Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton June 10, 2016

Ladders and Snakes in Second Language Fluency

Peter Skehan, Pauline Foster and Sabrina Shum

Abstract

This article reports a study comparing first and second language fluency during narrative retelling tasks of varying degrees of tightness in structural organisation, exploring in particular a distinction between discourse-based and clause-based fluency. We argue that positive and negative influences on fluency are linked to the Conceptualiser and Formulator stages of Levelt’s model of speaking. Task structure and degree of subordination, which were related to greater fluency for both native and non-native speakers, are Conceptualiser and discourse oriented. Formulaic language, which was also related to fluency, is more Formulator and clause oriented. Contrastingly, higher lexical sophistication and longer clauses are associated with clause-linked fluency problems, but only for native speakers.

References

Bolibaugh, Cylcia & Pauline Foster. 2013. Memory-based aptitude for nativelike selection: The role of phonological short-term memory. In Gisela Granena & Michael Long (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment, 205–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.35.08bolSearch in Google Scholar

Foster, Pauline. 2001. Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In Martin Bygate, Peter Skehan and Merrill Swain (eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing, 75–93. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Foster, Pauline, Alan Tonkyn & Gillian Wigglesworth. 2000. Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics 21. 354−375.10.1093/applin/21.3.354Search in Google Scholar

Foster, Pauline & Parveneh Tavakoli. 2009. Native speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency, and lexical diversity. Language Learning 59. 866–896.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00528.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hoey, Michael. 1983. On the surface of discourse. London: George Allen and Unwin.Search in Google Scholar

Kormos, Judit. 2006. Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Levelt, William. 1999. Producing spoken language: a blueprint of the speaker. In C. Brown and P. Hagoort (eds.), Neurocognition of language, 83–122. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198507932.003.0004Search in Google Scholar

MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. 3rd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar

Malvern, David & Brian Richards. 2002. Investigating accommodation in language proficiency interviews using a new measure of lexical diversity. Language Testing 19. 85–104.10.1191/0265532202lt221oaSearch in Google Scholar

Meara, Paul & Huw Bell. 2001. P_Lex: A simple and effective way of describing the lexical characteristics of short L2 texts. Prospect 16. 5–19.Search in Google Scholar

Norris, John & Lourdes Ortega. 2009. Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics 30. 555–578.10.1093/applin/amp044Search in Google Scholar

Pawley, Andrew & Frances Syder. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Jack Richards & Richard Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication, 191–227. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Read, John. 2000. Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511732942Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter. 2009. Lexical performance by native and non-native speakers on language-learning tasks. In Brian Richards, Helmut Daller, David Malvern & Paul Meara (eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application, 107–124. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230242258_7Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter (ed.). 2014a. Processing perspectives on task performance, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.5Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter. 2014b. Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. In Peter Skehan (ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance, 211–260. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.5.08skeSearch in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter & Pauline Foster. 1999. The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning 49. 93–120.10.1111/1467-9922.00071Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter & Pauline Foster, P. 2008. Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task-based performance: a meta-analysis of the Ealing research. In S. Van Daele, Alex Housen, Folkert Kuiken, M. Pierrard & Ineke Vedder (eds.), Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language use, learning, and teaching. Brussels: University of Brussels Press.Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter & Sabrina Shum. 2014. Structure and processing condition in video-based narrative retelling. In Peter Skehan (ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance, 187–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tblt.5.07skeSearch in Google Scholar

Tavakoli, Parvaneh & Peter Skehan. 2005. Planning, task structure, and performance testing. In Rod Ellis (ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language. 239–273. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.11.15tavSearch in Google Scholar

Wang, Zhan & Peter Skehan. (in preparation). The effects of time pressure and L2 proficiency level on speaking performance.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-6-10
Published in Print: 2016-6-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton