2.2 Classification of Self-repair
Levelt put forward the most specified classification systems in the field oflanguage acquisition. He distinguished two main types of repairs: covert repair andovert repair. Covert repairs are problematic date because it is almost alwaysimpossible to determine what the speaker is monitoring (Levelt, 1983). A covertrepair may be characterized by just an interruption plus editing term, or the repeat ofone or more lexical items. Besides, it’s even impossible to decide whether a covertrepair results from a ‘false alarm’ of the monitoring. But covert repairs do tell usmonitoring can take place before the utterance is overtly expressed. Overt repairs takeplace after the wrong items has been expressed. As a result, overt repairs can be easilyidentified and classified. Levelt states that monitoring has potential access to a largerange of aspects of the speech produced. Speakers will monitor intention and meaningof their expressions, and monitor for linguistic deviancy during the utterance. Theywill bear these three questions in mind while they are speaking. “Do I want to say thisnow?”; “Do I want to say it this way?”; and “Am I making an error?” (Levelt, 1983).According to the answers to these questions, Levelt classified self-repair into threetypes: different information repair, appropriateness repair and error repair.While speaking, the speaker may change his original intention and realize that hebetter expresses another message than the one he is currently formulating. The otherstatement of this message would be easier or more effective. Such a state of affairspresumably triggers the speaker to repair. The current message is replaced by adifferent one. Such repairs are called different information repairs.Chapter Three Methodology........................22
3.1 Research Questions ............223.2 Subjects.......................22
3.3 Instruments........................22
Chapter Four Results and Discussion .....................25
4.1 Results and Discussion on the Questionnaire ....................25
4.2 Results and Discussion on Oral Task.............................28
Chapter Five Conclusion.....................43
5.1 Major Findings ..........................43
5.2 Pedagogical Implications..................................44
Chapter Four Results and Discussion
4.1 Results and Discussion on the Questionnaire
The questionnaire aims to work out students’ attitude towards their own errors,their methods of correcting errors and the content they made self-repair. Thequestionnaires were handed to 100 subjects. The data collected from the questionnaireis presented in this part. (For the content of the questionnaire, see Appendix I ) Item 1 and Item 2 are mainly about the personal information of the subjects.There are 50 male students and 50 female students participated in the questionnaireresearch. Their ages are all above 16 and the number of students who are in the agegroup of 19-21 is the most, accounting for 87%. Therefore, the subjects share similarage. Besides, they all received regular English education in middle school and sharedsimilar L2 proficiency. In general, about 73% of the subjects choose to correct their errors at once. Mostof the students take the same attitude towards errors and they hope to correct theerrors at once. Because they think repairing at once can give them profoundimpression and cause less misunderstanding. 60% of male students and 86% of femalestudents hope to cor