O, hum, meio, uh, importa? Medindo fluência por meio de pausas preenchidas em grupos de comunicação face-a-face e em teletandem.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2318-7115.2022v43i1a8Resumo
A frequência de fenômenos hesitações, como Pausas preenchidas (PP) são inversamente correlacionadas à fluência percebida de alunos L2 (e.g., DERWING; ROSSITER; MUNRO; THOMSON., 2004; LENNON, 1990; ULLAKONOJA, 2008). O presente estudo investigou a produção dessas PPs por 66 aprendizes ingênuos de espanhol L2 com L1 de inglês em dois tipos de tarefas orais e comparou sua frequência em relação ao tipo de tarefa e se eles participaram de Face-a-Face ou Telecolaboração (Teletandem) díades comunicativas. Os resultados indicam que enquanto o meio das tarefas não afetou a fluência, o tipo de tarefa sim.
Metrics
Referências
BEATTIE, G. W.; BUTTERWORTH, B. L. 1979. Contextual probability and word frequency as determinants of pauses and errors in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 22.3: 201-211.
BRENNAN, S. E.; WILLIAMS, M. 1995. The feeling of Another′ s Knowing: prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers. Journal of memory and language, 34.3: 383-398.
CARLSON, R. A.; SULLIVAN, M. A.; SCHNEIDER, W. 1989. Practice and working memory effects in building procedural skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15.3: 517–526. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.15.3.517
CHAMBERS, F. 1997. What do we mean by fluency? System, 25.4: 535-544.
CLARK, H. H. 1996. Using language. Cambridge University Press.
CLARK, H. H.; TREE, J. E. F. 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84.1: 73-111.
CLARK, H. H.; WASOW, T. 1998. Repeating Words in Spontaneous Speech. Cognitive Psychology, 37: 201-242.
CUCCHIARINI, C.; STRIK, H.; BOVES, L. 2002. Quantitative assessment of second language learners' fluency: comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111:6: 2862–2873. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1471894
DE JONG, N.; PERFETTI, C. A. 2011. Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61.2: 533-568.
DE JONG, N. H.; STEINEL, M. P.; FLORIJN, A.; SCHOONEN, R.; HULSTIJN, J. H. 2013. Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34.05: 893-916.
DERWING, T. M.; ROSSITER, M. J.; MUNRO, M. J.; THOMSON, R. I. 2004. Second language fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language learning, 54.4: 655-679.
EJZENBERG, R. 2000. The juggling act of oral fluency: A psycho-sociolinguistic metaphor. In: RIGGENBACH, H. (Ed.). Perspectives on fluency: 287–314. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
FREED, B. 1995. What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In: FREED, B. (Ed.). Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context: 37-66. Philidelphia, PA: John Benjamin.
FREED, B. 2000. Is fluency, like beauty, the eyes (and ears) of the beholder? In: RIGGENBACH, H. (Ed.). Perspectives on fluency: 243-265. University of Michigan Press.
FREED, B. F.; SEGALOWITZ, N.; DEWEY, D. P. 2004. Context of learning and second language fluency in French: Comparing regular classroom, study abroad, and intensive domestic immersion programs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26.2: 275-301.
GOLDMAN-EISLER, F. 1961. The distribution of pause durations in speech. Language and Speech, 4.4: 232-237.
GOLDMAN-EISLER, F. 1968. Psycholinguistics: Experiments in Spontaneous Speech. Academic Press.
GOOD, D. A.; BUTTERWORTH, B. L. 1980. Hesitancy as a conversational resource: Some methodological implications. In: DECHERT, H. W.; RAUPACH, M. (Eds.). Temporal Variables in Speech: 145-52. Mouton.
GUILLOT, M. N. 1999. Fluency and its teaching (Vol. 11). Multilingual Matters.
HANSEN, J.; DECHENE, A.; WÄNKE, M. 2008. Discrepant fluency increases subjective truth. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44.3: 687-691.
HILTON, H. 2008. The link between vocabulary knowledge and spoken L2 fluency. Language Learning Journal, 36.2: 153-166.
HOUSEN, A.; KUIKEN, F.; VEDDER, I. 2012. (Eds.) Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
KOPONEN, M.; RIGGENBACH, H. 2000. Overview: Varying perspectives on fluency. Perspectives on Fluency, 5-24.
KORMOS, J.; DENES, M. 2004. Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners. System, 32.2: 145-164.
KOWAL, S.; O’CONNELL, D. C. 1980. Pausological research at Saint Louis University. In: DECHERT, H. W.; RAUPACH, M. (Eds.). Temporal Variables in Speech: 61-6. Mouton.
LENNON, P. 1990. The advanced learner at large in the L2 community: Developments in spoken performance. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 28.4: 309.
LENNON, P. 2000. The lexical element in spoken second language fluency. In: RIGGENBACH, H. (Ed.). Perspectives on Fluency: 25-42. University of Michigan Press.
LEOW, R. P. 1998. The effects of amount and type of exposure on adult learners' L2 development in SLA. Modern Language Journal, 82: 49-68.
LEVELT, W. J. 1983. Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14.1: 41-104.
LEVELT, W. J. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. MIT Press.
LIN, W.; HUANG, H.; LIOU, H. 2013. The Effects of text-based SCMC on SLA: A meta analysis. Language Learning & Technology, 17: 123-142.
MÖHLE, D. 1984. A comparison of the second language speech production of different native speakers. Second language productions, 26-49.
O'BRIEN, M. G. 2014. L2 Learners’ Assessments of accentedness, fluency, and comprehensibility of native and nonnative German speech. Language Learning, 64.4: 715-748.
OLYNYK, M.; D’ANGLEJAN, A.; SANKOFF, D. 1990. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of speech markers in the native and second language speech of bilinguals. In: SCARCELLA, R.; ANDERSEN, R.; KRASHEN, S. (Eds.). Developing communicative competence in a second language: 139-155. Newbury House.
OVIATT, S. 1995. Predicting spoken disfluencies during human–computer interaction. Computer Speech & Language, 9.1: 19-35.
PAWLEY, A.; SYDER, F. H. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. Language and communication: 191-225.
RAUPACH, M. 1984. Formulae in second language speech production. Second language productions: 114-137.
RAUPACH, M. 1987. Procedural knowledge in advanced learners of a foreign language. In: COLEMAN, J.; TOWELL, R. (Eds.). The advanced language learner: 123-155. CILT.
RIGGENBACH, H. 1991. Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse processes, 14.4: 423-441.
ROSSITER, M. J. 2009. Perceptions of L2 fluency by native and non-native speakers of English. Canadian Modern Language Review/La revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 65.3: 395-412.
SAITO, K.; AKIYAMA, Y. 2018. Effects of video-based interaction on the development of second language listening comprehension ability: A longitudinal study. TESOL Quarterly, 52.1: 163–176.
SAJAVAARA, K. 1987. Second language speech production: Factors affecting fluency. Psycholinguistic models of production: 45-65. Ablex.
SCHACHTER, S.; CHRISTENFELD, N.; RAVINA, B.; BILOUS, F. 1991. Speech disfluency and the structure of knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60.3: 362-367.
SCHNADT, M. J.; CORLEY, M. 2006. The influence of lexical, conceptual and planning based factors on disfluency production. In: SUN, R.; MIYAKE, N. (Eds.). Proceedings of the twenty-eighth meeting of the cognitive science society: 750-755.
SHOOK, D. J. 1994. FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 5.1: 57-93.
SHRIBERG, E. E. 1994. Preliminaries to a theory of speech disfluencies. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Berkeley.
SUH, B-R.; LEOW, R. P. 2020. Second language accuracy development through interaction in video-based telecollaboration and face-to-face contexts and type of assessment task: A curricular approach. Studies in Foreign Language Education, 34.3: 1-28.
SWERTS, M. 1998. Filled pauses as markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 30: 485-496.
TAVAKOLI, P.; SKEHAN, P. 2005. Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In: ELLIS, R. (Ed.). Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language. John Benjamins.
TELLES, J. A. 2015. Learning foreign languages in teletandem: Resources and strategies DELTA: Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 31: 603-632.
TOWELL, R., HAWKINS, R., BAZERGUI, N. 1996. The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17.1: 84 119. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.84
ULLAKONOJA, R. 2008. Pausing as an indicator of fluency in the Russian of Finnish learners. In: BARBOSA, P. A.; MADUREIRA, S.; REIS, C. (Eds.). Proceedings of the Speech Prosody 2008 conference: 339-342. Editora RG/CNPq.
VAN GELDEREN, A. 1994. Prediction of global ratings of fluency and delivery in narrative discourse by linguistic and phonetic measures-oral performances of students aged 11-12 years. Language Testing, 11.3: 291-319.
VOLSKAYA, N. B. 2004. O pauze i ne tol’ko o ney. In: ZINDERA, L. R.; BONDARKO, L. V. (Eds.). Foneticheskye chitenya v chest’ 100-letya so dnya rozhdenya: 129-136. Filologicheskiy fakul’tet SPbGU.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Os autores concedem à revista todos os direitos autorais referentes aos trabalhos publicados. Os conceitos emitidos em artigos assinados são de absoluta e exclusiva responsabilidade de seus autores.
Esta obra está licenciada com uma Licença 
