Article published in:
Journal of Second Language Pronunciation
Vol. 5:3 (2019) ► pp. 347–373

Second language speakers’ awareness of their own comprehensibility

Examining task repetition and self-assessment

| Concordia University
| Concordia University
| Concordia University
This study investigated whether second language (L2) speakers are aware of and can manipulate aspects of their speech contributing to comprehensibility. Forty Mandarin speakers of L2 English performed two versions of the same oral task. Before the second task, half of the speakers were asked to make their speech as easy for the interlocutor to understand as possible, while the other half received no additional prompt. Speakers self-assessed comprehensibility after each task and were interviewed about how they improved their comprehensibility. Native-speaking listeners evaluated speaker performances for five dimensions, rating speech similarly across groups and tasks. Overall, participants did not become more comprehensible from task 1 to task 2, whether prompted or not, nor did speakers’ self-assessments become more in line with raters’, indicating speakers may not be aware of their own comprehensibility. However, speakers who did demonstrate greater improvement in comprehensibility received higher ratings of flow, and speakers’ self-ratings of comprehensibility were aligned with listeners’ assessments only in the second task. When discussing comprehensibility, speakers commented more on task content than linguistic dimensions. Results highlight the roles of task repetition and self-assessment in speakers’ awareness of comprehensibility.
Keywords: comprehensibility, second language, awareness, pronunciation, task repetition, self-assessment
Article outline
  • 1.Linguistic dimensions of comprehensibility
  • 2.What do speakers know about comprehensibility?
  • 3.Comprehensibility and speakers’ self-assessments
  • 4.Comprehensibility and task repetition
  • 5.The current study
    • 5.1Method
      • 5.1.1L2 speakers
      • 5.1.2Tasks and procedure
      • 5.1.3Listeners and listening procedure
      • 5.1.4Data analysis
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Comprehensibility across repeated tasks
    • 6.2Comprehensibility and linguistic dimensions
    • 6.3Self- and listener-rated comprehensibility
    • 6.4Speakers’ awareness of L2 comprehensibility
  • 7.Discussion
    • 7.1Task repetition and comprehensibility
    • 7.2Self-assessment and comprehensibility
    • 7.3Speakers’ awareness of comprehensibility
    • 7.4Pedagogical implications
    • 7.5Limitations and future directions
  • 8.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 14 March 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.18008.str
References
Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M.
(2011) The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 111, 35–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Association for Language Awareness
(2017) Retrieved 15 September 2017 from http://​www​.lexically​.net​/ala​/la​_defined​.htm
Babaii, E., Taghaddomi, S., & Pashmforoosh, R.
(2016) Speaking self-assessment: Mismatches between learners’ and teachers’ criteria. Language Testing, 111, 1–27.Google Scholar
Bergeron, A., & Trofimovich, P.
(2017) Linguistic dimensions of accentedness and comprehensibility: Exploring task and listener effects in second language French. Foreign Language Annals, 50(3), 547–566. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bygate, M.
(2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Oxford, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Castañeda, M., & Rodríguez-González, E.
(2011) L2 speaking self-ability perceptions through multiple video speech drafts. Hispania, 111, 483–501.Google Scholar
Chen, Y. M.
(2008) Learning to self-assess oral performance in English: A longitudinal case study. Language Teaching Research, 111, 235–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, D., Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T.
(2016) Linguistic dimensions of second language accent and comprehensibility. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 111, 160–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, D., Trofimovich, P., Isaacs, T., & Saito, K.
(2015a) Does a speaking task affect second language comprehensibility? The Modern Language Journal, 111, 80–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crowther, D., Trofimovich, P., Saito, K., & Isaacs, T.
(2015b) Second language comprehensibility revisited: Investigating the effects of learner background. TESOL Quarterly, 111, 814–837. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Saint Léger, D.
(2009) Self-assessment of speaking skills and participation in a foreign language class. Foreign Language Annals, 111, 158–178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T.
(2003) What do ESL students say about their accents? Canadian Modern Language Review, 111, 547–567. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Rossiter, M. J.
(2002) ESL learners’ perceptions of their pronunciation needs and strategies. System, 111, 155–166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I.
(2004) Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 111, 655–679. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dlaska, A., & Krekeler, C.
(2008) Self-assessment of pronunciation. System, 111, 506–516. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J.
(2003) Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 111, 83–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2005) Principles of instructed language learning. System, 111, 209–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ETS
(2011) TOEFL iBT® research insight: TOEFL® program history. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
Gibson, W., & Brown, A.
(2009) Working with qualitative data. London, UK: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Trofimovich, P.
(2012) Deconstructing comprehensibility. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 111, 475–505. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jułkowska, I. A., & Cebrian, J.
(2015) Effects of listener factors and stimulus properties on the intelligibility, comprehensibility and accentedness of L2 speech. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 111, 211–237. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jung, Y., Kim, Y., & Murphy, J.
(2017) The role of task repetition in learning word-stress patterns through auditory priming tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 111, 319–346. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, S., & Trofimovich, P.
(2010) Language awareness and second language pronunciation: A classroom study. Language Awareness, 111, 171–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Y., & Tracy-Ventura, N.
(2013) The role of task repetition in L2 performance development: What needs to be repeated during task-based interaction? System, 111, 829–840. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kissling, E. M., & O’Donnell, M. E.
(2015) Increasing language awareness and self-efficacy of FL students using self-assessment and the ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Language Awareness, 111, 283–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larson-Hall, J.
(2009) A Guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lappin-Fortin, K., & Rye, B. J.
(2014) The use of pre-/posttest and self-assessment tools in a French pronunciation course. Foreign Language Annals, 111, 300–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S., & Chang, S.
(2005) Learner involvement in self-and peer-assessment of task-based oral performance. Language Research, 111, 711–735.Google Scholar
Lynch, T., & Maclean, J.
(2000) Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research, 111, 221–250. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, M. G.
(2014) L2 learners’ assessments of accentedness, fluency, and comprehensibility of native and nonnative German speech. Language Learning, 111, 715–748. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papajohn, D.
(2005) Toward Speaking Excellence: The Michigan Guide to maximizing your performance in the TSE ® test and other speaking tests. Ann Arbour, MI: University of Michigan Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Patri, M.
(2002) The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 111, 109–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L.
(1989) Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 111, 63–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L.
(2014) How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rajadurai, J.
(2006) Pronunciation issues in non-native contexts: A Malaysian case study. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 111, 43–59.Google Scholar
Ranta, E.
(2010) English in the real world vs. English at school: Finnish English teachers’ and students’ views. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 111, 156–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(2011) Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 111, 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossiter, M. J.
(2009) Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. Canadian Modern Language Review, 111, 395–412. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Akiyama, Y.
(2017) Video-based interaction, negotiation for comprehensibility, and second language speech learning: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 111, 43–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Shintani, N.
(2016) Do native speakers of North American and Singapore English differentially perceive comprehensibility in second language speech? TESOL Quarterly, 111, 421–446. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T.
(2016) Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 111, 217–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(2015) Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical review. Applied Linguistics, 111, 367–384. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. & Lapkin, S.
(1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 111, 371–391. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Isaacs, T., Kennedy, S., Saito, K., & Crowther, D.
(2016) Flawed self- assessment: Investigating self-and other-perception of second language speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 111, 122–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van den Branden, K.
(1997) Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 111, 589–636. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Venkatagiri, H. S., & Levis, J. M.
(2007) Phonological awareness and speech comprehensibility: An exploratory study. Language Awareness, 111, 263–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zoss, J. M.
(2015) Adult English learners’ perceptions of their pronunciation and linguistic self-confidence. (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Hamline University, Saint Paul, Minnesota.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Isbell, Daniel R. & Junkyu Lee
2022. Self‐Assessment of Comprehensibility and Accentedness in Second Language Korean. Language Learning Crossref logo
Tsunemoto, Aki, Pavel Trofimovich, Josée Blanchet, Juliane Bertrand & Sara Kennedy
2022. Effects of benchmarking and peer‐assessment on French learners' self‐assessments of accentedness, comprehensibility, and fluency. Foreign Language Annals 55:1 ► pp. 135 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.