Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:23:01.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding second language fluency behavior: The effects of individual differences in first language fluency, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency over time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2016

AMANDA HUENSCH  and
NICOLE TRACY-VENTURA
AMANDA HUENSCH*
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
NICOLE TRACY-VENTURA
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Amanda Huensch, Department of World Languages, University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, CPR 107, Tampa, FL 33620. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the extent to which first language (L1) fluency behavior, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency can predict second language (L2) fluency behavior over time. English L1 Spanish (n = 24) and French (n = 25) majors completed a picture-based oral narrative in the L2 before and after 5 months residing abroad and later in the L1 after returning home. Data were coded for seven measures of speed, breakdown, and repair fluency. The results from multiple regressions indicated that L1 fluency behavior, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency differentially contributed to explaining L2 fluency behavior prior to and during immersion. These findings suggest that when investigating L1–L2 fluency relationships considerations of mitigating factors such as cross-linguistic differences are necessary, and it is worthwhile to focus on how the contributions of these factors shift during development.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , July 2017 , pp. 755 - 785
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Baker-Smemoe, W., Dewey, D. P., Bown, J., & Martinsen, R. A. (2014). Does measuring L2 utterance fluency equal measuring overall L2 proficiency? Evidence from five languages. Foreign Language Annals, 47, 707–728.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Chaudron, C. (1994). Elicited imitation as a measure of second-language competence. In Tarone, E. E., Gass, S. M., & Cohen, A. D. (Eds.), Research methodology in second-language acquisition (pp. 245–261). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2010). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.2.04) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/ Google Scholar
Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A. F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & De Jong, N. H. (2012). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 30, 159–172.Google Scholar
Bowden, H. W. (2016). Assessing second language oral proficiency for research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Advance online publication. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000443 Google Scholar
Callies, M., Díez-Bedmar, M. B., & Zaytseva, E. (2014). Using learner corpora for testing and assessing L2 proficiency. In Leclercq, P., Edmonds, A., & Hilton, H. (Eds.), Measuring L2 proficiency: Perspectives from SLA (pp. 71–90). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt's “Speaking” model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–24.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., Groenhout, R., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2015). Second language fluency: Speaking style or proficiency? Correcting measures of second language fluency for first language behavior. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 223–243.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2009). Fluency in L2 is related to fluency in L1. Paper presented at the 7th International Symposium on Bilingualism (ISB7), Utrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. N. (2013). Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 893–916.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., & Bosker, H. R. (2013). Choosing a threshold for silent pauses to measure second language fluency. Paper presented at DiSS, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Derwing, T., Munro, M., 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, 655–679.Google Scholar
Dominguez, L., Tracy-Ventura, N., Arche, M., Mitchell, R., & Myles, F. (2013). The role of dynamic contrasts in the L2 acquisition of Spanish past tense morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 558–577.Google Scholar
Du, H. (2013). The development of Chinese fluency during study abroad in China. Modern Language Journal, 97, 131–143.Google Scholar
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.Google Scholar
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375.Google Scholar
Freed, B. F. (Ed.). (1995). Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (Vol. 9, pp. 123–148). New York: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginther, A., Dimova, S., & Yang, R. (2010). Conceptual and empirical relationships between temporal measures of fluency and oral English proficiency with implications for automated scoring. Language Testing, 27, 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F., & Deschamps, A. (1975). Analyse contrastive des variables temporelles de l'anglais et du français: Vvitesse de parole et variables composantes, phénomènes d'hésitation. Phonetica, 31, 144–184.Google Scholar
Kahng, J. (2014). Exploring utterance and cognitive fluency of L1 and L2 English speakers: Temporal measures and stimulated recall. Language Learning, 64, 809–854.Google Scholar
Kim, Y., Tracy-Ventura, N., & Jung, Y. (2016). A measure of proficiency or short-term memory? Validation of an elicited imitation test for SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 100, 655–673.Google Scholar
Kormos, J., & Dénes, M. (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32, 145–164.Google Scholar
Langley, J. (2000). Missing. London: Francis Lincoln.Google Scholar
Langley, J. (2006). I very really miss you. London: Francis Lincoln.Google Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40, 387–417.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. (1999). Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In Brown, C. & Hagoort, P. (Eds.), The neurocognition of language (pp. 83–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1994). The year abroad and its effects. Language Learning Journal, 10, 32–38.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R., McManus, K., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2015). Comparison of language development during different residence abroad programmes. In Mitchell, R., Tracy-Ventura, N., & McManus, K. (Eds.), Social interaction, identity and language learning during residence abroad (EUROSLA Monograph Series 4, pp. 115–138). Retrieved from http://www.eurosla.org/eurosla-monograph-series-2/social-interaction-identity-and-language-learning-during-residence-abroad/ Google Scholar
Mitchell, R., Tracy-Ventura, N., & McManus, K. (2017). The Anglophone students abroad: Identity, social relationships and language learning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mora, J. C., & Valls-Ferrer, M. (2012). Oral fluency, accuracy, and complexity in formal instruction and study abroad learning contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 610–641.Google Scholar
Ortega, L. (2000). Understanding syntactic complexity: The measurement of change in the syntax of instructed L2 Spanish learners (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, Honolulu).Google Scholar
Ortega, L., Iwashita, N., Norris, J. M., & Rabie, S. (2002). An investigation of elicited imitation tasks in crosslinguistic SLA research. Paper presented at the 2nd Language Research Forum, Toronto.Google Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (2000). The one clause at a time hypothesis. In Riggenbach, H. (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 163–191). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Pellegrino, F., Coupé, C., & Marsico, E. (2011). A cross-language perspective on speech information rate. Language, 87, 539–558.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.Google Scholar
Préfontaine, Y., & Kormos, J. (2015). The relationship between task difficulty and second language fluency in French: A mixed methods approach. Modern Language Journal, 99, 96–112.Google Scholar
Riazentseva, A. (2001). Second language proficiency and pausing: A study of Russian speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 497–526.Google Scholar
Roach, P. (1998). Some languages are spoken more quickly than others. In Bauer, L. & Trudgill, P. (Eds.), Language myths. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.Google 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, 173–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serrano, R., Llanes, À., & Tragant, E. (2011). Analyzing the effect of context of second language learning: Domestic intensive and semi-intensive courses vs. study abroad in Europe. System, 39, 133–143.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36, 1–14.Google 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.Google Scholar
Towell, R., & Dewaele, J. M. (2005). The role of psycholinguistic factors in the development of fluency amongst advanced learners of French. In Dewaele, J. M. (Ed.), Focus on French as a foreign language (pp. 210–239). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84–119.Google Scholar
Tracy-Ventura, N., McManus, K., Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2014). “Repeat as much as you can”: Elicited imitation as a measure of oral proficiency in L2 French. In Leclercq, P., Edmonds, A., & Hilton, H. (Eds.), Measuring L2 proficiency: Perspectives from SLA (pp. 143–166). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Trouvain, J., & Möbius, B. (2014). Sources of variation of articulation rate in native and non-native speech: Comparisons of French and German. Paper presented at the 7th Speech Prosody Conference (SP7), Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Wu, S.-L., & Ortega, L. (2013). Measuring global oral proficiency in SLA research: A new elicited imitation test of L2 Chinese. Foreign Language Annals, 46, 680–704.Google Scholar
Yan, X., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Ginther, A. (2015). Elicited imitation as a measure of second language proficiency: A narrative review and meta-analysis. Language Testing. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0265532215594643 Google Scholar