CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningPhonetics and Phonology Research

PREDICTING L2 FLUENCY FROM L1 FLUENCY BEHAVIOR: THE CASE OF L1 TURKISH AND L2 ENGLISH SPEAKERS

Open access
Duran-Karaoz, Zeynep, Tavakoli, Parvaneh·2020·Studies in Second Language Acquisition
DOI 10.1017/s0272263119000755
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The article reports on the findings of a study investigating the relationship between first language (L1) and second language (L2) fluency behavior. Drawing on data collected from Turkish learners of English, the study also addresses the question of whether proficiency level mediates the relationship, if any. The data were coded for a range of breakdown, repair, speed, and composite measures. Language proficiency was measured by means of two tests: Oxford Placement Test (OPT) and an Elicited Imitation Task (EIT). The results show that some breakdown and repair measures were positively correlated in L1 and L2, but no correlations were observed for articulation rate and speech rate. The relationships were not mediated by proficiency level. Regression analyses show that a number of models predicted L2 fluency. L1 fluency contributed significantly to models predicting pausing behavior; EIT scores predicted L2 speech rate; and L1 fluency and OPT scores predicted L2 repair and mid-clause pauses. The important implications of the findings for fluency research and second language pedagogy are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263119000755

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Allan, D. (2004). Oxford placement test. University of Cambridge local examination syndicate. Oxford University Press.
  2. de Jong, N. H. (2015). Predicting pauses in L1 and L2 speech: The effects of utterance boundaries and word frequency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54, 113-132.
  3. de Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2012). The effect of task complexity on functional adequacy, fluency and lexical diversity in speaking performances of native and non-native speakers. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 121À142). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  4. Di Silvio, F., Diao, W., & Donovan, A. (2016). The development of L2 fluency during study abroad: A cross- language study. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 610À624.
  5. Holtz, A. (2012). American newspaper comics: An encyclopaedic reference guide. University of Michigan Press.
  6. Huensch, A., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2016). Understanding second language fluency behaviour: The effects of individual differences in first language fluency, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency over time. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1À31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716416000424 · DOI
  7. Huensch, A., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2017). L2 utterance fluency development before, during, and after residence abroad: A multidimensional investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 275-293.
  8. Hulstijn, J. (2015). Language proficiency in native and non-native speakers: Theory and research. Vol. 41. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  9. Hunter, A. M. (2017). Fluency development in the ESL classroom: The impact of immediate task repetition and procedural repetition on learners' oral fluency (Unpublished doctoral thesis). St. Mary's University, Twickenham, London. https://research.stmarys.ac.uk/1868/1/Final%20version%2023.10.2017.pdf
  10. 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. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 655-673.
  11. Koponen, M., & Riggenbach, H. (2000). Overview: Varying perspectives on fluency. In Perspectives on fluency (pp. 5À24). University of Michigan.
  12. Kormos, J. (1998). Self-repairs in the speech of Hungarian learners of English (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Eotvos University, Budapest.
  13. Leonard, K. R., & Shea, C. E. (2017). L2 speaking development during study abroad: Fluency, accuracy, complexity, and underlying cognitive factors. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 179À193.
  14. Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking from intention to articulation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
  15. Mora, J. C., & Valls-Ferrer, M. (2012). Oral fluency, accuracy, and complexity in formal instruction and study abroad learning contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 610À641.
  16. Plonsky, L., & Ghanbar, H. (2018), Multiple regression in L2 research: A methodological synthesis and guide to interpreting R2 values. The Modern Language Journal, 102, 713-731.
  17. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is "big"? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Préfontaine, Y., & Kormos, J. (2016). A qualitative analysis of perceptions of fluency in second language French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54, 151-169.
  19. Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive Bases of Second Language Fluency. Routledge.
  20. Segalowitz, N. (2016). Second language fluency and its underlying cognitive and social determinants. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54, 79-95.
  21. Skehan, P. (2014). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 211-260).
  22. Skehan, P. (2015). Limited attention capacity and cognition. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp. 123-155).
  23. Skehan, P., Foster, P., & Shum, S. (2016). Ladders and snakes in second language fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 54, 97-111.
  24. Tavakoli, P. (2011). Pausing patterns: Differences between L2 learners and native speakers. ELT Journal, 65, 71-79.
  25. Tavakoli, P. (2016). Speech fluency in monologic and dialogic task performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics, Special Issue on Fluency, 54, 131-150.
  26. Tavakoli, P. (2019). Automaticity, fluency and second language performance. In Z. Wen & M. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and pedagogy (pp. 39-52).
  27. Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239-277).
  28. Tavakoli, P., Campbell, C., & McCormack, J. (2016). Development of speech fluency over a short period of time: Effects of pedagogic intervention. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 447-471.
  29. Towell, R., & Dewaele, J. M. (2005). The role of psycholinguistic factors in the development of fluency amongst advanced learners of French. In J. M. Dewaele (Ed.), Focus on French as a foreign language (pp. 210-239). Multilingual Matters.
  30. 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. Measuring L2 proficiency: Perspectives from SLA (pp. 143À166). Multilingual Matters.
  31. Wright, C. (2013). An investigation of working memory effects on oral grammatical accuracy and fluency in producing questions in English. TESOL Quarterly, 47, 352-374.
  32. Wright, C. (2018). Effects of study abroad on L2 Mandarin Chinese: Effects of time and task. In C. Sanz & A. Morales-Front (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Study Abroad Research and Practice (pp. 1-17). Routledge.
  33. 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.
  34. 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, 33, 497À528.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Duran-Karaoz, Z., & Tavakoli, P.
Affiliations
University of Reading (GB)
Corresponding author
Duran-Karaoz, Zeynep
ORCID
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2020-03-20
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
671-695
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
DOI
10.1017/s0272263119000755
OpenAlex
W2997538648
Cited by
42
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
FWCI
24.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Studies in Second Language Acquisition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
second language fluency, Turkish learners of English, speech rate, articulation rate, language proficiency, second language teaching

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review