【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 et language while their attention is principally focused on the meaning rather on the form. The task should also have a sense of pleteness, being also to stand alone as a municative act in its own right (Nunan, 1989:15)3 Nunan,D. (1989) Design Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge University Press..….any structural language learning endeavor which has a particular objective, appropriate content, a specified working procedure, and a range of outes for those who undertake the task. “Task” is therefore assumed to refer to a range of workplans which have the overall purpose of facilitating language learningfrom the simple and brief exercise type, to more plex and lengthy activities such as group problemsolving or simulations and decisionmaking (Breen, 1987:23)4 Breen, .(1987) learner Contributions to Task Design. In Candlin, Christopher, and Murphy, D.(Eds), Language Learning Tasks, Prentice Hall..….one of a set of differentiated, sequenceable, problemsolving activities involving learners and teachers in some joint selection from a range of varied cognitive and municative procedures applied to existing and new knowledge in the collective exploration and pursuance of foreseen or emergent goals within a social milieu (Candlin, 1987:10).These definitions are roughly arranged in terms of a continuum of “real world” to “pedagogical” perspectives on what tasks are. This distinction between the “real” world and the classroom does not imply that the classroom is not a valid social context in its own right (Breen, 1985). Nor, indeed, are real world and pedagogical tasks mutually exclusive: there is no reason why tasks cannot have both real world and pedagogical dimensions. However, as implied in the first two definitions provided by Long and by Crookes, respectively, pedagogical tasks should be derived from real world tasks, since analytical syllabuses are based in part on an analysis of learners’ behavioral needs (Wilkins, 1976). The Types of Tasks From the various definitions of tasks, we can know that some researchers lay emphasis on the reality of tasks, . tasks are the things that are to be done in the real life, while other researchers determine the definitions of tasks from the classroom teaching angles, emphasizing the close relationship between tasks, language and language learning. On the basis of this, Nunan(1989) suggests that tasks should be divided into two types: realworld tasks and pedagogical tasks. Realworld tasks are the various things that are pleted in the situations which is close to or similar to the real life. An example of a realworld task might be: the learner will listen to a weather forecast and identify the predicted maximum temperature for the day. Or the learner will listen to a weather forecast and decide whether or not to take an umbrella and sweater to school (Nunan,1989:40). Pedagogical tasks are pieces of classroom works which involve learners in prehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the language while their attention is principally focused on meaning rather than forms. They have a nonlinguistic oute, which are things that don’t happen out of the classroom. For example, asking the learners to tell the differences between two pictures in pairs, asking the learners to draw geometrical figures from the teacher’s instruction, asking learners to put forward a suggestion to solve fictitious problems. Willis (1996) classifies tasks into six main types: listing, ordering and sorting, paring, problemsolving, sharing personal experiences and creative task. In fact, Willis does not really classify tasks according to a certain criterion, but lists some mon tasks. Even though, this classified method has a certain inspiring effect on teachers’ designing tasks. He suggests that simple tasks may consist of only type, for example, listing, and plex tasks may incorporate two or more types, such as listing and then with paring and ranking etc. Apart from this classification, Willis proposes a range of task designs that “require learners to process the text for meaning in order to achieve the goals of task. This will involve reading, listening or viewing with some kind of municative purpose, and may well involve talking about the text and perhaps taking notes.”(Willis,1996:71). Pica, Kanagy and Falodun (1993, in Richards and Rodgers, 2001:234) classify tasks into five types according to the interactive mode:1. Jigsaw tasks: Learners work in pairs or small groups. They each have different information and they have to exchange their information so that they each have all the information. Often they then have to answer questions or do other tasks based on the plete information. 2. Informationgap tasks: Group members should work in pairs. Each member possesses the information the other doesn’t know. They municate with each other by making use of the language they have acquired. Each gets the other’s information by exchanging information. 3. Problemsolving tasks: Tasks and related information are given to learners. Learners find a proper solution through negotiation and discussion. 4. Decisionmaking tasks: Through discussing, learners e to an agreement and then choose a decision. 5. Opinionexchanging tasks: These tasks ask learners to express their different views and thoughts. There is no need to reach a consensus. Task VS Exercise In TBLT, task is different from exercise. Nunan (2001:25) claims that the essential difference between a task and an exercise is that a task has a nonlinguistic oute, while an exercise has a linguistic oute. He suggests that as an exercise, the oute should be a set of structures. In Skehan’s (1998) opinion, the information gap is the most important in distinguishing task from exercise. He argues that a task usually has the information, but an exercise does not. Table 21 shows us the key points:According to Table 1, we recover many essential distinctions between a task