Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

YABANCILARA TÜRKÇE DİL BİLGİSİ ÖĞRETİMİNDE GİRDİ ODAKLI GÖREVLER

Year 2022, Volume: 11 Issue: 1, 315 - 340, 15.03.2022

Abstract

Girdiler dil öğrenicisine yazılı, sözlü veya görsel olarak sunulan dilsel verilerdir. Çoğu çalışmaya göre girdi, yabancı/ikinci dil öğretiminin temel taşıdır. Bu durum, kuralların kullanımını edindirmeyi hedefleyen dil bilgisi öğretimi için de geçerlidir. Öğrenicilerin, çıktı tabanlı ürünler ortaya koyabilmeleri için girdinin, alındıya dönüşmesi yani işlemlenmiş olması oldukça önemlidir. Bu amaçla dil öğrenicisi, gerçek yaşam durumlarını yansıtan zengin, ilgi çekici, anlam odaklı, söylemsel düzeydeki yapılandırılmış girdi görevlerine maruz kalmalıdır. Yabancılara Türkçe dil bilgisi öğretimine yönelik çalışmalara bakıldığında yöntem kitaplarının hedef dilbilgisel yapıların farklı anlam ve kullanımlarına yönelik söylemsel düzeyde girdi görevleri içermediği görülmektedir. Oldukça yoğun dilbilgisel içerikle karşı karşıya olan dil öğreticileri, bu bağlamda desteklenmelidir. Bu gerekçeyle çalışmada, söylemsel düzeyde yapılandırılmış girdi odaklı dil bilgisi görevleri tasarlanmıştır. Hedef dil bilgisi konusu, gelecek zaman kipinin hikâyesidir (-(y)AcAktI). Bu tip girdiler sayesinde dil öğrenicisi, sunulan bağlamlar üzerinden bilişsel süreçler işleterek biçim-anlam eşleştirmesi yapar ve hedef dilbilgisel yapının biçim, anlam ve kullanımlarına yönelik yorumlarda bulunup farkındalık kazanır.

References

  • Ak Başoğul, D. ve Aksu, C. (2016). Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde dil düzeylerine göre metin değiştirim sürecinde okutman yeterlikleri. S. Dilidüzgün (Ed.). Kuram ve uygulama bağlamında Türkçe öğretimi (ss. 427-441). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Angelovska, T. (2017). Beyond instructed L2 grammar acquisition: theoretical insights and pedagogical considerations about the role of prior language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 397-417.
  • Barın, E., Çobanoğlu, Ş., Ateş, Ş., Balcı, M. ve Özdemir, C. (Ed.) (2015). Yedi iklim Türkçe B2. Ankara: Yunus Emre Enstitüsü.
  • Benati, A. (2016). Input manipulation, enhancement and processing: theoretical views and empirical research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 65-88.
  • Benati, A. (2017). The role of input and output tasks in grammar instruction: Theoretical, empirical and pedagogical considerations. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 377-396.
  • Benati, A. & Angelovska, T. (2017). The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of English simple past tense: age and cognitive task demands. IRAL, 53(2), 249 – 269.
  • Bölükbaş Kaya, F. (2021). Yabancılara Türkçe dil bilgisi öğretimi. İstanbul: Kültür Sanat Basımevi.
  • Celce-Murcia, M. & Hilles, S. (1988). Teqhniques and resources in teaching grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book (2nd ed.). USA: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Cem, A. (2005). Dilbilgisi öğretiminde biçim-anlam-kullanım üçlüsü: ders malzemesi ve uygulama önerisi. Dil Dergisi, 128, 7-11.
  • Cem Değer, A., Çetin, B. ve Oflaz Köleci, B. (2017). Kuramdan uygulamaya yabancılara Türkçe dilbilgisi öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Chalker, S. (1994). Pedagogical grammar: principles and problems. M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn & E. Williams (Eds.). Grammar and the language teacher (pp. 31-44). New York: Prentice Hall.
  • Council of Europe (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment – companion volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
  • Crossley, S. A., Allen, D. & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Text simplification and comprehensible input: a case for an intuitive approach. Language Teaching Research, 16(1), 89-108.
  • Danylenko, O. (2020) Input-and output-based grammar instruction in teaching English after German. World Science, 6(58), 11-17.
  • DeKeyser, R., Salaberry, R., Robinson, P. & Harrington, M. (2002). What get processed in processing instruction? A commentary on Bill VanPatten’s “processing instruction: an update’’. Language Learning, 52, 805–823.
  • Durmuş, M. (2013a). Metin değiştirimin dilbilimsel süreçleri üzerine. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(4), 391-408.
  • Durmuş, M. (2013b). İkinci/yabancı dil öğretiminde özgün ve değiştirilmiş dilsel girdi üzerine. International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(1), 1291-1306.
  • Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 87-105.
  • Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33, 209-224.
  • Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: an sla perspective, TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.
  • Fidan, D. (2016). Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretimi ders kitaplarındaki dilbilgisi konuları ve öğretmen-öğrenici görüşleri. Turkish Studies, 11(14), 257-276.
  • Fotos, S. (2001). Cognitive approaches to grammar instruction (3rd ed.). M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.) Teaching English as a foreign language (pp. 267-284). Heinle & Heinle.
  • Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition (2nd ed.) VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.). Theories in second language acquisition an introduction (pp. 180-206). New York and London: Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: a comprehensive grammar. Londra & New York: Routledge.
  • Günay, D., Yıldız, F., Çetin, B., Köleci, E., Oryaşın, U., Atak, A., Demirhan, Y., Tülü, T. ve Şen, E. (Yay. Haz.) (2015). İzmir yabancılar için Türkçe B2 öğretmen kitabı. İstanbul: Papatya Yayıncılık.
  • Hahn, A. & Angelovska, T. (2017). Input-practice-output: a method for teaching L3 English after L2 German with a focus on syntactic transfer. T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.). L3 syntactic transfer: models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5) (pp. 299-319). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Harrington, M. (2004). Commentary: Input processing as a theory of processing input. B. VanPatten (Ed.). Proccesing instruction theory, research, and commentary (ss. 79-92). Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Hinkel, E. & Fotos, S. (2002). From theory to practice: a teacher’s view. E. Hinkel, & S. Fotos (Eds.). New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 1-12). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.). Sociolinguistics: selected reading (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  • Kaygısız, Ç. (2020). Authentıc language input in foreign language teaching materials: advantages and disadvantages. Dil Dergisi, 171(2), 32-45.
  • Keck, C. & Kim, J. (2014). Pedagogical grammar. Amsterdam & USA: John Benjamins Publishing.
  • Korkmaz, Z. (2009). Türkiye Türkçesi grameri şekil bilgisi (3. baskı). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  • Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. Harlow: Longman.
  • Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
  • Krashen, S. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. N. Ellis (Ed.). Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 45–77). New York: Academic Press.
  • Krashen, S. (1998). Comrehensible output. System, 26, 175-182.
  • Krashen, S. (2009). Principles and practice in second language acquisition (1st int. ed.). Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching grammar (3rd ed.). M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-257). Boston MA: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language from grammar to grammaring. Boston: Thomson Heinle.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar (4th ed.). M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 256-270). Boston MA: National Geographic Learning.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2014). Dil öğretiminde teknik ve ilkeler (3. baskı) (M. Calp, çev.). Ağrı: Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Loschky, L. & Bley-vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. G. Crookes & S. M. Gass (Eds.). Tasks and language learning: ıntegrating theory and practice (pp. 123-167). Clevedon UK: Multilingual Matters.
  • Newby, D. (2008) Pedagogical grammar: a cognitive+communicative approach. W. Delanoy & L. Volkmann (Eds.). Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 29-44). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
  • Newby, D. (2014a). Do grammar exercises help? Assessing the effectiveness of grammar pedagogy. C. Haase & N. Orlova (Eds.). ELT: Harmony and diversity (pp. 3-16). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Newby, D. (2014b). Harmonising the teaching and learning of grammar: a cognitive+communicative approach. Babylonia The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2(18), 23-29.
  • Newby, D. (2015). The role of theory in pedagogical grammar: a cognitive + communicative approach. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 13-34.
  • Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2000), Effectiveness of L2 instruction: a research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
  • Peçenek, D. (2008). Yabancı dil öğretiminde dilbilgisi. Dil Dergisi, 141, 67-84.
  • Richards, J. C. & Reppen, R. (2014). Towards a pedagogy of grammar instruction. RELC Journal, 45(1), 5–25.
  • Russell, V. (2016). An examination of learners’ noticing and processing of complex Spanish grammar in authentic ınput texts. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 13(1), 5–29.
  • Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
  • Shintani, N. (2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Sülüşoğlu, B. (2008). İşe dayalı dil öğretim malzemelerinin Türkçe’nin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde uygulanması (Yüksek lisans tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • TELC (2013). Diller için Avrupa ortak öneriler çerçevesi öğrenim, öğretim ve değerlendirme (2. baskı). Frankfurt/Main: telc GmbH.
  • Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach grammar (4th imp.). Malaysia: Longman.
  • Uzun, N. E. (Ed.) (2012). Yeni Hitit 1 yabancılar için Türkçe ders kitabı, A1, A2. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • VanPatten, B. (1993). Grammar teaching for the acquisition-rich classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26(4), 435-450.
  • VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • VanPatten, B. (2004). Input proccessing in SLA. B. VanPatten (Ed.). Proccesing instruction theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5-32). Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • VanPatten, B. & Cadierno, T. (1993). Input processing and second language acquisition: a role for instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77(1), 45-57.
  • VanPatten, B. & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: processing instruction and communicative tasks. F. R. Eckman, D. Highland, P. W. Lee, J. Mileham & R. R. Weber (Eds.). Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 169-186). Mahwah New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Willis, J. R. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: understanding our practices, acknowledging different practitioners. B. L. Leaver & J. R. Willis (Eds.). Task-based instruction in foreign language education, practices and programs (pp. 3-44). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
  • Willis, J. R. (2016). A flexible framework for task-based learning an overview of a task-based framework for language teaching. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/30503745/A_flexible_framework_for_task_based_learning_An_overview_of_a_task_based_framework_for_language_teaching
  • Wong, W. (2010). Exploring the effects of discourse-level structured input activities with French causative. A. Benati & J. Lee (Eds.). Processing instruction and discourse (pp. 198–216). London: Continuum Press.
  • Wong, W. (2015). Input, input processing, and output: a study with discourse-level input and the French causative. IRAL, 53(2), 181 – 202.
  • Yılmaz, M. Y., Bölükbaş, F. ve Keskin F. (Ed.) (2020). Yeni İstanbul, uluslararası öğrenciler için Türkçe ders kitabı C1. İstanbul: Kültür Sanat Basımevi.
  • Ying, H. (1994). What sort of input ıs needed for intake? SLAT Student Association Working Papers, 2(1), 28-40.
Year 2022, Volume: 11 Issue: 1, 315 - 340, 15.03.2022

Abstract

References

  • Ak Başoğul, D. ve Aksu, C. (2016). Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde dil düzeylerine göre metin değiştirim sürecinde okutman yeterlikleri. S. Dilidüzgün (Ed.). Kuram ve uygulama bağlamında Türkçe öğretimi (ss. 427-441). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Angelovska, T. (2017). Beyond instructed L2 grammar acquisition: theoretical insights and pedagogical considerations about the role of prior language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 397-417.
  • Barın, E., Çobanoğlu, Ş., Ateş, Ş., Balcı, M. ve Özdemir, C. (Ed.) (2015). Yedi iklim Türkçe B2. Ankara: Yunus Emre Enstitüsü.
  • Benati, A. (2016). Input manipulation, enhancement and processing: theoretical views and empirical research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 65-88.
  • Benati, A. (2017). The role of input and output tasks in grammar instruction: Theoretical, empirical and pedagogical considerations. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 377-396.
  • Benati, A. & Angelovska, T. (2017). The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of English simple past tense: age and cognitive task demands. IRAL, 53(2), 249 – 269.
  • Bölükbaş Kaya, F. (2021). Yabancılara Türkçe dil bilgisi öğretimi. İstanbul: Kültür Sanat Basımevi.
  • Celce-Murcia, M. & Hilles, S. (1988). Teqhniques and resources in teaching grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book (2nd ed.). USA: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Cem, A. (2005). Dilbilgisi öğretiminde biçim-anlam-kullanım üçlüsü: ders malzemesi ve uygulama önerisi. Dil Dergisi, 128, 7-11.
  • Cem Değer, A., Çetin, B. ve Oflaz Köleci, B. (2017). Kuramdan uygulamaya yabancılara Türkçe dilbilgisi öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Chalker, S. (1994). Pedagogical grammar: principles and problems. M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn & E. Williams (Eds.). Grammar and the language teacher (pp. 31-44). New York: Prentice Hall.
  • Council of Europe (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment – companion volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
  • Crossley, S. A., Allen, D. & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Text simplification and comprehensible input: a case for an intuitive approach. Language Teaching Research, 16(1), 89-108.
  • Danylenko, O. (2020) Input-and output-based grammar instruction in teaching English after German. World Science, 6(58), 11-17.
  • DeKeyser, R., Salaberry, R., Robinson, P. & Harrington, M. (2002). What get processed in processing instruction? A commentary on Bill VanPatten’s “processing instruction: an update’’. Language Learning, 52, 805–823.
  • Durmuş, M. (2013a). Metin değiştirimin dilbilimsel süreçleri üzerine. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(4), 391-408.
  • Durmuş, M. (2013b). İkinci/yabancı dil öğretiminde özgün ve değiştirilmiş dilsel girdi üzerine. International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(1), 1291-1306.
  • Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 87-105.
  • Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33, 209-224.
  • Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: an sla perspective, TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.
  • Fidan, D. (2016). Türkçenin yabancı dil olarak öğretimi ders kitaplarındaki dilbilgisi konuları ve öğretmen-öğrenici görüşleri. Turkish Studies, 11(14), 257-276.
  • Fotos, S. (2001). Cognitive approaches to grammar instruction (3rd ed.). M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.) Teaching English as a foreign language (pp. 267-284). Heinle & Heinle.
  • Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition (2nd ed.) VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.). Theories in second language acquisition an introduction (pp. 180-206). New York and London: Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: a comprehensive grammar. Londra & New York: Routledge.
  • Günay, D., Yıldız, F., Çetin, B., Köleci, E., Oryaşın, U., Atak, A., Demirhan, Y., Tülü, T. ve Şen, E. (Yay. Haz.) (2015). İzmir yabancılar için Türkçe B2 öğretmen kitabı. İstanbul: Papatya Yayıncılık.
  • Hahn, A. & Angelovska, T. (2017). Input-practice-output: a method for teaching L3 English after L2 German with a focus on syntactic transfer. T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.). L3 syntactic transfer: models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5) (pp. 299-319). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Harrington, M. (2004). Commentary: Input processing as a theory of processing input. B. VanPatten (Ed.). Proccesing instruction theory, research, and commentary (ss. 79-92). Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Hinkel, E. & Fotos, S. (2002). From theory to practice: a teacher’s view. E. Hinkel, & S. Fotos (Eds.). New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 1-12). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.). Sociolinguistics: selected reading (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  • Kaygısız, Ç. (2020). Authentıc language input in foreign language teaching materials: advantages and disadvantages. Dil Dergisi, 171(2), 32-45.
  • Keck, C. & Kim, J. (2014). Pedagogical grammar. Amsterdam & USA: John Benjamins Publishing.
  • Korkmaz, Z. (2009). Türkiye Türkçesi grameri şekil bilgisi (3. baskı). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  • Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. Harlow: Longman.
  • Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
  • Krashen, S. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. N. Ellis (Ed.). Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 45–77). New York: Academic Press.
  • Krashen, S. (1998). Comrehensible output. System, 26, 175-182.
  • Krashen, S. (2009). Principles and practice in second language acquisition (1st int. ed.). Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching grammar (3rd ed.). M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-257). Boston MA: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language from grammar to grammaring. Boston: Thomson Heinle.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar (4th ed.). M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 256-270). Boston MA: National Geographic Learning.
  • Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2014). Dil öğretiminde teknik ve ilkeler (3. baskı) (M. Calp, çev.). Ağrı: Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Loschky, L. & Bley-vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. G. Crookes & S. M. Gass (Eds.). Tasks and language learning: ıntegrating theory and practice (pp. 123-167). Clevedon UK: Multilingual Matters.
  • Newby, D. (2008) Pedagogical grammar: a cognitive+communicative approach. W. Delanoy & L. Volkmann (Eds.). Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 29-44). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
  • Newby, D. (2014a). Do grammar exercises help? Assessing the effectiveness of grammar pedagogy. C. Haase & N. Orlova (Eds.). ELT: Harmony and diversity (pp. 3-16). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Newby, D. (2014b). Harmonising the teaching and learning of grammar: a cognitive+communicative approach. Babylonia The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2(18), 23-29.
  • Newby, D. (2015). The role of theory in pedagogical grammar: a cognitive + communicative approach. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 13-34.
  • Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2000), Effectiveness of L2 instruction: a research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
  • Peçenek, D. (2008). Yabancı dil öğretiminde dilbilgisi. Dil Dergisi, 141, 67-84.
  • Richards, J. C. & Reppen, R. (2014). Towards a pedagogy of grammar instruction. RELC Journal, 45(1), 5–25.
  • Russell, V. (2016). An examination of learners’ noticing and processing of complex Spanish grammar in authentic ınput texts. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 13(1), 5–29.
  • Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
  • Shintani, N. (2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Sülüşoğlu, B. (2008). İşe dayalı dil öğretim malzemelerinin Türkçe’nin yabancı dil olarak öğretiminde uygulanması (Yüksek lisans tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • TELC (2013). Diller için Avrupa ortak öneriler çerçevesi öğrenim, öğretim ve değerlendirme (2. baskı). Frankfurt/Main: telc GmbH.
  • Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach grammar (4th imp.). Malaysia: Longman.
  • Uzun, N. E. (Ed.) (2012). Yeni Hitit 1 yabancılar için Türkçe ders kitabı, A1, A2. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • VanPatten, B. (1993). Grammar teaching for the acquisition-rich classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26(4), 435-450.
  • VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • VanPatten, B. (2004). Input proccessing in SLA. B. VanPatten (Ed.). Proccesing instruction theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5-32). Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • VanPatten, B. & Cadierno, T. (1993). Input processing and second language acquisition: a role for instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77(1), 45-57.
  • VanPatten, B. & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: processing instruction and communicative tasks. F. R. Eckman, D. Highland, P. W. Lee, J. Mileham & R. R. Weber (Eds.). Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy (pp. 169-186). Mahwah New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Willis, J. R. (2004). Perspectives on task-based instruction: understanding our practices, acknowledging different practitioners. B. L. Leaver & J. R. Willis (Eds.). Task-based instruction in foreign language education, practices and programs (pp. 3-44). Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
  • Willis, J. R. (2016). A flexible framework for task-based learning an overview of a task-based framework for language teaching. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/30503745/A_flexible_framework_for_task_based_learning_An_overview_of_a_task_based_framework_for_language_teaching
  • Wong, W. (2010). Exploring the effects of discourse-level structured input activities with French causative. A. Benati & J. Lee (Eds.). Processing instruction and discourse (pp. 198–216). London: Continuum Press.
  • Wong, W. (2015). Input, input processing, and output: a study with discourse-level input and the French causative. IRAL, 53(2), 181 – 202.
  • Yılmaz, M. Y., Bölükbaş, F. ve Keskin F. (Ed.) (2020). Yeni İstanbul, uluslararası öğrenciler için Türkçe ders kitabı C1. İstanbul: Kültür Sanat Basımevi.
  • Ying, H. (1994). What sort of input ıs needed for intake? SLAT Student Association Working Papers, 2(1), 28-40.
There are 71 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Duygu Ak Başoğulu This is me

Publication Date March 15, 2022
Submission Date October 25, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 11 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Ak Başoğulu, D. (2022). YABANCILARA TÜRKÇE DİL BİLGİSİ ÖĞRETİMİNDE GİRDİ ODAKLI GÖREVLER. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim (TEKE) Dergisi, 11(1), 315-340.

27712  27714 27715