Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:03:09.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Replication research in pedagogical approaches to spoken fluency and formulaic sequences: A call for replication of Wood (2009) and Boers, Eyckmans, Kappel, Stengers & Demecheleer (2006)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2017

Haidee Thomson ,
Frank Boers  and
Averil Coxhead
Haidee Thomson
Affiliation:
School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Frank Boers
Affiliation:
School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Averil Coxhead
Affiliation:
School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The focus of this paper is replication research in pedagogical approaches to spoken fluency and formulaic sequences, and in particular, a call for replication of two often cited studies: Wood (2009) and Boers, Eyckmans, Kappel, Stengers & Demecheleer (2006). We begin by presenting a brief background to fluency and formulaic language, and pedagogical approaches to the development of these two aspects of learning in a second (L2) or foreign language. We then move on to our two original studies of pedagogical interventions in formulaic sequences and spoken fluency – Wood (2009) and Boers et al. (2006) – and suggest possible approaches to replication for both.

Type
Replication Research
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , July 2019 , pp. 406 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boers, F. & Webb, S. (2018). Research timeline: Researching teaching and learning collocation in adult second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching 51.1.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H. & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research 10.3, 245–261.Google Scholar
Boers, F. & Lindstromberg, S. (2012). Experimental and intervention studies on formulaic sequences in a second language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32, 83–110.Google Scholar
Bui, G. & Huang, Z. (2016). L2 fluency as influenced by content familiarity and planning: Performance, measurement, and pedagogy. Language Teaching Research. doi/10.1177/1362168816656650.Google Scholar
Conklin, K. & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics 29.1, 72–89.Google Scholar
Conklin, K. & Schmitt, N. (2012). The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32, 45–61.Google Scholar
Dao, P., Iwashita, N. & Gatbonton, E. (2016). Learner attention to form in ACCESS task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research 21.4, 454–479.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Di Silvio, F., Diao, W. & Donovan, A. (2016). The development of L2 fluency during study abroad: A cross-language study. The Modern Language Journal 100.3, 610–624.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R. & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 42.3, 375–396.Google Scholar
Gatbonton, E. & Segalowitz, N. (1988). Creative automatization: Principles for promoting fluency within a communicative framework. TESOL Quarterly 22.3, 473–492.Google Scholar
Gatbonton, E. & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fluency. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes 61.3, 325–353.Google Scholar
Griffin, G. & Harley, T. (1996). List learning of second language vocabulary. Applied Psycholinguistics 17.4, 443–460.Google Scholar
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kuiper, K. (1995). Smooth talkers: The linguistic performance of auctioneers and sportscasters. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary: Same or different? Applied Linguistics 19.2, 255–271.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Why (or why not), when, and how to replicate research. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21–46.Google Scholar
Millar, N. (2010). The processing of malformed formulaic language. Applied Linguistics 32.2, 129–148.Google Scholar
Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System 17.3, 377–384.Google Scholar
Onoda, S. (2014). An exploration of effective teaching approaches for enhancing the oral fluency of EFL students. In Muller, T. et al. (eds.), Exploring EFL fluency in Asia. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 120–142.Google Scholar
Pawley, A. & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, J. & Schmidt, R. (eds.), Language and communication. New York: Longman, 191–226.Google Scholar
Porte, G. (ed.) (2012). Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Préfontaine, Y., Kormos, J. & Johnson, D. (2016). How do utterance measures predict raters’ perceptions of fluency in French as a second language? Language Testing 33.1, 53–73.Google Scholar
Regan, V., Howard, M. & Lemee, I. (2009). The acquisition of sociolinguistic competence in a study abroad context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (ed.) (2004). Formulaic sequences. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K. & van Heuven, W. (2011). Seeing a phrase ‘time and again’ matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37.3, 776−784.Google Scholar
Stengers, H., Boers, F., Housen, A. & Eyckmans, J. (2010). Does ‘chunking’ foster chunk-uptake? In De Knop, S., Boers, F. & De Rycker, A. (eds.), Fostering language teaching efficiency through cognitive linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 99–117.Google Scholar
Stengers, H., Boers, F., Housen, A. & Eyckmans, J. (2011). Formulaic sequences and L2 oral proficiency: Does the type of target language influence the association? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 49.4, 321–343.Google Scholar
Tavakoli, P. (2016). Fluency in monologic and dialogic task performance: Challenges in defining and measuring L2 fluency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 54.2, 133–150.Google Scholar
Thai, C. & Boers, F. (2016). Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly 50, 369–393.Google Scholar
Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (1998). Making the grade: An interactive course in English for academic purposes. Toronto: Prentice Hall Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 12.1, 39–57.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence, and classroom applications. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2013). Formulaic language. Language Teaching 46.3, 316–334.Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (2017). Effects of receptive-productive integration tasks and prior knowledge of component words on L2 collocation development. System 66, 156–167.Google Scholar