Читать книгу The Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics - Carol A. Chapelle - Страница 107

To measure the linguistic resources of communication, language testers need a means of defining them. What exactly are linguistic “resources of communication” and how can they be represented? Is a list of grammatical structures that learners need to master an adequate representation for assessment? Are the resources forms that are associated with literal meanings? Are they forms that can vary in meaning depending on the context in which they are used? Or are they an amalgam of independent form‐meaning mappings that conspire to convey propositions in context?

These questions remain important in the assessment of grammar despite the fact that L2 educators have always acknowledged the importance of linguistic resources, specifically the grammatical resources of communication. Fundamental questions remain because of lack of agreement on how to represent linguistic resources as well as how they can best be taught, tested, and researched. As a result, for decades, testers have proposed and refined models of L2 knowledge, each specifying an explicit grammatical component (e.g., Lado, 1961; Canale & Swain, 1980; Bachman, 1990; Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Purpura, 2004, 2016). These models are introduced as reflecting two distinct conceptualizations of language proficiency: one based on knowledge of grammatical form and the other based on a set of linguistic resources for creating contextualized meaning. Both conceptualizations of L2 knowledge are effectively used today as a basis for designing assessments for a range of purposes, but their differences are important because they affect score interpretation and use.