Oral fluency and foreign accent distinguish L2 from L1 speech production. In language testing practices, both fluency and accent are usually assessed by raters. This study investigates what exactly native raters of fluency and accent take into account when judging L2. Our aim is to explore the relationship between objectively measured temporal, segmental and suprasegmental properties of speech on the one hand, and fluency and accent as rated by native raters on the other hand. For 90 speech fragments from Turkish and English L2 learners of Dutch, several acoustic measures of fluency and accent were calculated. In Experiment 1, 20 native speakers of Dutch rated the L2 Dutch samples on fluency. In Experiment 2, 20 different untrained native speakers of Dutch judged the L2 Dutch samples on accentedness. Regression analyses revealed, first, that acoustic measures of fluency were good predictors of fluency ratings. Second, segmental and suprasegmental measures of accent could predict some variance of accent ratings. Third, perceived fluency and perceived accent were only weakly related. In conclusion, this study shows that fluency and perceived foreign accent can be judged as separate constructs.
Anderson-HsiehJ.JohnsonR.KoehlerK. (1992). The relationship between native speaker judgments of nonnative pronunciation and deviance in segmentals, prosody, and syllable structure. Language Learning, 42, 529–555.
2.
Anderson-HsiehJ.KoehlerK. (1988). The effect of foreign accent and speaking rate on native speaker comprehension. Language Learning, 38, 561–613.
3.
BaayenR. H.DavidsonD. J.BatesD. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412.
4.
BaayenR. H.PiepenbrockR.van RijnH. (1993). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
BeckmanM. E.VendittiJ. J. (2010). Tone and Intonation. In HardcastleW. J.LaverJ. (Eds.), The handbook of phonetic sciences (pp. 603–652). Oxford: Blackwell.
7.
BortfeldH.LeonS.BloomJ.SchoberM.BrennanS. (2001). Disfluency rates in conversation: Effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech, 44, 123–147.
8.
BoskerH. R.PingetA-F.QuenéH.SandersT. J. M.De JongN. H. (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing30(2), 159–175.
9.
ChambersF. (1997). What do we mean by fluency?System, 25, 535–544.
10.
CucchiariniC.StrikH.BovesL. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners’ fluency: Comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111, 2862–2873.
11.
CutlerA. (2012). Native listening: Language experience and the recognition of spoken words, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
CutlerA.ButterfieldS. (1992). Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 218–236.
13.
De JongN. H.BoskerH. R. (2013). Choosing a threshold for silent pauses to measure second language fluency. In EklundR. (Ed.), Proceedings of disfluency in spontaneous speech (pp. 17–20). DiSS 2013.
14.
De JongN. H.GroenhoutR.SchoonerR.HulstijnJ. H. (2013). Second language fluency: Speaking style or proficiency? Correcting measures of second language fluency for first language behavior. Applied Psycholinguistics; doi: 10.1017/S0142716413000210.
15.
De JongN. H.SteinelM. P.FlorijnA. F.SchoonenR.HulstijnJ. H. (2012). Facets of speaking proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 5–34.
16.
DerwingT.MunroM.ThomsonR.RossiterM. (2009). The relationship between L1 fluency and L2 fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(4), 533–557.
17.
DerwingT.RossiterM. (2003). The effects of pronunciation instruction on the accuracy, fluency, and complexity of L2 accented speech. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–18.
18.
DerwingT.RossiterM.MunroM.ThomsonR. (2004). L2 fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning, 54, 655–679.
19.
FerrerM. (2011). The development of oral fluency and rhythm during a study abroad period. Doctoral dissertation. University of Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
20.
FreedB. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In FreedB. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
21.
HulstijnJ. H.SchoonenR.De JongN. H.SteinelM. P.FlorijnA. F. (2012). Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Language Testing, 29, 203–221.
22.
KangO. (2010). Relative salience of suprasegmental features on judgments of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness. System, 38, 301–315.
23.
KormosJ.DénesM. (2004). Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32, 145–164.
24.
LennonP. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40, 387–412.
25.
LennonP. (2000). The lexical element in spoken second language fluency. In RiggenbachH. (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 25–42). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
26.
LibermanM.PierrehumbertJ. (1984). Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length. In AronoffM.OehrleR. (Eds.), Language sound structure (pp. 157–233). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27.
LimpertE.StahelW.AbbtM. (2001). Lognormal distributions across the sciences: Keys and clues. BioScience, 51(5), 341–352.
28.
MagenI. (1998). The perception of foreign-accented speech. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 381–400.
29.
MoyerA. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology: The critical factors of age, motivation and instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 81–108.
30.
MunroM. J.DerwingT. M. (1998). The effects of speech rate on the comprehensibility of native and foreign accented speech. Language Learning, 48, 159–182.
31.
MunroM. J.DerwingT. M. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 49, Supplement 1, 285–310.
32.
MunroM. J.DerwingT. M. (2001). Modeling perceptions of the accentedness and comprehensibility of L2 speech: Accentedness and comprehensibility of L2 speech: The role of speaking rate. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 451–468.
33.
MunroM. J.DerwingT. M. (2008). Segmental acquisition in adult ESL learners: A longitudinal study of vowel production. Language Learning, 58, 479–502.
34.
NeriA.CucchiariniC.StrikH. (2006). Selecting segmental errors in L2 Dutch for optimal pronunciation training. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 357–404.
35.
PatkowskiM. (1990). Age and accent in a second language: A reply to James Emil Flege. Applied Linguistic, II, 73–89.
36.
QuenéH.van den BerghH. (2004). On multi-level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: A tutorial. Speech Communication, 43(1–2), 103–121.
37.
QuenéH.van den BerghH. (2008). Examples of mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 413–425.
38.
RiggenbachH. (1991). Towards an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversation. Discourse Processes, 14, 423–441.
39.
RossiterM. (2009). Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(3), 395–412.
40.
SchmidtR. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.
41.
SegalowitzN. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. London/New York: Routledge.
42.
SmithR. (2005). The role of fine phonetic detail in word segmentation. Doctoral dissertation. University of Cambridge, UK.
TavakoliP.SkehanP. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure and performance testing. In EllisR. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–273). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
45.
ThurstoneL. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529–554.
46.
TowellR.HawkinsR.BazerguiN. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84–119.
47.
VeenkerT. J. G. (2006). FEP: A tool for designing and running computerized experiments (version 2.4.19) [Computer program].
48.
WennerstromA. (2000). The role of intonation in second language fluency. In RiggenbachH. (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 102–127). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
49.
XuY. (1999). Effects of tone and focus on the formation and alignment of F0 contours. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 55–105.
