Temporal fluency and problem-solving in interaction: An exploratory study of fluency resources in L2 dialogue

Peltonen, Pauliina

doi:10.1016/j.system.2017.08.009

Cited by 39 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Speakers in a dialogue share the responsibility of creating and maintaining a flowing conversation and of filling silences. Peltonen (2017) introduced the term dialogue fluency to refer to the contributions of individual speakers to the collaborative aspects of fluency in a dialogue, measured as the number of turn pauses, the mean length of turn pauses, the number of repetitions of what the other speaker said, and the number of collaborative completions. This differs from McCarthy's confluence in that these can be measured objectively and take into account more than turn‐taking and subjective impressions of the flow of conversation.…”

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research focusing mainly on utterance fluency has shown that speakers are more fluent in dialogue tasks compared to monologue tasks (Michel, Kuiken, & Vedder, 2007; Sato, 2014; Tavakoli, 2016; Witton‐Davies, 2014) and that high‐proficiency speakers in dialogue settings are more fluent than speakers with lower proficiency (Peltonen, 2017).…”

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In everyday conversation, speakers tend not to hold endless monologues, but they are rather engaged in dialogues with others. Because of the co‐constructed nature of conversation, the perceived fluency of speakers in dialogue will not depend solely on the quality of their speech but also on the interaction with their interlocutors (McCarthy, 2010; Peltonen, 2017). In other words, when language learners are striving to develop their interactional competence, they will need to learn how to co‐construct interaction that includes topic management, interactive listening, breakdown repair, nonverbal or visual behaviors, and turn management (Galaczi & Taylor, 2018, p. 226).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fluency in Dialogue: Turn‐Taking Behavior Shapes Perceived Fluency in Native and Nonnative Speech

Jong

Bosker

2020

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluency is an important part of research on second language learning, but most research on language proficiency typically has not included oral fluency as part of interactions even though natural communication usually occurs in conversations. The present study considered aspects of turn‐taking behavior as part of the construct of fluency and investigated whether these aspects differentially influence perceived fluency ratings of native and nonnative speech. Results from two experiments using acoustically manipulated speech showed that, in native speech, too “eager” answers (interrupting a question with a fast answer) and too “reluctant” answers (answering slowly after a long turn gap) negatively affected fluency ratings. However, in nonnative speech, only too “reluctant” answers led to lower fluency ratings. Thus, we demonstrated that acoustic properties of dialogue are perceived as part of fluency. By adding to the current understanding of dialogue fluency, these lab‐based findings carry implications for language teaching and assessment.

show abstract

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fluency in Dialogue: Turn‐Taking Behavior Shapes Perceived Fluency in Native and Nonnative Speech

Jong

Bosker

2020

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most widely used measures in contemporary L2 fluency research relate to the three main dimensions of fluency: speed (e.g., speech rate), breakdown (different aspects of pausing), and repair fluency (false starts, repetitions, and reformulations) (Skehan, , ; Tavakoli & Skehan, ). In the present study, temporal fluency refers to speed and breakdown measures, and FPs, drawls, fillers, and repetitions are regarded as stalling mechanisms (see Peltonen, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Connections Between First and Second Language Fluency: A Mixed Methods Approach

Peltonen

2018

The Modern Language Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many factors influencing second language (L2) speech fluency have been widely studied, but the effects of first language (L1) fluency on L2 speech fluency are still relatively poorly understood. In contrast to mostly quantitative previous studies, the present study adopted a mixed methods approach to examining the connections between L1 fluency and L2 fluency. Monologue speech samples in L1 and L2 were obtained from 42 Finnish learners of English at 2 school levels (9th grade and upper secondary school). The samples were examined for 13 measures capturing different aspects of fluency: temporal fluency, including speed and pausing, and stalling mechanisms. The results indicated positive correlations between the majority of temporal L1 and L2 fluency measures. Regression analyses further demonstrated that most temporal L2 fluency measures could be predicted from L1 fluency measures to a certain extent, although the predictive power varied across the measures. Regarding stalling mechanisms, a complementary qualitative analysis provided insights to idiosyncratic patterns in their use in L1 and L2. Together, the findings suggest that L1 fluency is an important factor in explaining L2 fluency and should be more widely acknowledged in L2 fluency research, assessment, and teaching.

show abstract

“…This interactional aspect posits that participants in a dialogue share the responsibility of maintaining fluency across turns and therefore entails how fluency is displayed in collaboration. For instance, Galaczi (2014) and Peltonen (2017) both show that more proficient L2 speakers have fewer pauses between turns than less proficient L2 speakers.…”

Section: Discourse Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluency in Second Language Testing: Insights From Different Disciplines

Jong

2018

Language Assessment Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers the construct of fluency in second language assessment and how it might be informed by research in applied linguistics. It briefly describes the way fluency is conceptualized in four language tests, as embodied in their respective assessment criteria, to show where the field is at present. The article then takes into account recent insights from applied linguistics, and from the fields of psycholinguistics, discourse analysis, and sociolinguistics. The article questions the current conceptualization of fluency in language testing, in which it is defined as a concept that should be sought in the ear of the beholder, and where disfluency is only seen as a deficit. Future research should focus on finding ways to ensure that the measures used in testing reflect the ability to talk fluently and efficiently, rather than measures that only reflect listeners' impressions about such ability, and to show that these can be marked appropriately and reliably.

show abstract

Temporal fluency and problem-solving in interaction: An exploratory study of fluency resources in L2 dialogue

Cited by 39 publications

References 36 publications

Fluency in Dialogue: Turn‐Taking Behavior Shapes Perceived Fluency in Native and Nonnative Speech

Fluency in Dialogue: Turn‐Taking Behavior Shapes Perceived Fluency in Native and Nonnative Speech

Exploring Connections Between First and Second Language Fluency: A Mixed Methods Approach

Fluency in Second Language Testing: Insights From Different Disciplines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About