Investigating the Correlation between English Spoken Fluency and Working Memory Capacity in both Dialogic and Monologic Presentations

Nada Alshehri
{"title":"Investigating the Correlation between English Spoken Fluency and Working Memory Capacity in both Dialogic and Monologic Presentations","authors":"Nada Alshehri","doi":"10.9734/ajess/2024/v50i41335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Studies on second language (L2) speech fluency recommend studying fluency in a dialogic context. In response to the researchers' calls, this study introduced monologic and dialogic tasks to investigate the various aspects of speed, breakdown, and repair fluency in the oral performancemost L2 fluency studies have looked at oral fluency in a monologic task. Dialogue is the more authentic and natural way of communication, which is apparent in everyday language use. Currently, there is a scarcity of research examining dialogue fluency in non-native bilingual speakers who share the same L2. The existing body of research on language learning and processing has underscored significant connections between individual differences (IDs) in working memory capacity (WMC) and models of L2 speech production in both first language (L1). Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether variations in WMC are linked to dysfluency in L2 monologue and dialogue. Therefore, this study also aimed to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the correlation between utterance fluency in both monologue and dialogue and WMC. A total of 64 undergraduate Saudi students were given various tasks as part of the study. An argumentative task was presented as a monologue focused on a prevalent topic in the participants’ country. In contrast, during a dialogic discussion task, 32 pairs engaged in exchanging opinions on a popular subject in their country. Additionally, participants underwent two challenging working memory (WM) tests: the Operation Span Test and the Backward Digit Span Test. The findings aligned with prior research, indicating that L2 participants demonstrated greater fluency in dialogue compared to monologue, as evident in speed and breakdown measures of utterance fluency. Interestingly, WMC did not emerge as a robust predictor for variations in L2 oral performances between monologue and dialogue.","PeriodicalId":502349,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies","volume":"94 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2024/v50i41335","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Studies on second language (L2) speech fluency recommend studying fluency in a dialogic context. In response to the researchers' calls, this study introduced monologic and dialogic tasks to investigate the various aspects of speed, breakdown, and repair fluency in the oral performancemost L2 fluency studies have looked at oral fluency in a monologic task. Dialogue is the more authentic and natural way of communication, which is apparent in everyday language use. Currently, there is a scarcity of research examining dialogue fluency in non-native bilingual speakers who share the same L2. The existing body of research on language learning and processing has underscored significant connections between individual differences (IDs) in working memory capacity (WMC) and models of L2 speech production in both first language (L1). Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether variations in WMC are linked to dysfluency in L2 monologue and dialogue. Therefore, this study also aimed to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the correlation between utterance fluency in both monologue and dialogue and WMC. A total of 64 undergraduate Saudi students were given various tasks as part of the study. An argumentative task was presented as a monologue focused on a prevalent topic in the participants’ country. In contrast, during a dialogic discussion task, 32 pairs engaged in exchanging opinions on a popular subject in their country. Additionally, participants underwent two challenging working memory (WM) tests: the Operation Span Test and the Backward Digit Span Test. The findings aligned with prior research, indicating that L2 participants demonstrated greater fluency in dialogue compared to monologue, as evident in speed and breakdown measures of utterance fluency. Interestingly, WMC did not emerge as a robust predictor for variations in L2 oral performances between monologue and dialogue.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
调查英语口语流利程度与对话式和单一式演讲中工作记忆能力之间的相关性
有关第二语言(L2)言语流利性的研究建议在对话语境中研究流利性。为了响应研究者的呼吁,本研究引入了单项任务和对话任务,以考察口语表现中的速度、分解和修复流利性等各个方面。对话是更真实、更自然的交流方式,这在日常语言使用中显而易见。目前,对母语为第二语言的非双语者对话流利性的研究还很少。关于语言学习和处理的现有研究强调了工作记忆能力(WMC)的个体差异(IDs)与第一语言(L1)的第二语言语音生成模型之间的重要联系。然而,工作记忆容量的差异是否与 L2 独白和对话中的流畅性障碍有关,目前仍不清楚。因此,本研究也旨在通过调查独白和对话中的语篇流畅性与 WMC 之间的相关性来填补这一文献空白。本研究共向 64 名沙特本科生布置了各种任务。论证任务以独白的形式呈现,重点是参与者所在国家的一个流行话题。与此相反,在对话讨论任务中,32 对参与者就本国的热门话题交换了意见。此外,参与者还接受了两项具有挑战性的工作记忆(WM)测试:操作跨度测试和后向数字跨度测试。研究结果与之前的研究结果一致,表明与独白相比,后语参与者在对话中表现出更高的流利度,这一点在语速和语句流利度的细分测量中都很明显。有趣的是,WMC 并未成为预测独白和对话之间第二语言口语表现差异的有力因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review on Inclusive Education Research: Identifying Concerns over Children with Disabilities Role of Bangabandhu in the Development of Post-independence International Relations: A Study on Selected Dhaka Dailies Training and Development on Employee Performance, A Case of Garissa County Referral Hospital, Kenya Unveiling the Prospects of General Teacher While Teaching Students with Visual Impairment Gender Equality and Economic Growth: A Case of Lusaka District, Zambia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1