The role of vocabulary and grammar knowledge in secondlanguage oral fluency: A correlational study

1
The role of vocabulary and grammar knowledge in
second-language oral fluency A correlational
study

• Nel de Jong Free University Amsterdam
• Laura Halderman University of Pittsburgh
• SLRF 2009 Michigan State University

2
Oral Fluency in L2 Speakers

• Broad vs. narrow definition (Lennon 1990)
• Broad general oral proficiency
• Narrow speed and smoothness of oral delivery
• Oral fluency depends on fast and automatic
  retrieval of vocabulary and processing of grammar
  knowledge (e.g. Levelt 1999 Kormos 2006
  Schmidt 1992)
• Lexical and grammatical knowledge play a large
  role in second language oral fluency

3
Lexical knowledge

• Lexical retrieval in writing
• Lexical retrieval training of words lead to
  greater use of those items and more essential
  content elements were expressed. No effect on
  global text quality. (Snellings et al. 2004)
• Lack of (access to) lexical knowledge is a major
  cause of dysfluencies (Hilton 2007)

4
Aspects of Lexical Knowledge

• Breadth
• How many words a person knows
• Greater breadth leads to fewer lexical searches
• Depth
• How well a person knows a word
• Greater depth leads to easier integration into
  context
• Lexical retrieval speed
• How fast a person retrieves a word
• Faster retrieval leads to less dysfluencies

5
Grammatical knowledge

• Automatic syntactic encoding is fast and requires
  little attention
• (Anderson et al. 2004 Kormos 2006 Segalowitz
  Hulstijn 2003)
• Automaticity leads to oral fluency
• (De Jong Perfetti in preparation Towell
  Hawkins Bazergui 2006)
• Implicit grammatical knowledge can tell us what
  structures have been proceduralized

6
Test of Grammatical Ability

• Elicited Imitation
• Repetition of sentences with target structures
  Percent Correct
• Controlled test of productive accuracy (cf.
  grammaticality judgments)
• Reconstructive vs. rote memory (Bley-Vroman
  Chaudron 1996 Erlam 2006 Munnich et al. 1996)

7
Research Goal
Examine the relationship between lexical and
grammatical knowledge and oral fluency in a
sample of English Language Learners
8
Our Tests

• Picture Naming Immediate Delayed
• Breadth of Lexical Knowledge
• Lexical Retrieval Speed (Immediate)
• Articulation Rate (Delayed)
• Vocabulary Knowledge Scale
• Depth of Lexical Knowledge
• Elicited Imitation
• Grammatical Knowledge
• Two minute recorded monologue
• Oral production sample

9
Measures of Oral Fluency

• Temporal Measures
• Length of fluent runs
• Number of syllables between pauses
• Length of pauses
• Phonation/time ratio
• of time filled with speech
• Articulation rate
• Syllables per minute
• (Kormos Dénes Towell et al. 1996)

10
Hypotheses

• Greater breadth of vocabulary PN accuracy gt
  longer fluent runs higher phonation/time ratio
• Faster lexical retrieval Imm. PN RT gt shorter
  pauses
• Greater vocabulary depth VKS gt longer fluent
  runs
• Greater grammatical ability EI gt longer fluent
  runs

11
Participants

• 23 students enrolled in English language courses
  Speaking course
• High intermediate (60-79 on Michigan Test of
  English Language Proficiency)
• L1s Arabic (3) Chinese (3) French (1) Italian
  (2) Japanese (3) Korean (5) Russian (1)
  Slovak (1) and Spanish (1) Turkish (3)

12
Picture Naming

• Immediate
• Timing began as soon as the picture was shown
• Delayed
• Timing began at the onset of a beep that was
  played 3 seconds after the picture appeared
• 24 pictures of nouns each
• Frequency bands sampled
• 1-1000 1001-2000 2001-3000 3001-10000
• Measures Accuracy Reaction Time

13
Vocabulary Knowledge Scale

• 12 nouns 12 verbs
• Four frequency bands
• 1-2000 2001-3000 3001-5000 5001-10000
• Definitions
• 1-9 words avg. 4.0 words
• Only 2000 most frequent words
• Distracter definitions adapted from Vocabulary
  Levels Test

14
Target word
Definitions shown when 3 - 5 is selected
Textbox to type sentence
15
Elicited Imitation

• 32 sentences 16 were grammatically incorrect
• 8 grammatical structures
• third person singular s regular plural nouns
• embedded questions regular past tense
• indefinite articles relative clauses
• Modals verb complements
• Sentences 6-11 words avg. 8.2
• Sampled from Erlam (2006)

16
Elicited Imitation
17
Results Time 1
p lt .05 p lt .01 p lt .001 Frequency
1-1000 2001-3000 only
18
Results Time 2
p lt .05 p lt .01 p lt .001 Frequency
1-1000 2001-3000 only
19
Conclusions from Correlations

• PN accuracy (breadth) correlates with MLP and
  PTR but inconsistently
• Outlier in the Pretest measures
• Easier to find appropriate word (more fluent)
• EI (grammatical ability) and VKS (depth)
  correlate with LFR
• Building sentence structures
• EI (grammatical ability) and VKS (depth)
  correlate with AR
• Do students slow down their articulation rate for
  planning

20
Gains Time 1 Time 2Picture Naming Accuracy

• Main effect of pre/post
• Main effect of frequency
• Interaction - naming type by frequency
• Frequency effect only in Immediate Naming
• Naming under time pressure is less accurate

21
Gains Time 1 Time 2Picture Naming Reaction
Time

• Main effect of naming type
• Interaction - naming type by time
• Effect of time only in Delayed Naming
• No improvement in lexical retrieval but in
  initiation of articulatory processes (cf. Barry
  et al. 2001)

22
Gains Time 1 Time 2Elicited Imitation

• Main effects
• time structure accuracy
• Interaction (marginally sign.)
• structure X accuracy X pretest/posttest

23
Conclusions from Pre/Post-tests

• Improvement in vocabulary breadth
• Improvement in initiation of articulatory
  processes
• Naming under time pressure is less accurate
• Lexical retrieval in speeches also occurs under
  time pressure
• Improvement in grammatical ability
• Mostly noun plurals relative clauses verb
  complements

24
Hypotheses

• Greater breadth of vocabulary PN accuracy gt
  longer fluent runs higher phonation/time ratio
• PTR yes MLFR no
• Faster lexical retrieval Imm. PN RT gt shorter
  pauses
• No support
• Greater vocabulary depth VKS gt longer fluent
  runs
• Yes and higher articulation rate
• Greater grammatical ability EI gt longer fluent
  runs
• Yes and higher articulation rate

25
Possible Explanations

• Curriculum focuses on academic vocabulary
  acquisition
• Our Pictures sample more general vocabulary and
  highly imageable nouns
• Recorded monologues are very open-ended
• Its hard to predict what vocabulary and
  grammatical structures they will use

26
Many thanks to

• Co-PIs Prof. Charles Perfetti Dr. Laura
  Halderman
• Research assistants Colleen Davis Mary Lou
  Vercellotti
• The students and teachers at the ELI
• The Robert Henderson Language Media Center
• Pittsburgh Science of Learning Center
• Contact cam.de.jong_at_let.vu.nl lkh11_at_pitt.edu

This work was supported in part by the Pittsburgh
Science of Learning Center which is funded by
the National Science Foundation award number
SBE-0354420.
27
Correlations Gains Gains
Gain in PTR with gain in Delayed Picture Naming r
.477 p .053n 17 All other correlations
n.s.
28

• Extras

29
Elicited Imitation
30
Overall Conclusions

• Vocabulary breadth predicts fluency
• At single points in time MLP and PTR
• Gain only Accuracy on Delayed Naming with PTR
• Lexical retrieval speed predicts articulation
  rate
• Articulation rate is not a reflection of
  proceduralization
• Vocabulary depth predicts fluency
• At single points in time MLFR AR
• Gain no post-test
• Implicit Grammar Knowledge predicts fluency
  measures the most
• At single points in time MLFR AR
• Gain no significant correlations with temporal
  measures