying it to enhance
comprehensibility, appropriateness and
accuracy.
• Encourage collaborative learning (e.g. group
work)
– Results in greater quatity of output and
negotiation of meaning of meaning than that
found in teacher-fronted classes (Long &Peter,
1985)
• Appropriate choice of activities
– Enhance positive interdependence (fosters
interaction)
– Equal participation by students
– Accountablity by each participant

Output Hypothesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Output Hypothesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Output Hypothesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Output

1. Provide opportunities for meaningful practice, allowing the

2. Force the learners to switch from semantic mental processes to

3. Through testing hypothesis

4. Responses of other speakers of the language (especially

You might also like