World Applied Sciences Journal 19 (7): 1042-1050, 2012 ISSN 1818-4952 © IDOSI Publications, 2012 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2012.19.07.3729 Corresponding Author: Javad A'lipour, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord Branch, Iran. 1042 Effects of Three Types of FoF on the Use of Idioms in Controlled and Free Spoken Response Tasks Javad A'lipour, Mehdi Latifi and Saeed Ketabi 1 1 2 Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord Branch, Iran 1 University of Isfahan, 2 Abstract: This paper reports on the effects of three types of focus on form (FoF) instruction, namely explicit, implicit and combinatorial, on acquisition of idioms by EFL intermediate learners. 80 learners who were homogenous in terms of language proficiency and idiomatic knowledge were assigned to four groups: three experimental and one control. One of the experimental groups was exposed to explicit teaching of idioms. The second experimental group was taught the same idiomatic expressions through implicit FoF and the third experimental group (referred to as the combinatorial FoF group in this study) was taught the idioms through a combination of explicit and implicit techniques. The ability to use the target idiomatic expressions was measured through a multiple choice test (MCT) and a free spoken response task (FSRT). On both measures, the combinatorial FoF group outperformed the other groups followed by the group taught through explicit FoF which was in turn followed by the one taught through implicit FoF. In addition, the differences between all the groups were found to be statistically significant on both measures. The interpretation of the results along with the implications is discussed. Key words: Combinatorial FoF (CfoF) Explicit focus on form (EfoF) Implicit FoF (IfoF) idioms INTRODUCTION implicit and explicit knowledge systems. Ellis [3] argued To date, a number of studies in the SLA literature natural language use they could be considered tests of have investigated the effects of different types of form- implicit knowledge. Tests of explicit knowledge, on the focused instruction on different types of learning. Ellis other hand, involve some kind of metalinguistic judgment. (2001) argues that form-focused instruction (FFI) refers to An important issue which is worthy of more attention is any planned or incidental instructional activities that are how different types of instruction affect the explicit and aimed at drawing language learners’ attention to linguistic implicit knowledge systems and processes in controlled forms. This study focuses specifically on the distinction and spontaneous response tasks. between explicit focus on form (EFoF) and implicit focus Another issue which is worthy of attention is on form (IFoF), both examples of FoF. According to this whether the effect of instruction varies across different distinction, where instruction requires overt attention to target structures. Ellis [4], in a review of the effect of FFI the forms of the target language, it is considered explicit, on free response measures, argued that instruction was whereas when forms are present but learners are not found to be more effective in cases where the target forms asked to attend to rules during L2 tasks, instruction is were of a morphological or formulaic nature. Dekeyser [5] considered implicit [1,2]. SLA theoreticians have also also suggests that those structures that do not lend made the same distinction between the types of themselves well into simple associative learning and have knowledge that L2 learners hold. Explicit knowledge is an arbitrary form-meaning connection including idioms, considered factual, analyzed knowledge about rules are difficult to learn implicitly and will require more explicit and implicit knowledge refers to procedural, unanalyzed learning processes. The goal of this study is to explore knowledge that allows one to use the second language the effectiveness of explicit and implicit instruction on appropriately in spontaneous situations of language use acquisition of idioms, as formulaic utterances, in [1]. An important issue is what types of tasks can tap into controlled and free-spoken response tasks. that when tasks create constraints similar to those in