Good oral production skills are fundamental to the integration of non-native speakers into their host society. In particular, L2 oral fluency (OF), i.e., the rapid, smooth, accurate translation of communicative intention during on-line processing (Lennon, 2000, p. 26; see also Segalowitz, 2010), has been shown to be of great importance in maintaining listeners' attention (Suzuki & Kormos, 2020). However, although L2 OF may largely depend on L1 OF skills (Tavakoli & Wright, 2020), it still represents a distinct challenge for L2 speakers as it requires a real-time efficient allocation of cognitive resources. Specifically, working memory (WM), which refers to the limited capacity system responsible for the temporary storage and manipulation of information (Baddeley, 2012), has been shown to be most important in speech production (Wen & Li, 2019). However, these cognitive resources are limited and vary from one speaker to another (Kormos, 2006), and may also differentially interact with language forms (Awwad & Tavakoli, 2022; Ellis & Sinclair, 1996), which can differ from the L1 to the L2. To our knowledge, no previous studies have verified whether WM interacts in a distinct manner depending on the speakers' L1 and the language used for L2 production. Therefore, the present communication reports on a study that investigated this relationship. 30 ESL French-speaking and 30 French L2 English speaking adults were subjected to a picture-based narration task in both their L1 and L2. To maximize language production, participants were given two minutes planning time (e.g., Foster & Skehan, 1996). Each narration, which lasted on average three minutes, was recorded. Participants' WM was measured using the Highest-Number Task (Oakhill et al., 2011), a numerical span test known to measure both temporary storage and manipulation of information. Fluency was holistically assessed using a flowchart using a scheme adapted from Turner and Upshur (2002). Three judges independently coded the narrations. An interrater agreement of .89 was obtained. Factorial analysis results show a distinct pattern in the mediating role of WM in the L1-L2 OF relationship. These results are discussed in light of previous studies.
References
Awwad, A., & Tavakoli, P. (2022). Task complexity, language proficiency and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech performance. IRAL, 60, 169–196.
Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working memories: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1-29.
Ellis, N. C., & Sinclair, S. (1996). Working memory in the acquisition of vocabulary and syntax: Putting language in good order. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 234-250.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299–323.
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40, 387-417.
Oakhill, J., Yuill, N. et Garnham, A. (2011). The differential relations between verbal, numerical and spatial working memory abilities and children's reading comprehension. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 83–106.
Tavakoli, P., & Wright, C. (2020). Second language speech fluency. From research to practice Cambridge University Press.
Turner, C. E., & Upshur, J. A. (2002). Rating scales derived from student samples: effects of the scale maker and the student sample on scale content and student scores. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 49–49.
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.
Wen, Z., & Li, S. (2019). Working memory in L2 learning and processing. In J. Schwieter & A. Benati (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning (pp. 365-389. Cambridge University Press.
