编者按
华体会体 语言认知科学学科创新引智基地公众号推出“对话大咖”专栏，基地将邀请学术大师进行学术经验分享和交流。本次分享基地研究生新生与基地特聘教授、美国宾夕法尼亚州立大学James Lantolf教授进行的学术交流。
专家简介
James P. Lantolf教授为引智基地特聘教授、美国宾夕法尼亚州立大学荣休教授、国际权威语言学期刊Applied Linguistics 主编,Lantolf教授是当今社会文化理论发展的主要领军人物之一，主要研究领域为社会文化理论（SCT）和课堂二语发展，提出概念教学法（CBT），首创了动态评估（DA）的理念，曾荣获“AAAL（北美应用语言学协会） 最杰出学者和服务奖”，并被《应用语言学发展史（1980年后）》列为过去35年中最具影响力的应用语言学家之一。
Q1:将社会文化理论(SCT)与二语习得(SLA)研究相结合，较传统二语习得研究，其意义与落脚点在何处？
Compared to the traditional sense of SLA research, what is the exact significance and focus of combining SCT with SLA research?
Lantolf：
二语习得领域约莫有18个理论，其中，大多数理论是基于语言学的二语习得专门研究理论。作为一门广义心理学理论，社会文化理论突出了语言在思维过程中重要作用。所以社会文化理论与其他理论的区别是，大多数理论的关注重点在于语言学习者出于社会交际需求而内化的外语知识的能力，而社会文化理论从社会交际中发掘出语言的第二个功能——心理机能——也就是语言调节思维过程的功能。目前，还没有其他二语习得理论涉及到这个重要的领域 。社会文化理论的一个关注重点是：在学习者的心理机能范畴内，学习者能在多大程度上内化一门新语言。
There are something like 18 different theories of SLA. Most are designed specifically for SLA and are largely linguistically-based theories. SCT is a general psychological theory that assigns significance to language in the thinking process. Hence, most theories are focused on the ability of learners to internalize a new language for the purpose of social communication. SCT recognizes that language has a second function, derived from social communication, and this is its psychological function—that is, its capacity to mediate the thinking process. No other theory of SLA addresses this important topic. An important question that SCT considers is the extent to which a learner can internalize a new language in its psychological function.
Q2:与传统的第二语言习得研究相比，将社会文化理论与第二语言学习研究相结合的意义和重点是什么？
What is the significance and focus of combining SCT with SLA research, compared to traditional SLA research?
Lantolf：
我不确定如何界定“传统”二语习得研究。正如我在第一个问题中所回应的，学界大约有18种二语习得理论。我不赞同“社会文化理论和二语习得相结合”的说法。我倾向于如此解释：因为社会文化理论是一个解释思维形成和运作过程的广义心理学理论，而它必须考虑到学习第二语言对思维过程的影响（可参考第一个问题答案）。
I’m not sure what traditional SLA research is. As I said in my answer to the first question, there are approximately 18 different theories of SLA. I wouldn’t say that SCT combines with SLA. I would say that because SCT is a general psychological theory that explains the formation and functioning of thinking, it has to consider the impact of L2 learning on the thinking process (as I tried to explain in my response to the first question).
Q3:如何保持学术上的热情？
You are an world-class scholar with great achievements, so how do you always maintain passion on academic research?
Lantolf：
这个问题很难回答。回首我40年的研究生涯，社会文化理论为“学习新语言对个体意味着什么”这一研究提供了更多可能性，这令我沉醉其中。如何提高外语学习效率？学习者如何利用所习得的语言来调节与他人的关系和自己的思维过程？这些问题发人深省，我认为维果斯基的著作也为这一系列问题提供了很好的解答思路。
This is a difficult question to answer. The possibilities --that SCT offers --for investigating-- what the learning of a new language means --for the individual --has fascinated me for the past 40 years. How can we improve the learning of new languages and once they are learned how do people use them to regulate their relationships to others and to their own thinking process. To me this is a fascinating question and I believe that Vygotsky’s writings provide a way of answering these questions.
Q4:您有什么学术阅读的技巧吗？您是如何阅读文献的？
Do you have any tips for academic reading and how do you organize your reading list especially the papers?
Lantolf：
维果斯基说过，要成为一个优秀的研究者，必须先提出有价值的问题。因此，我总是带着问题去阅读，并试着从中找出答案。单纯为了阅读而阅读，成效往往差强人意。动机性阅读是以探寻问题答案为目的的阅读。我知道有人总想读完二语习得领域所有的期刊文章。即使是我这样做，也难免会说东忘西。但如果我是为了解惑而阅读，那么知识更容易进入我的脑海以及应用到我接下来的研究中。此外，拓展阅读范围也很重要。爱因斯坦曾说，拓展阅读范围是发展创造性思维的重要一环，我很认同这一说法。另外，维果斯基认为坚持阅读哲学也很重要，这一点我也很认同。因为哲学为所有科学工作提供了理论背景。因此，我鼓励大家既要阅读专业领域的知识，也要阅读非专业领域的内容，你会发现，许多问题的答案，甚至许多问题都来自于课外读物。
Vygotsky wrote that to be a good researcher one has to ask good questions. So, I always try to organize what I read around the questions that I ask. Reading for the sake of reading is not very productive. Reading to try to find answers to good questions is motivated reading. I know people who try to read everything that appears in SLA journals. If I do this, much of what I read is forgotten. But if I read because I want to try to find answers to good questions, I am more likely to remember what I read and I am more likely to use this knowledge in my own research. Also, it is very important to try to read outside of your field. Einstein said that this was the key to his ability to think creatively and I agree. Vygotsky insisted that it was important to read philosophy and I agree with this as well. Philosophy provides the theoretical background for all work in science. I would encourage you to mix reading within your field with reading outside of your field. You will find that many of the answers to your questions and even many of your questions will come from outside reading.
Q5:请问如何将社会文化理论和认知神经科学运用在语言学研究中？
How can SCT and cognitive neuroscience be used together in linguistic research ?
Lantolf：
这个问题非常好。在社会文化理论兴起之初，一些学者已经在维果茨基和鲁利亚引领下将研究兴趣延伸到神经科学领域，比如上世纪中后期进行的一些研究。鲁利亚是维果茨基最重要的同事，他被广泛公认为神经心理学的奠基人。我目前进行的研究项目尝试将ERP研究与社会文化理论相结合。这对于研究大脑和思维有重要意义——二者并不是一回事。没有大脑，人类将无法思考，但大脑本身无法产生思维。文化也是形成思维的重要机制。因此，我们需要了解大脑和文化如何相互作用以形成思维。1973年，鲁利亚出版了一本非常重要的著作--《工作脑》，他在书中用社会文化理论来阐释大脑和思维的运作方式，还利用该理论帮助脑损伤患者修复因外伤受损的心智功能。就这个话题我可以展开更多，但我想以上回答已足以让你们对于神经科学和社会文化理论协同工作的意义和方式有了一定了解。
This is a really good question. From the beginning of SCT with the work of Vygotsky and Luria they were deeply interested in neuroscience research, such as it was conducted in the middle and latter part of the last century. Luria, Vygotsky’s most important colleague, is considered by many to be the founding father of neuropsychology. I am currently working on a research project that is trying to integrate ERP research with SCT. The reason this matters is because we need to understand what goes on in the brain as well as the mind. They are not the same thing. A brain is necessary to think but it isn’t sufficient to generate a mind. Culture is also an essential mechanism in the formation of the mind. So, we need to understand how brain and culture interact to create a human mind. Luria published a very important book in 1973—The Working Brain, in which he used SCT to not only to understand how the brain and the mind functioned but to also help people with brain damage repair the mental functions they lost because of the damage. I could say much more about this topic but I think my response gives you some sense of why and how neuroscience and SCT can work in tandem.
Q6:研究二语习得是否需要具备一些数学和物理方面的知识？如果需要的话想问问具体要掌握哪些方面?
In the ongoing path of SLA research, I wonder if it is necessary or would it be better to master some knowledge or skills of math and physics. If so, I would like to ask what specific aspects should be acquired?
Lantolf：
我不确定掌握物理学本身会有多大帮助。但是，我们可以从物理学家严谨地开展研究、发展和检验理论的方式和过程中得到一定启发。物理学家一般不会用多种理论同时解释同一现象，因此他们努力去检验哪一个理论最具有说服力。然而在二语习得研究情况却大不相同，所以这个领域现存18种不同理论，物理学家们可能对此无法理解。我并不是说我们应该用物理学方法来研究二语习得，真若如此，会出问题——毕竟物理学研究的现实与SLA和一般社会科学研究的现实迥然不同，研究对象也大相径庭，但正如维果斯基所主张的：“我们需要灵活运用不同的研究方法”，我想表达的是，我们可以借鉴物理学家的研究方式探索问题，诸如如何构建理论、理论研究的意义是什么之类的问题。至于数学，除了数学统计的重要性，我不知道该具体再谈些什么。需要强调的是我们必须谨慎在研究中使用统计数据。
I’m not sure that mastery of physics makes much of a difference per se. However, by understanding how physicists engage in rigorous research to develop and test theories, I think there is something to learn. Physicists are not comfortable with multiple theories that seek to explain the same phenomena. They try to determine which of competing theories best explains the phenomena. Unfortunately, in SLA this hasn’t happened and is a major reason why the field currently tolerates 18 different theories. This would be an intolerable situation for physics. I am not saying that SLA should use the same methods that physics uses to carry out research. To do so creates a problem because the reality that physics studies is a very different reality from what SLA and the social sciences in general study. The study of people is vastly different from the study of inert meaningless matter. So, as Vygotsky argued, we need different research methods. However, as I said, I think we can learn from physics something about how to build theories and why theories matter. I’m not sure what to say about math, other than it would be useful to study statistics. But here we have to be careful about how we use statistics in our research.
Q7:请问您对我们这些研究小白，从哪些方面，以哪些形式开始学习，进入二语习得领域，有什么建议吗？
Respected Professor, I am a green hand on academic research. Could you please give us some practical advice on SLA research? Such as from what point should we get into this research area, or in what learning style do you prefer and suggest us to do?
Lantolf：
学习开展研究工作最好的方法就是付诸行动。不过，我尤其建议团队合作的形式。大家在团队中明确分工，每个成员负责研究项目研究的不同方面。领队最好应由经验丰富且有能力统筹设计和执行研究的科研人员担任。随着成员对各自的工作越来越熟悉，大家各自对自己的工作负责，他们做研究的能力也会日益精进。
I believe that the best way to learn how to do research is to do research. I suggest, however, working in teams, where you set up a division of labor, so that each member of the team is responsible for different aspects of a research project. Ideally, the team should be headed up by an experienced researcher, who can help with the design and execution of a study. Over time the team members can be responsible for different aspects of the project and as each member becomes familiar with these aspects, they development a better understanding of how to do research.
Q8:近几年有哪些您认为比较好的二语习得方面的新理论？
Could you please introduce several latest theories you think are valuable in the domain of SLA?
Lantolf：
正如我在几个回答中反复强调的那样，二语习得领域众说纷纭，我们也没办法减少理论数量。我认为没有多少研究者了解或者愿意了解其他流派的二语习得理论，毕竟还是在自己的舒适圈做研究更轻松。但若一直抱有这样的想法，我们很难取得进步。当下有个热门问题：我们可以向语言从业者（比如语言教师）提出哪些建议来改善教学质量，并提高学生的学习效率呢？对于这个问题，一种理论建议采用隐性教学法，另一种理论建议采用显性教学法，那么，在面对相互矛盾的建议时，教师们又该如何抉择呢？至于最新的理论，我有些新书推荐大家阅读：如《Mitchell, Miles和Marsden》、 《Second Language Learning Theories》、《vanPatten, Keating, Wulff》、《 Theories in Second Language Acquisition. An Introduction》.
As I have tried to stress in several of my answers, there are too many theories in SLA and we don’t seem to be doing anything to reduce the number. I don’t think there are many researchers who understand, or who even try to understand alternative theories. They are comfortable working in their own theory. It is difficult to imagine how we can make progress this way. An immediate problem is what recommendations can be made to practitioners, such as language teachers, for improving instruction that enhances student learning. One theory recommends implicit instruction and another recommends explicit instruction. How can teachers decide when presented with such conflicting recommendations? As for the latest theories, I think it would be best to have a look at recent books such as Mitchell, Miles and Marsden. Second Language Learning Theories as well as vanPatten, Keating, and Wulff. Theories in Second Language Acquisition. An Introduction.
Q9:最近二语习得领域的研究以实证研究为主，我们设计自己的实验时，有哪些需要注意的问题？
I noticed that empirical studies is especially common-used in recent SLA research, so could you please give us some suggestions on experimental design?
Lantolf：
设计一个实验很容易，但要设计一个能解决重要且有趣的问题的实验就不那么容易了。我在二语习得研究中发现了一个问题：作为老师，我们经常教学生如何设计实验，却很少教学生如何设计有趣的问题。这就导致刚踏入研究领域的小白研究每个问题都套用同一种他们所熟知的实验设计方式。就好比，你的工具只有一把锤子，你就会把所有问题都看做钉子。一个有价值的研究（不一定是实验——也可以用其他方式进行研究）最重要的是要基于良好的理论基础，因为你能基于理论提出有价值的问题，而理论基础对于设计研究以及解决问题也能提供一定指导方向。
It is fairly easy to design an experiment, but it is not so easy to design an experiment that can answer important and interesting questions. One of the problems I see in SLA research is that we tend to teach students how to design experiments but we don’t show them how to think about interesting questions. The result is that new members of the field then try to apply what they know about experimental design to every problem they want to investigate. To paraphrase: when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail. The most important step in designing a good study (not necessarily and experiment—because there can be alternative ways of conducting a study) is to start with a good theory because a good theory will allow you to ask good questions and it will also provide guidance in how to design appropriate studies to answer the questions.
线上学术答疑预告
基地将邀请James Lantolf教授在11月进行线上学术答疑活动，详细安排敬请持续关注，欢迎积极参与！
