Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:42:58.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2012

NIVJA H. DE JONG ,
MARGARITA P. STEINEL ,
ARJEN FLORIJN ,
ROB SCHOONEN  and
JAN H. HULSTIJN
NIVJA H. DE JONG*
Affiliation:
Utrecht University
MARGARITA P. STEINEL
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
ARJEN FLORIJN
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
ROB SCHOONEN
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
JAN H. HULSTIJN
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Nivja de Jong, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS, Utrecht University, Trans 10, Utrecht 3512 JK, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated how individual differences in linguistic knowledge and processing skills relate to individual differences in speaking fluency. Speakers of Dutch as a second language (N = 179) performed eight speaking tasks, from which several measures of fluency were derived such as measures for pausing, repairing, and speed (mean syllable duration). In addition, participants performed separate tasks, designed to gauge individuals’ second language linguistic knowledge and linguistic processing speed. The results showed that the linguistic skills were most strongly related to average syllable duration, of which 50% of individual variance was explained; in contrast, average pausing duration was only weakly related to linguistic knowledge and processing skills.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 34 , Issue 5 , September 2013 , pp. 893 - 916
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., & Maechler, M. (2010). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 0.999375-36). Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2007). PRAAT. Retrieved from http://www.praat.orgGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (2002). Speaking in time. Speech Communication, 36, 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84, 73–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Wasow, T. (1998). Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 37, 201–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crystal, T. H., & House, A. S. (1990). Articulation rate and the duration of syllables and stress groups in connected speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2000). Quantitative assessment of second language learners’ fluency by means of automatic speech recognition technology. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 989–999.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners’ fluency: Comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111, 2862–2873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt's speaking model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–24.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2011). Facets of speaking proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 4–34.Google Scholar
Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dell, G. S., & O'Seaghdha, P. G. (1992). Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42, 287–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., Thomson, R. I., & Rossiter, M. J. (2009). The relationship between L1 fluency and L2 fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 533–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I. (2004). Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 54, 655–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J., & Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The unloved variable in applied linguistic research. Language Learning, 49, 509–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J., & Furnham, A. (2000). Personality and speech production: A pilot study of second language learners. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 355–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, C. W., Pollack, M. D., & Montague, W. E. (1970). Implicit speech: Mechanism in perceptual encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84, 502–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, M. W. (1974). Extraversion, arousal, and retrieval from semantic memory. Journal of Personality, 42, 319–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freed, B. F. (1995). Do students who study abroad become fluent? In Freed, B. F. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics: Experiments in spontaneous speech. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kempen, G., & Huijbers, P. (1983). The lexicalization process in sentence production and naming: Indirect election of words. Cognition, 14, 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kormos, J., & Dénes, M. (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32, 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14, 41–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16, 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 3, 387–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, P. (2000). The lexical element in spoken second language fluency. In Riggenbach, H. (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 25–42). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
O'Brien, I., Segalowitz, N., Freed, B., & Collentine, J. (2007). Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 557–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oostdijk, N., Goedertier, W., Eynde, F. V., Boves, L., Martens, J., Moortgat, M., et al. (2002). Experiences from the spoken Dutch corpus project. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation—2002, 2, 340–347.Google Scholar
Postma, A. (2000). Detection of errors during speech production: A review of speech monitoring models. Cognition, 77, 97–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quené, H. (2008). Multilevel modeling of between-speaker and within-speaker variation in spontaneous speech tempo. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 1104–1113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramsay, R. W. (1968). Speech patterns and personality. Language and Speech, 11, 54–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/Google Scholar
Riazantseva, A. (2001). Second language proficiency and pausing: A study of Russian speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 497–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggenbach, H. (1991). Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Processes, 14, 423–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossiter, M. J. (2009). Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65, 395–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Freed, B. F. (2004). Context, contact, and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in at home and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 173–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. S., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Severens, E., Van Lommel, S., Ratinckx, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2005). Timed picture naming norms for 590 pictures in Dutch. Acta Psychologica, 119, 159–187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shriberg, E. E. (1994). Preliminaries to a theory of speech disfluencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2003). Task based instruction. Language Teaching, 36, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 6, 174–215.Google ScholarPubMed
Sternberg, S., Knoll, R. L., Monsell, S., & Wright, C. E. (1988). Motor programs and hierarchical organization in the control of rapid speech. Phonetica, 45, 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, S., Monsell, S., Knoll, R. L., & Wright, C. E. (1978). The latency and duration of rapid movement sequences: Comparisons of speech and typewriting. In Stelmach, G. E. (Ed.), Information processing in motor control and learning (pp. 117–152). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towell, R. (2002). Relative degrees of fluency: A comparative case study of advanced learners of French. IRAL—International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 40, 117–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Buuren, S., & Oudshoorn, K. (1999). Flexible multivariate imputation by MICE. Leiden: TNO Prevention Center.Google Scholar
Van der Slik, F. W. P. (2010). Acquisition of Dutch as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 401–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar