Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-c8zdz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T08:13:49.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

KAZUYA SAITO ,
PAVEL TROFIMOVICH  and
TALIA ISAACS
KAZUYA SAITO*
Affiliation:
Birkbeck, University of London
PAVEL TROFIMOVICH
Affiliation:
Concordia University
TALIA ISAACS
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Kazuya Saito, Department of Applied Linguistics and Communication, Birkbeck, University of London, 26 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DQ, UK. E-mail: kazuyasaitou@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The current project aimed to investigate the potentially different linguistic correlates of comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding) and accentedness (i.e., linguistic nativelikeness) in adult second language (L2) learners’ extemporaneous speech production. Timed picture descriptions from 120 beginner, intermediate, and advanced Japanese learners of English were analyzed using native speaker global judgments based on learners’ comprehensibility and accentedness, and then submitted to segmental, prosodic, temporal, lexical, and grammatical analyses. Results showed that comprehensibility was related to all linguistic domains, and accentedness was strongly tied with pronunciation (specifically segmentals) rather than lexical and grammatical domains. In particular, linguistic correlates of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness were found to vary by learners’ proficiency levels. In terms of comprehensibility, optimal rate of speech, appropriate and rich vocabulary use, and adequate and varied prosody were important for beginner to intermediate levels, whereas segmental accuracy, good prosody, and correct grammar featured strongly for intermediate to advanced levels. For accentedness, grammatical complexity was a feature of intermediate to high-level performance, whereas segmental and prosodic variables were essential to accentedness across all levels. These findings suggest that syllabi tailored to learners’ proficiency level (beginner, intermediate, or advanced) and learning goal (comprehensibility or nativelike accent) would be advantageous for the teaching of L2 speaking.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , March 2016 , pp. 217 - 240
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N. (2012). Age of onset and nativelike L2 ultimate attainment of morphosyntactic and phonetic intuition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adolphs, S., & Schmitt, N. (2003). Lexical coverage of spoken discourse. Applied Linguistics, 24, 425–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson-Hsieh, J., Johnson, R., & Koehler, K. (1992). The relationship between native speaker judgments of nonnative pronunciation and deviance in segmentals, prosody, and syllable structure. Language Learning, 42, 529–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, U., & Engstrand, O. (1989). Perceived strength and identity of foreign accent in Swedish. Phonetica, 46, 138–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2012). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Retrieved from http://www.praat.orgGoogle Scholar
Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A.-F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 30, 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradlow, A., & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition, 106, 707–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Assessing lexical proficiency using analytic ratings: A case for collocation accuracy. Applied Linguistics. Advance online publication. doi:10.1093/applin/amt056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M. (2003). What do ESL students say about their accents? Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 545–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (1997). Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2009). Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication. Language Teaching, 42, 476–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2013). The development of L2 oral language skills in two L1 groups: A seven-year study. Language Learning, 63, 163–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48, 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I. (2004). L2 fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 54, 655–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fayer, J. M., & Krasinski, E. (1987). Native and nonnative judgments of intelligibility and irritation. Language Learning, 37, 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, J. (2005). Intelligibility and the listener: The role of lexical stress. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 399–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J., & Liu, S. (2001). The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 527–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J., Munro, M. J., & MacKay, I. R. A. (1995). Factors affecting degree of perceived foreign accent in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3125–3134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J., Yeni-Komshian, G., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second language acquisition. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 78–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, R., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, L. (2004). Primary stress and intelligibility: Research to motivate the teaching of suprasegmentals. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H., & Schmid, M. (2013). Perceived foreign accent in first language attrition and second language acquisition: The impact of age of acquisition and bilingualism. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 361–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Thomson, R. I. (2013). Rater experience, rating scale length, and judgments of L2 pronunciation: Revisiting research conventions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10, 135–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Trofimovich, P. (2012). “Deconstructing” comprehensibility: Identifying the linguistic influences on listeners’ L2 comprehensibility ratings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 475–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kang, O., Rubin, D., & Pickering, L. (2010). Supresegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English. Modern Language Journal, 94, 554–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Levis, J. M. (2005). Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 369–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition: Second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. Modern Language Review, 96, 190–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Processing time, accent, and comprehensibility in the perception of native and foreign-accented speech. Language and Speech, 38, 289–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 49, 285–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (2001). Modeling perceptions of the accentedness and comprehensibility of L2 speech: The role of speaking rate. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 451–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (2006). The functional load principle in ESL pronunciation instruction: An exploratory study. System, 34, 520–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Burgess, C. (2010). Detection of nonnative speaker status from content-masked speech. Speech Communication, 52, 626–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Morton, S. (2006). The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 111–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., & Mann, V. A. (2005). Age of immersion as a predictor of foreign accent. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 311–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piske, T., MacKay, I., & Flege, J. (2001). Factors affecting degree of foreign accents in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (2011). Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K. (2013). The acquisitional value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning: Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners. Language Learning, 63, 499–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K. (in press). Experienced teachers’ perspectives on priorities for improved intelligible pronunciation: The case of Japanese learners of English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24.Google Scholar
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T. (2014). Using listener judgements to investigate linguistic influences on L2 comprehensibility and accentedness: A validation and generalization study. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (2008). State of the art: Instructed second language vocabulary acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 12, 329–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajima, K., Port, R., & Dalby, J. (1997). Effects of temporal correction on intelligibility of foreign-accented English. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2008). Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 58, 439–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokumoto, M., & Shibata, M. (2011). Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation. World Englishes, 30, 392–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., & Baker, W. (2006). Learning second-language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T. (2012). Disentangling accent from comprehensibility. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1982). The comprehensibility of non-native speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4, 114–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2009a). The vocabulary demands of television programs. Language Learning, 59, 335–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2009b). The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics, 30, 407–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winters, S., & O’Brien, M. G. (2013). Perceived accentedness and intelligibility: The relative contributions of F0 and duration. Speech Communication, 55, 486–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar