Chapter published in:

Learning Language through Task Repetition
Edited by Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 11] 2018
► pp. 43–73

Chapter 2. Grammatical structures and oral fluency in immediate task repetition

Trigrams across repeated performances

Nel de Jong | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Philip Tillman | Independent researcher

In this study we examine to what extent words and grammatical structures are re-used when a speaking task is repeated with the same content (i.e., specific task repetition). We examine this re-use, which has been argued to support proceduralization and fluency development (N. de Jong & Perfetti, 2011), under both constant and increasing time pressure, and we investigate the correlation between re-use and fluency. The analyses are performed not only on individual words but also on trigrams, which are sequences of three words (e.g., the red car; here: lexical trigrams) or three parts of speech (e.g., det adj noun: POS trigrams), to capture grammatical structure. Thirty-nine adult ESL speakers completed repeated retellings of one to three picture stories. One group followed the 4/3/2 procedure (Nation, 1989), which involves three iterations with gradually increasing time pressure; for the other group the available time was constant. The extent of re-use of words and grammatical structures across task iterations was calculated using cosine similarity with tf-idf weighting (Manning, Raghavan, & Schütze, 2008), which adjusts for the frequency of words or trigrams, both within an iteration and across iterations and speakers. It was found that immediate task repetition had a strong effect on re-use at the level of individual words and trigrams, but increasing time pressure did not. The relationship between re-use and fluency was variable, but showed higher re-use for speakers struggling with fluency. We conclude that, if fluency development is to be stimulated by re-use of words and grammatical structures, it can be done with specific task repetition, whether under increasing time pressure or not.

Published online: 25 September 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.11.02jon

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, 15, 35–59.

Anderson, J. R.

(1993) Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Biber, D., & Conrad, S.

(1999) Lexical bundles in conversation and academic prose. In H. Hasselgard & S. Oksefjell (Eds.), Out of corpora: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson (pp. 181–189). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V.

(2004) If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 371–405.

Boers, F.

(2014) A reappraisal of the 4/3/2 activity. RELC Journal, 45, 221–235.

Breen, M.

1989 The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In R.K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 187–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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). Harlow: Pearson Longman.

Bygate, M., & Samuda, V.

(2005) Integrative planning through the use of task-repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 37–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Chen, Y-H., & Baker, P.

(2016) Investigating criterial discourse features across second language development: Lexical bundles in rated learner rssays, CEFR B1, B2 and C1. Applied Linguistics, 37, 849–880.

De Cock, S.

(2004) Preferred sequences of words in NS and NNS speech. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures, 2, 225–246.

de Jong, N.

(2012) Does time pressure help or hinder oral fluency? In N. De Jong, K. Juffermans, M. Keijzer, & L. Rasier (Eds.), Papers of the Anéla 2012 Applied Linguistics Conference (pp. 43–52). Delft: Eburon.

de Jong, N., & Perfetti, C. A.

(2011) Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61, 533–568.

de Jong, N., & Vercellotti, M. L.

(2016) Similar prompts may not be similar in the performance they elicit: Examining fluency, complexity, accuracy, and lexis in narratives from five picture prompts. Language Teaching Research, 20, 387–404.

de Jong, N. H., Steinel, M., Florijn, A., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H.

(2013) Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 893–916.

DeKeyser, R. M.

(2009) Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of second language teaching (pp. 119–138). Oxford: Blackwell.

Ellis, R.

(2003) Tasks in SLA and language pedagogy. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Task-based language learning and teaching (pp. 1–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Francis, W. S., Corral, N. I., Jones, M. L., & Sáenz, S. P.

(2008) Decomposition of Repetition Priming Components in Picture Naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 566–590.

Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M. J., & Fernández-García, M.

(1999) The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, 49, 549–581.

Hawkes, M. L.

(2012) Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal, 66, 327–336.

Heaton, J. B.

(1966) Composition Through Pictures. Essex: Longman.

Hyland, K.

(2008) As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4–21.

Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H.

(2008) Speech and language processing: An introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics and speech recognition (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

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, 41, 829–840.

Lauttamus, T., Nerbonne, J., & Wiersma, W.

(2007) Detecting syntactic contamination in emigrants: The English of Finnish Australians. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 20, 273–307.

Levelt, W. J. M.

(1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

(1999) Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In C. Brown & P. Hagoort (Eds.), The neurocognition of language (pp. 83–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lyster, R., & Sato, M.

(2013) Skill Acquisition Theory and the role of practice in L2 development. In M. del P. García Mayo, M. J. Gutierrez Mangado, & M. Martinez Adrian (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 71–91). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

MacWhinney, B.

(2000) The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H.

(2008) Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marsden, E., Mackey, A., & Plonsky, L.

(2016) The IRIS Repository: Advancing research practice and methodology. In A. Mackey & E. Marsden (Eds.), Advancing methodology and practice: The IRIS repository of instruments for research into second languages (pp. 1–21). New York NY: Routledge.

Martinez, R., & Schmitt, N.

(2012) A phrasal expressions list. Applied Linguistics, 33, 299–320.

McCarthy, P. M., Hall, C., Duran, N. D., Doiuchi, M., Fujiwara, Y., Duncan, B., & McNamara, D. S.

(2009) Analyzing journal abstracts written by Japanese, American, and British scientists using Coh-Metrix and the Gramulator. The ESPecialist, 30, 141–173.

McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P.

(2009) Using priming methods in second language research. New York, NY: Routledge.

Nation, P.

(1989) Improving speaking fluency. System, 17, 377–384.

Ortega, L.

(2005) What do learners plan? Learner-driven attention to form during pre-task planning. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 77–109). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Pallotti, G.

(2009) CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30, 590–601.

Paquot, M., & Granger, S.

(2012) Formulaic language in learner corpora. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 130–149.

Sample, E., & Michel, M.

(2014) An exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 31, 23–46.

Shafer, D.

(2006) Revolution: Software at the speed of thought. Monterey, CA: Shafer Media.

Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C.

(2010) An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31, 487–512.

Skehan, P.

(2009) Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510–532.

(2014) Limited attentional capacity, second language performance, and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 211). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Snellings, P., Van Gelderen, A., & De Glopper, K.

(2004) The effect of enhanced lexical retrieval on second language writing: A classroom experiment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 175–200.

Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P.

(2008) Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 58, 439–473.

Thai, C., & Boers, F.

(2016) Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 369–393.

Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N.

(1996) The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84–119.