"Second language (L2) scholars generally agree that pronunciation development should prioritize attaining understandable over nativelike speech (e.g., Derwing & Munro, 2015; Jenkins, 2000; Levis, 2005). What specific linguistic measures of speech enable listener understanding is less clear. While monologic-based research indicates a combined effect of segmental and suprasegmental measures (word stress, intonation, rhythm), interactive-based research has emphasized only a segmental focus. The current study takes a first step in addressing this divide by applying a monologic methodology to interactive speech. Twenty intensive English program students (levels 3/4 of a 4-level program) completed one interactive and three monologic (Picture, Experiential, & Academic) tasks. Using 60-second (interactive) or 30-second (monologic) excerpts, 36 native Listeners rated each Speaker on 9- point scales per task for accentedness (i.e., nativelikeness) and comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding). I acoustically coded all utterances for a series of phonological and fluency measures (derived from Isaacs & Trofimovich, 2012). In addition, each Speaker received a task rating for the Experiential, Academic, and Interactive tasks to see if perceived accentedness and/or comprehensibility predicted actual task performance. Consistent with previous findings, Listeners perceived comprehensibility more positively than accentedness (e.g., Trofimovich & Isaacs, 2012). In terms of task, Interactive speech patterned most similarly to Experiential speech, especially for comprehensibility. Speakers were easier to understand on these two tasks than they were for Picture or Academic. Across tasks, Listeners' perception of comprehensibility was associated with fluency measures (Articulation Rate, Mean Length of Run), but not phonological. The more complex, linguistically constrained tasks, Picture and Academic, demonstrated stronger associations with these fluency measures than did Experiential and Interactive, a likely effect of the increased cognitive demands placed on Speakers in regards to their lexical retrieval and syntactical encoding processes (Segalowitz, 2010). Listeners' perception of comprehensibility also associated with task performance on both the Experiential and Academic tasks, but not for the Interactive task. For both Experiential and Academic, it appears that a higher perceived comprehensibility rating aligns with higher overall task score (and for Experiential, scores in both the Pronunciation and Fluency categories). For Interactive speech, it is likely that task performance draws more upon measures of interactive competence (e.g., turn-taking, topic initiation, discourse extension; May, 2011) than it does perceived comprehensibility. I conclude my study by discussing what insight the above findings can provide in regards to how L2 speech is perceived. This insight includes the potential effect of speaker, listener, and task variables, along with how the measurement of specific linguistic measures is operationalized. In addition, I discuss the potential pedagogical and assessment implications of perceived comprehensibility being associated with task performance. After addressing the limitations of my study, I provide suggestions for future research to extend my findings."--Pages ii-iii.
Read
