Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Second Language Pronunciation
Vol. 7:3 (2021) ► pp.435–461

Task engagement and comprehensibility in interaction

Moving from what second language speakers say to what they do

ORCID logo | Concordia University
ORCID logo | Concordia University
ORCID logo | Concordia University
This exploratory study examined the relationship between second language (L2) English speakers’ comprehensibility and their interactional behaviors as they engaged in a conversation with fellow L2 speakers. Thirty-six pairs of L2 English university students completed a 10-minute academic discussion task and subsequently rated each other’s comprehensibility. Transcripts of their conversation were coded for eight measures of task engagement, including cognitive/behavioral engagement (idea units, language-related episodes), social engagement (encouragement, responsiveness, task and time management, backchanneling, nodding), and emotional engagement (positive affect). Speakers who showed more encouragement and nodding were perceived as easier to understand, whereas those who produced more frequent language-focused episodes and demonstrated more responsiveness were rated as harder to understand. These findings provide initial evidence for an association between L2 speakers’ interactional behaviors and peer-ratings of comprehensibility, highlighting L2 comprehensibility as a multifaceted and interaction-driven construct.
Keywords: comprehensibility, interaction, interactional behavior, task engagement, English as lingua franca, second language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The present study
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Paired oral interactions
    • 3.2Data coding
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Limitations, implications, and future work
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 27 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.21006.tro
References (72)
References
Ackerman, J. M., & Bargh, J. A. (2010). Two to tango: Automatic social coordination and the role of felt effort. In B. Bruya (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 335–371). MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aoki, H. (2011). Some functions of speaker head nods. In C. Goodwin, C. LeBaron, & J. Streeck (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 93–105). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baralt, M., Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Engagement with the language: How examining learners’ affective and social engagement explains successful learner-generated attention to form. In M. Sato, & S. Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 209–239). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2002). Listener responses as collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 521, 566–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2010). Does verb bias modulate syntactic priming? Cognition, 1141, 455–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bjørge, A. K. (2010). Conflict or cooperation: The use of backchannelling in ELF negotiations. English for Specific Purposes, 291, 191–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A. F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contribution of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing, 301, 159–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S. E., Kuhlen, A. K., & Charoy, J. (2018). Discourse and dialogue. In S. L. Thompson-Schill (Ed.), The Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 145–209). Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, L., Myles, J., & Curtis, A. (2004). Targeting language support for non-native English-speaking graduate students at a Canadian university. TESL Canada Journal, 211, 50–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crowther, D., Trofimovich, P., Isaacs, T., & Saito, K. (2015). Does a speaking task affect second language comprehensibility? The Modern Language Journal, 991, 80–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cumming, G., & Calin-Jageman, R. (2017). Introduction to the new statistics: Estimation, open science, and beyond. Routledge.Google Scholar
Dao, P., & McDonough, K. (2018). Effect of proficiency on Vietnamese EFL learners’ engagement in peer interaction. International Journal of Educational Research, 881, 60–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (1997). Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 191, 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Pronunciation fundamentals. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J. & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2002). They speaked and wrote real good: Judgments of native and non-native grammar. Language Awareness, 111, 84–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I. (2004). Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 541, 655–679. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducasse, A. M., & Brown, A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: Raters’ orientation to interaction. Language Testing, 261, 423–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S. (1972). Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 231, 283–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fayer, J. M., & Krasinski, E. (1987). Native and nonnative judgments of intelligibility and irritation. Language Learning, 371, 313–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage.Google Scholar
Foote, J., & Trofimovich, P. (2018). Is it because of my language background? A study of language background influence on comprehensibility judgments. Canadian Modern Language Review, 741, 253–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 261, 402–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galaczi, E. D. (2008). Peer-peer interaction in a speaking test: The case of the First Certificate in English examination. Language Assessment Quarterly, 51, 89–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glenn, P., & Holt, E. (2013). Studies of laughter in interaction. Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregersen, T. S. (2005). Nonverbal cues: Clues to the detection of foreign language anxiety. Foreign Language Annals, 381, 388–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Imai, Y. (2010). Emotions in SLA: New insights from collaborative learning for an EFL classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 941, 278–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Thomson, R. I. (2013). Rater experience, rating scale length, and judgments of L2 pronunciation: Revisiting research conventions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 101, 135–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Trofimovich, P. (2012). Deconstructing comprehensibility: Identifying the linguistic influences on listeners’ L2 comprehensibility ratings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 341, 475–505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isaacs, T., Trofimovich, P., Yu, G., & Chereau, B. M. (2015). Examining the linguistic aspects of speech that most efficiently discriminate between upper levels of the revised IELTS Pronunciation scale. IELTS Research Report Series, 41, 1–48.Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. F., & Snider, N. E. (2013). Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime’s prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition, 1271, 57–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, O., Rubin, D., & Pickering, L. (2010). Suprasegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English. The Modern Language Journal, 941, 554–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knapp, M. L., Hall, J. A., & Horgan, T. G. (2013). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Lambert, C., Philp, J., & Nakamura, S. (2017). Learner-generated content and engagement in second language task performance. Language Teaching Research, 211, 665–680. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 331, 159–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
May, L. (2009). Co-constructed interaction in a paired speaking test: The rater’s perspective. Language Testing, 261, 397–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Interactional competence in a paired speaking test: Features salient to raters. Language Assessment Quarterly, 81, 127–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2010). Spoken fluency revisited. English Profile Journal, 11, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P. (2019). Corpus of English as a Lingua Franca Interaction (CELFI). Montreal, Canada: Concordia University.Google Scholar
Munro, M. J. (2018). Dimensions of pronunciation. In O. Kang, R. I. Thomson, & J. M. Murphy (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of contemporary English pronunciation (pp. 413–431). Routledge.Google Scholar
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 451, 73–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Morton, S. L. (2006). The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 281, 111–131. [URL]. DOI logo
Nagle, C., Trofimovich, P., O’Brien, M. G., & Kennedy, S. (2021). Beyond linguistic features: Exploring the behavioral and affective correlates of comprehensible second language speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Published online 23 March 2021. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, S., Phung, L., & Reinders, H. (2020). The effect of learner choice on L2 task engagement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Published online 13 October 2020. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nash, C. E. (2007). Gestural regulators in French, Japanese and American English dialogues. In M. Grein & E. Weigand (Eds.), Dialogue and culture (pp. 115–140). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, M. G. (2014). L2 learners’ assessments of accentedness, fluency, and comprehensibility of native and nonnative German speech. Language Learning, 641, 715–748. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oga-Baldwin, W. L. Q., & Nakata, Y. (2017). Engagement, gender, and motivation: A predictive model for Japanese young language learners. System, 651, 151–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, B. (2011). Interpersonal emotion transfer: Contagion and social appraisal. Personality and Social Psychology Compass, 51, 428–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paxton, A., Dale, R., & Richardson, D. C. (2016). Social coordination of verbal and nonverbal behaviors. In P. Passos, K. Davids, & J. Y. Chow (Eds.), Interpersonal coordination and performance in social systems (pp. 259–274). Routledge.Google Scholar
Pelachaud, C., Badler, N. I., & Steedman, M. (1996). Generating facial expressions for speech. Cognitive Science, 201, 1–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 361, 50–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 211, 737–758. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Ghanbar, H. (2018). Multiple regression in L2 research: A methodological synthesis and guide to interpreting R2 values. The Modern Language Journal, 1021, 713–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Qiu, X., & Lo, Y. Y. (2017). Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engagement in second language use. Language Teaching Research, 211, 681–698. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 501, 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Tran, M., Suzukida, Y., Sun, H., Magne, V., & Ilkan, M. (2019). How do L2 listeners perceive the comprehensibility of foreign-accented speech? Roles of L1 profiles, L2 proficiency, age, experience, familiarity and metacognition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 411, 1133–1149. DOI logoGoogle 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, 371, 217–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M. (2014). Exploring the construct of interactional oral fluency: Second language acquisition and language testing approaches. System, 451, 79–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shin, S.-Y., Lidster, R., Sabraw, S., & Yeager, R. (2016). The effects of L2 proficiency differences in pairs on idea units in a collaborative text reconstruction task. Language Teaching Research, 201, 366–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Storch, N. (2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 51, 29–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Metatalk in a pair work activity: Level of engagement and implications for language development. Language Awareness, 171, 95–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 821, 320–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor Reid, K., O’Brien, M., Trofimovich, P., & Bajt, A. (2020). Testing the malleability of teachers’ judgments of second language speech. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 61, 236–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T. (2012). Disentangling accent from comprehensibility. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 151, 905–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Nagle, C. L., O’Brien, M. G., Kennedy, S., Taylor Reid, K., & Strachan, L. (2020). Second language comprehensibility as a dynamic construct. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 61, 430–457. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Os, M., De Jong, N. H., & Bosker, H. R. (2020). Fluency in dialogue: Turn-taking behavior shapes perceived fluency in native and nonnative speech. Language Learning, 701, 1183–1217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1982). The comprehensibility of non-native speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 114–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaughn, C., & Whitty, A. (2020). Investigating the relationship between comprehensibility and social evaluation. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 61, 483–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, K. A. (2011). Some uses of head nods in “third position” in talk-in-interaction. Gesture, 111, 103–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhu, W., & Flaitz, J. (2005). Using focus group methodology to understand international students’ academic language needs: A comparison of perspectives. TESL-EJ, 81, 1–11.Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Aoyama, Takumi, Joseph S. Yamazaki, Sachiko Nakamura, Alyssa Vuogan, Hyejin An, Claudia J. Kim & Ali H. Al-Hoorie
2024. Conceptualization and operationalization in L2 task engagement research: Taking stock and moving forward. Language Teaching ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Burton, J. Dylan
2024. Evaluating the impact of nonverbal behavior on language ability ratings. Language Testing 41:4 ► pp. 729 ff. DOI logo
Zheng, Chaoqun, Pavel Trofimovich, Rachael Lindberg, Kim McDonough & Masatoshi Sato
2024. Do they like me?. Studies in Second Language Acquisition ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Crowther, Dustin & Daniel R. Isbell
2023. Second language speech comprehensibility: A research agenda. Language Teaching ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Crowther, Dustin, Daniel R. Isbell & Hitoshi Nishizawa
2023. Second language speech comprehensibility and acceptability in academic settings: Listener perceptions and speech stream influences. Applied Psycholinguistics 44:5 ► pp. 858 ff. DOI logo
Nagle, Charlie, Pavel Trofimovich, Oguzhan Tekin & Kim McDonough
2023. Framing second language comprehensibility: Do interlocutors’ ratings predict their perceived communicative experience?. Applied Psycholinguistics 44:1 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
NAGLE, CHARLIE L., PAVEL TROFIMOVICH, MARY GRANTHAM O'BRIEN & SARA KENNEDY
2022. Comprehensible to Whom? Examining Rater, Speaker, and Interlocutor Perspectives on Comprehensibility in an Interactive Context. The Modern Language Journal 106:4 ► pp. 675 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2024. 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.