[en] The present study explores the impact that task-supported language teaching (TSLT) and task- based language teaching (TBLT) have on the acquisition of case forms and verbs of motion in Russian and on learners' written and oral production. From a methodological point of view, the study follows a pre-test – immediate post-test – delayed post-test design. Data have been obtained from first and second year students of the University of Barcelona (n=54) with a low level of proficiency in Russian. Each learner was assigned to a task-supported (TS) or task-based (TB) group and received 14 hours of corresponding treatment. The TSLT treatment for the first year students focused on the use of prepositions and case forms, and the treatment for the second year students involved the Russian verbs of motion with and without prefixes. For the TBLT treatment, the acquisition of the same linguistic items was analysed. These items were present in the tasks designed for the experiment. Data were obtained by means of three grammar tests (fill in the blanks, multiple choice and grammaticality judgment tests), a written task which required learners to write a letter / an email to a friend and two oral tasks (room description and map task). Measures include the target-like use of prepositions, case forms and verbs of motion in the grammar tests and in oral and written production, the number of errors per words for general accuracy, the number of clauses per T-unit and the mean length of clause for syntactic complexity, Guiraud's Index of lexical richness for lexical complexity, and speech rate for oral fluency. Statistical tests related to the use of prepositions and case forms show that both approaches provided positive results in the immediate post-test, however, neither task-supported nor task-based treatment led to a significant improvement in the long-term perspective. On the other hand, participants in both groups demonstrated a significant improvement in the target-like use of verbs of motion produced in their oral and written performance and used in their grammar tests. In written production, learners' syntactic complexity measured by means of clauses per T- unit and lexical complexity significantly increased after the treatment, whereas phrasal complexity (mean length of clause) did not change over time. Written accuracy significantly improved in both groups immediately after the treatment. However, learners in the TB group maintained this improvement three months after the treatment, whereas the accuracy of learners in the TS group decreased to the level they had before the treatment. In oral production, learners in both groups significantly improved their general accuracy in the performance of the map task. Lexical complexity and fluency improved in both oral tasks. As for syntactic complexity, no changes were found in any of the tasks. The comparison of the effects that the two types of treatment have had on different aspects of learners' production reveals that participants in the TS and the TB groups have not significantly differed on accuracy, syntactic complexity and fluency of their oral and written performance. Task-supported and task-based treatments also had a similar effect on accuracy in the use of Russian prepositions and case forms. However, learners in the TB group have showed significantly better results than learners in the TS group as far as lexical complexity and the target-like use of verbs of motion are concerned.

[es] El presente estudio explora el impacto en la adquisición del ruso como lengua extranjera de TSLT (Task-supported language teaching) y TBLT (Task-based language teaching). El objeto de análisis es la adquisición de los casos y de los verbos de movimiento en la producción oral y escrita en los parámetros de la complejidad, corrección y fluidez. El estudio experimental sigue el diseño de pre-test ‒ post-test inmediato ‒ post-test diferido. Los datos han sido obtenidos a partir del trabajo con estudiantes de primer y segundo curso de la Universidad de Barcelona (n=54) con un nivel elemental de competencia en lengua rusa. Dos grupos de estudiantes han trabajado con la metodología TSLT y otros dos con TBLT. Cada uno de los 4 grupos ha recibido 14 horas de formación. Los datos analizados se han obtenido a partir de tests gramaticales (espacios en blanco, selección múltiple y tests de gramaticalidad), una tarea escrita consistente en escribir una carta a un amigo, y dos tareas orales (la descripción de una habitación y una Map task). El análisis estadístico de la adquisición de las preposiciones y las formas declinadas muestra que tanto con TSLT como TBLT se consiguen resultados satisfactorios en el post-test inmediato, pero no en el post-test diferido. En cambio, independientemente del tipo de instrucción, los participantes sí han demostrado progresos significativos en su competencia de los verbos de movimiento. En la producción escrita, la complejidad sintáctica medida en proposiciones por T-unit y la complejidad léxica aumentan significativamente después de la instrucción. La corrección mejora significativamente en ambos grupos en el post-test inmediato y en el post-test diferido del grupo TBLT. En la producción oral, los estudiantes de ambos grupos mejoran su corrección en la tarea Map task, la complejidad léxica y fluidez en ambas tareas orales, pero no consiguen progresos significativos en lo que respecta a la complejidad sintáctica en ninguna de las dos tareas. La comparación de los dos tipos de instrucción muestra que los estudiantes de los grupos TBLT consiguen mejores resultados que los de TSLT en lo que se refiere a complejidad léxica y verbos de movimiento.