Investigating the Differences Between Prepared and Spontaneous Speech Characteristics: Descriptive Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.319Keywords:
Oral performance, pre-task planning, A2, Russian EFL speakers discourse.Abstract
In the modern EFL paradigm, pre-task planning time is viewed as a norm. Pre-task planning time is one of the central concerns of teachers, test-developers, as well as researchers. Pre-task planning is planning a speech before performing a task, and it also involves rehearsal and strategic planning. The paper addresses the problem of pre-task planning advisability for A2 Russian EFL speakers. The research presented in this paper examines the structure, breakdown, repair, syntactic complexity, lexical diversity as well as the accuracy of the discourse produced by 145 Russian participants of the English language competition held in Kazan, Russia, in January 2020. The discourse analysis revealed that the pre-task time is used by A2 EFL speakers not only to focus on a dialog but also to elicit a topic text from memory, thus focusing on form rather than meaning. Hence, in A2 tests prioritizing meaning over form and measuring the ability for spontaneous speech, the one-minute pre-task planning time is viewed as questionable.
References
Abdi, R., Basarati, A. (2018). Legitimation in Discourse and Communication Revisited: A Critical View towards Legitimizing Identities in Communication. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language. 6(1), 86-100
Ahangari, S., & Abdi, M. (2011). The Effect of Pre-Task Planning on the Accuracy and Complexity of Iranian EFL Learners Oral Performance. Procedia – Socialand Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.445 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.445
Ahmanova, O. (2004), Slovar lingvisticheskih terminov [Dictionary of linguistic terms], Moscow: Editorial URSS [in Russian].
CEFR Level A2. URL: http://www.stgiles-international.com/app/ webroot/docs/Level-A2-Learner-Outcomes.pdf.
Elder, C., & Iwashita, N. (2005). Planning for Test Performance: Does it Make a Difference? In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language (pp. 219−238). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.14eld DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.14eld
Elizabeth Shriberg (2005), Spontaneous Speech: How People Really Talk and Why Engineers Should Care, Speech Technology and Research Laboratory, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA, ees@speech.sri.com. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2005-3
Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. 12-58. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1999). The Influence of Source of Planning and Focus of Planning on Task-Based Performance. Language Teaching Research, 3, 21-247. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889900300303 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889900300303
Galyashina, E. (2003), Theory and practice of linguistic, analysis of media texts in forensic examinations and information disputes]. Materials of scientific-practical seminar,Moscow: Gallery [in Russian].
J. Hirschberg (2002), Communication and prosody. Speech Communication, 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(01)00024-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(01)00024-3
Keaton, S.A., Giles, H. (2016). Subjective Health: The Roles of Communication, Language, Aging, Stereotypes, and Culture. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language. 4(2), 1-10
Kent RD, Vorperian HK(2013), Speech impairment in Down syndrome: a review. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2013. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2012/12-0148) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2012/12-0148)
Laan, G. (1997), The contribution of intonation, segmental durations, and spectral features to the perception of a spontaneous and a read speaking style, Speech Communication, 22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(97)00012-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(97)00012-5
Mann, M., & Taylore-Knowles, S. (2006). Macmillan Exam Skills for Russia: Speaking and Listening. Oxford: Macmillan.
McCarthy, P. M., & Jarvis, S. (2010). MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior research methods, 42(2), 381-392. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.381 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.381
McLaughlin, B., Rossman, T., & McLeod, B. (1983). Second language learning: an information-processing perspective. Language Learning, 33,135—57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00532.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00532.x
Mehrang, F., & Rahimpour, M. (2012). The Impact Of Task Structure And Planning Conditions On Oral Performance Of EFL Learners.
Nick Campbell(2017), Voice characteristics of spontaneous speech, ATR Human Information Science Laboratories, Keihanna Science City, Kyoto, Japan.
Nitta, R., & Nakatsuhara, F. (2014). A Multifaceted Approach to Investigating Pre-Task Planning Effects on Paired Oral Test Performance, Language Testing, 31(2), 147-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213514401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213514401
North, B., Figueras, N., Takala, S., Van Avermaet, P., & Verhelst, N. (2009). Relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). A Manual. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Posner, M., & Klein, R. (1973). On the Functions of Consciousness. In S. Kornblum (ed.): Attention and Performance IV. London: Academic Press.
Roberts JE, Price J, Malkin C (2007), Language and communication development in Down syndrome. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2007;13. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrdd.20136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mrdd.20136
Schmidt, R. (1990). The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
Solnyshkina, M. I., Ziganshina, C. R., Sharifullina, E. A., & Gatiyatullina, G. M. (2016). The Effect of Pre-Task Strategic Planning on Russian A2 EFL Learners’ Monologic Oral Performance. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS) ISSN 2356-5926, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n12p1
Solnyshkina, M.I., Harkova, E.V., and A.S.Kiselnikov. (2014). Unified (Russian) State Exam in English: Reading Comprehension Tasks. English Language Teaching, 7(12), 19 November. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n12p1
Solovyev, V., Solnyshkina, M., Ivanov, V., & Batyrshin, I. (2019). Prediction of reading difficulty in Russian academic texts. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 36(5), 4553-4563. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-179007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-179007
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language (pp. 239−273). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.15tav DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.15tav
Textinspector, URL: http://www.textinspector.com/workflow/ 2FE5E7C6-5EDC-11E6-91DB-973EAFCE53D3.
Verbickaya, M., Mann, M., & Taylore-Knowles, S. (2015). Testy dlya podgotovki k GIA in English. Macmillan.
Wayne Ward (1988), Understanding spontaneous speech, Conference: Proceedings of the workshop on Speech and Natural Language. https://doi.org/10.3115/100964.100975 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3115/100964.100975
Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An Investigation of Planning Time and Proficiency Level on Oral Test Discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85−106. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229701400105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229701400105
Wigglesworth, G., & Elder, C. (2010). An Investigation of Effectiveness and Validity of Planning Time in Speaking Test Tasks. Language Assessment Quarterly, 7, 1−24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903031779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300903031779
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The Effects of Pre-Task Planning And on-Line Planning on Fluency, Complexity and Accuracy in L2 Monologic Oral Production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1−27. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Policy for Journals/Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
Policy for Journals / Manuscript with Paid Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Publisher retain copyright .
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work .
