Native speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency, and lexical diversity

Language Learning

Volumn 59, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 866-896

  Foster, Pauline ^a   Tavakoli, Parvaneh ^b  

^a ST MARY'S UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Narrative structure; Native speaker performance; Processing capacity; Storyline complexity; Task effects

Indexed keywords

EID: 62549158024     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: 14679922     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00528.x     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Alderson, C. (1980). Native and non-native speaker performance on cloze test. Language Learning, 30, 59 76.
2. Clark, J 1977). The performance of native speakers of English on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL Report No 1). Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service.
3. Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367 383.
4. Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevedon, UK : Multilingual Matters.
5. Elder, C., Iwashita, N., & McNamara, T. (2002). Estimating the difficulty of oral proficiency tasks: What does the test-taker have to offer. Language Testing, 19 (4 343 368.
6. Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 12 20.
7. Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam : Benjamins.
8. Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2005). The effects of careful within-task planning on oral and written task performance. In R. Ellis (Ed. Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 167 193). Amsterdam : Benjamins.
9. Foster, P. (2000). Attending to message and medium: The effects of planning time on the task-based language performance of native and non-native speakers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, King's College, London.
10. Foster, P. (2001). Rules and routines: a consideration of their role in the task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds. Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language teaching, learning and testing (pp. 75 95). London : Longman.
11. Foster, P. (2009). Lexical diversity and native-like selection: The bonus of studying abroad. In H. Daller, D. Malvern, P. Meara, J. Milton, B. Richards, and J. Treffers-Daller (Eds. Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 91 106). Basingstoke, UK : Palgrave-Macmillan.
12. Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299 323.
13. Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language. Applied Linguistics, 21 (3 354 375.
14. Givon, T. (1985). Function, structure, and language acquisition. In D. Slobin (Ed. The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 1, pp. 1008 1025). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Harris, C., & Bates, E. (2002). Clausal background and pronominal reference: A functionalist approach to c-command. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17 (3 237 269.
16. Heaton, J. B. (1966). Composition through pictures. Essex, UK : Longman.
17. Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical Priming: A new theory of words and language. London : Routledge.
18. Iwashita, N., McNamara, T., & Elder, C. (2001). Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information-processing approach to task design. Language Learning, 51 (3 401 436.
19. Johnson, D. (1977). The TOEFL and domestic students: Conclusively inappropriate. TESOL Quarterly, 11, 79 86.
20. Jones, L. (1980). Notions in English. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
21. Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. London : Routledge.
22. Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
23. Levelt, W. (1993). Language use in normal speakers and its order. In G. Blanken, H. Dittman, H. Grimm, J. Marshal, & C. Wallesch (Eds. Linguistic disorders and pathologies (pp. 1 15). Berlin : de Gruyter.
24. Malvern, D., & Richards, B. (2002). Investigating accommodation in language proficiency interviews using a new measure of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 19 (1 85 104.
25. Matthiessen, C., & Thompson, S. (1988). The structure of discourse and subordination. In J. Haiman & S. Thompson (Eds. Clause combining in grammar and discourse (pp. 95 120). Philadelphia : Benjamins.
26. Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different length of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20 (1 83 108.
27. Navon, D. (1989). The importance of being visible: On the role of attention in a mind viewed as an anarchic intelligence system. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1, 191 238.
28. Neumann, O. (1996). Theories of attention. In O. Neumann & A. Sanders (Eds. Handbook of perception and action: Vol. 3. Attention (pp. 389 446). San Diego, CA : Academic Press.
29. Ochs, E. (1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givon (Ed. Syntax and semantics (pp. 12 31). New York : Academic Press.
30. Oller, J., & Conrad, C. (1971). The cloze technique and ESL proficiency. Language Learning, 21, 183 195.
31. Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 109 148.
32. Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native-like selection and native-like fluency. In J. Richard & R. Schmidt (Eds. Language and communication (pp. 191 226). London : Longman.
33. Rampton, B. (1990). Displacing the "native speaker": Expertise, affiliation, and inheritance. ELT Journal, 44 (2 97 101.
34. Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed. Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287 318). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
35. Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22 (1 27 55.
36. Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 161 176.
37. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50 (4 696 734.
38. Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds. Researching pedagogic tasks second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 119 141). Harlow, UK : Longman.
39. Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search and attention. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1 66.
40. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127 190.
41. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
42. Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1 (3 185 212.
43. Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retelling. Language Learning, 49 (1 93 120.
44. Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed. Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 183 205). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
45. Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2009). Second language learning, acquisition and performance: A task-based perspective. Unpublished manuscript.
46. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and assessment. London : Pearson Education.
47. Swan, M., & Walter, C. (1990). The new Cambridge English Course, Practice 2. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
48. Stricker, L. J. (2002). The performance of native speakers of English and ESL speakers on the computer-based TOEFL and GRE general test. Princeton, NJ : ETS.
49. Tabachnic, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York : Harper Collins.
50. Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2008). Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 58 (2 439 473.
51. 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. 239 277). Amsterdam : Benjamins.
52. VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287 301.
53. Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16 (2 181 205.
54. Whiteson, V. (1979). A study of proficiency and linguistic variety of non-native EFL teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
55. Wigglesworth, G. (2001). Influences on performance in task-based oral assessments. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds. Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language teaching, learning and testing (pp. 186 209). London : Longman.