In the 4/3/2 activity learners deliver the same talk three times under increasing time pressure. The activity is intended first and foremost to foster fluency, but accuracy and complexity have also been said to benefit from this activity. The present study investigates whether immediate repetition of monologues under increasing time pressure really brings about linguistic improvements beyond fluency. Ten adult ESL learners delivered two talks three times, one talk with and the other without increasing time pressure. Fluency improved under both task conditions, but the potential of task repetition to bring about improvements in accuracy appeared to be compromised by the increasing time pressure. A strikingly high amount of verbatim duplication of word strings from the participants’ first version of their monologues in subsequent versions helps to account for the fluency gains and also for the lack of improvement in other linguistic aspects.
AhmadianMJ (2012) The effects of guided careful online planning on complexity, accuracy and fluency in intermediate EFL learners’ oral production: the case of English articles. Language Teaching Research16(1): 129–49.
2.
AhmadianMJTavakoliM (2010) The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research15(1): 35–59.
3.
ArevartSNationP (1991) Fluency improvement in a second language. RELC Journal22(1): 84–94.
4.
BostonJS (2008) Learner mining of pre-task and task input. ELT Journal62(1): 66–76.
5.
BygateM (2001) Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In: BygateMSkehanPSwainM (eds) Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow: Pearson Longman, 23–48.
6.
DallerH (2003) Lexical richness in the spontaneous speech of bilinguals. Applied Linguistics24(2): 197–222.
7.
De JongN (2012) Does time pressure help or hinder oral fluency? In: De JongNJuffermansKKeijzerMRasierL (eds) Papers of the Anéla 2012 applied linguistics conference. Delft: Eburon, 43–52.
8.
De JongNPerfettiCA (2011) Fluency training in the ESL classroom: an experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning61(2): 533–68.
9.
DewaeleJMFurnhamA (2000) Personality and speech production: a pilot study of second language learners. Personality and Individual Differences28(2): 355–65.
10.
EllisR (2005) Planning and task-based performance: theory and research. In: EllisR (ed.) Planning and Task Performance in Second Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 3–34.
11.
HawkesML (2012) Using task repetition to direct learner attention and focus on form. ELT Journal66(3): 327–36.
12.
HillJLewisMLewisM (2000) Classroom strategies, activities, and exercises. In: LewisM (ed.) Teaching Collocation: Further Developments in the Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications, 47–69.
13.
KormosJDenesM (2004) Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System32(2): 145–64.
14.
LauferB (2005) Lexical frequency profiles: from Monte Carlo to the real world: a response to Meara. Applied Linguistics26(4): 582–88.
15.
LeveltWM (1989) Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
LynchTMacleanJ (2001) Effects of immediate task repetition on learners’ performance. In: BygateMSkehanPSwainM (eds) Researching Pedagogic Tasks, Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing. Harlow: Longman, 99–118.
17.
MauriceK (1983) The fluency workshop. TESOL Newsletter17(4): 29.
18.
MochizukiNOrtegaL (2008) Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: a study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research12(1): 11–37.
NationISP (2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?Canadian Modern Language Review63(1): 59–82.
21.
NationISP (2007) The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching1(1): 2–13.
22.
NationISPNewtonJ (2009) Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking. New York: Routledge.
23.
RiggenbachH (ed.) (2000) Perspectives on Fluency. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
24.
SkehanP (2009) Modelling second language performance: integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics30(4): 510–32.
25.
SkehanPFosterP (1999) The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning49(1): 93–120.
26.
TavakoliP (2011) Pausing patterns: differences between L2 learners and native speakers. ELT Journal65(1): 71–79.
27.
WoodD (2009) Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: a case study. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics12(1): 39–57.
28.
WoodD (2010) Formulaic Language and Second Language Speech Fluency: Background, Evidence and Classroom Applications. New York: Continuum.
29.
YuanFEllisR (2003) The effect of pre-task planning and online planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics24(1): 1–27.
