On the voyage into explori ng a research question: Where is an interactional interface to interrelate a focus on form to a specific task in designing a task-based syllabus?, this study identifies three problems, i.e., the learnability, the performability, and the interactionability problem from the reviews of the research on task-based sy llabuses (Ellis, 2003; Prabhu, 1987; Snow, Met, & Genesee, 1989) to be settled in designing a task-based syllabus. In order to search for a poss ible solution to these problems, it proposes an interactive approach to a task-based sy llabus called the Ability-Task Function (ATF) Model. The ATF constitutes a linear function, 'y=ax+b', in which 'y ' represents the levels of language abi lities on the Parallel Developmental Sequence (Kim & K won, 2007) and 'x' the hierarchies of task performances on the target language use domain continuum (Kim, 2006c). Hence, the vertical y axis (i.e., the levels of language abilities) and the horizontal x ax is (i.e., the hierarchies of task performances) comprise the ATF Coordinate or Map on which we are able to explore a possible answer to the three problems. Finally, this study demonstrates how the A TF fades the three problems out, and hence comes to a conclusion: The A TF is, in a sense, a kind of metric by which not only we are able to plot, analyze, and evaluate all the pedagogic tasks on the line (i.e., y=ax+b, a= l, b=O), but also select and sequence them along the line on which they are all in direct proportion of the levels of language abilities to the hierarchies of task performances. Thus, the ATF Model can provide a conceptual framework for designing an interactive abilitydifferentiated task-based syllabus.

This study reports on a classroom observation of the language produced by intermediate EFL learners in a Korean university, especially in terms of negotiation of meaning. Negotiation of meaning during task interactions makes certain that task participants receive comprehensible input and produce comprehensible output, which have been argued as essential elements for foreign language learning. Task type is also considered important, with those tasks requiring an exchange of information most likely to facilitate the negotiation of meaning. The purposes of this study was to compare successful meaning negotiation in four types of task(information gap, jigsaw, problem solving, and sharing personal experiences tasks) in terms of qualitative meaning negotiation. For this study, I recorded eight different tasks involving twenty-four students, a total of around five hours of learner interaction. This study showed that qualitative meaning negotiation is more important than the mere evidence of meaning negotiation indices for foreign language development. In terms of task type, open tasks such as problem solving and sharing personal experiences tasks may facilitate a higher qualitative negotiation than information gap tasks and jigsaw tasks, especially in intermediate or advanced English classes.

The task-based approach to second or foreign language pedagogy aims to provide learners with a natural context for authentic language use. While learners are performing real-world or pedagogical tasks, they have opportunities not only to get a rich and comprehensible input of real language, but also to produce target language items to exchange meanings. Interaction in doing the tasks is thought to facilitate language learning process. Thus, one of the important things that teachers have to do first for their task-based English classes is to design tasks for target language items reflecting native speakers’ authentic language use. It is expected that learners can communicate with foreigners using the prescriptive target language items outside the classroom. This research attempted to find out if non-native English teachers would be able to make accurate predictions about target language items in terms of language forms and lexical phrases that would naturally occur when English native speakers carried out two types of tasks (closed tasks and open tasks). The results showed that many language items predicted by non-native English teachers did not appear in the recorded data by English native speakers, especially for open tasks. Thus, this research called into question the practice of setting tasks at the end of a PPP cycle (presentation, practice, and production), to allow students to put into use target language items that has previously been practised.