论文总字数：45034字

摘 要

Introduction 1

Literature Review 2

2.1 Theoretical issues 2

2.1.1 Levelt’s speech production model 2

2.1.2 Working memory capacity 3

2.1.3 Planning 3

2.1.4 The interplay of working memory and planning time on oral production 4

2.2 Empirical studies 5

2.2.1 Studies on the effects of working memory on oral production 5

2.2.2 Studies on the effects of planning on oral production 5

2.2.3 Studies on the effects of WM and planning on oral production 6

2.2.4 Limitations of previous studies 7

Methodology 9

3.1 Research questions 9

3.2 Participants 9

3.3 Data collection 9

3.3.1 Computerized reading span test 9

3.3.2 Picture-narrative task 10

3.4 Procedure 11

3.5 Data analysis 11

3.5.1 Working memory 11

3.5.2 Fluency 13

Results and Discussions 14

4.1 Results of the Two-way ANOVA 14

4.2 Discussions 17

4.2.1 Effects of working memory on fluency 17

4.2.2 Effects of planning time on fluency 17

4.2.3 Effects of working memory and planning on fluency 18

Conclusions 19

5.1 Major findings 19

5.2 Theoretical implication 19

5.3 Pedagogical implication 20

5.4 Limitations 20

References 22

Acknowledgements

The writing of this paper is one of the real challenges I have ever encountered in my life and it is an outcome of support, encouragement and love I received from so many people. Here I would like to take the opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks to those who have contributed, directly and indirectly, to the completion of this paper.

My deepest gratitude goes to my supervisor, Mr. Han Yawen, for his painstaking effort in guiding me through the various stages of writing this paper. During my working on the paper, he helped me with choosing the topic, collecting the samples, and accessing the software for treating the data. His profound insights broadened my horizon in linguistic studies. The work would not have been possible without his patient guidance, continuous encouragement and generous support. Furthermore, it is my honor to benefit a lot from his personalities and diligence, which I will treasure in my whole life.

I would like to thank all the other teachers for their enlightenment, knowledge, encouragement and help throughout my undergraduate study at NanjingTech.

Special thanks go to my dear friends and fellow students, who have accompanied me throughout the four years at the university.

Last but not least, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to my parents for their love and support all these years.

Abstract

This study examines how planning time and working memory capacity (hereafter WMC) affect Chinese EFL learners’ oral fluency. Participants include 51 sophomores in Nanjing Tech University. After completing a computerized reading span test as measure of working memory capacity, the participants were divided into high-WMC group and low-WMC group. All the participants were required to finish a picture-narrative task under planning time and no planning time conditions. Results of two-way ANOVA test indicated that test-takers with planning time have greater oral fluency than test-takers without planning time, whereas WMC did not affect test-taker’s performance of oral fluency, and there was no interaction between WMC and planning time. The author discussed the findings by suggestions that the oral fluency could be improved by more planning time.

Key words: oral production oral fluency working memory capacity

planning time

中文摘要

本研究考察了工作记忆容量和准备时间对中国英语学习者口语产出流利性的影响。南京工业大学51名大二学生参加了本次实验。作者通过电脑版阅读广度测试对受试者的工作记忆容量进行测量并将其分为高工作记忆容量组和低记忆容量组，并在有准备时间和无准备时间情况下，让受试者完成英语图片复述口语测试。通过双因素方差分析，研究结果发现，准备时间显著影响口语流利度；工作记忆容量对口语流利度无影响；准备时间和工作记忆容量对口语流利度无交互效应。研究者讨论了通过合适的准备时间帮助学习者提高口语流利度的可能性。

关键词：口语产出 口语流利度 工作记忆容量 准备时间

Introduction

Oral fluency is recognized as the most important evaluation criterion of learners’ oral ability (Zhai, 2011). The researchers think that the planning time is the key factor to influence the fluency of L2 learners’ oral production (Yuan amp; Ellis, 2003). Researchers also believe that oral fluency depends also on the individual working memory capacity (Daneman ,1991; Fortkamp 1999). However, few studies have considered the effects of planning time and working memory capacity on the fluency of Chinese EFL learners’ oral production. At present, planning time can help learners reduce the working memory load is still controversial. (Glória, 2009) This paper will examine the effects of planning time and working memory capacity on oral fluency through empirical research, and explore the possibility of reducing working memory load by adjusting planning time.

Literature Review

2.1 Theoretical issues

2.1.1 Levelt’s speech production model

Levelt proposed a powerful model of speech production in 1989. He discriminated declarative knowledge from procedural knowledge and controlled processing from automatic processing. Declarative knowledge includes situation knowledge, encyclopedic knowledge, especially discourse knowledge and conceptual and lexical knowledge. Procedural knowledge is the basis of some experienced performances such as the fluent speaking. (Zhang, 2002) Four components form Levelt`s speech production model: a conceptualizer, a formulator, a knowledge component, an articulator and a speech-comprehension system. And its advantage consists in the concordancy of the different parts of the production process, other than being limited to different parts of the production process. Three components, the formulator, the conceptualizer,and the articulator is most close to oral output. In the formulator, the speaker chooses acceptable language forms from the mental lexicon to translate pre-verbal messages into phonological plans. In the conceptualizer, the speaker chooses the declarative knowledge related to the purposes and orders the information for pre-verbal message. Then in the articulator, the actual speech is realized. In summary, according to Levlet`s speech production model, the information could be processed at the same time and the high-level processing is less automatic than the low-level processing. Most of all, on account of the essence of working memory and the speed with which speech is normally produced, Levelt indicates that fluent speech production requires procedural knowledge and automatic processing. (Zhang, 2002)

2.1.2 Working memory capacity

Definitions of the term “working memory” can be found in a considerable body of related researches. It refers to the limited capacity cognitive system responsible for both storage and processing of information during the performance of complex cognitive tasks (McLaughlin amp; Heredia, 1996; Daneman amp; Carpenter, 1980; Baddeley, 1986). Baddeley (1986) introduced a theory that human beings possess a “multicomponent memory system” that consists of at least “three standard systems: sensory, short-term memory, and long-term memory”.

Working memory’s core system is the central executive system. The central executive system is also a control system. Working memory is also called “short-term store” or short-term memory, primary memory, immediate memory and refers to the temporary processing and storage of information. Many models proposed about how working memory functions form cognitive psychology. One of the most important of them is Baddeley and Hitch’s multi-component model.

According to the findings of some studies in L2 oral production, greater working memory capacity tend to facilitate speech formulation, or in other words, help produce more fluent, more accurate speech (Fortkamp,1999). We can reasonably infer that working memory plays a quite significant role in cognitive activities and thus expect differences between EFL speakers with high and low working memory capacity.

2.1.3 Planning

Planning is defined as the cognitive process of thinking about what you will do in the event of something happening. It’s most distinguishing feature is that the original state and the objective are clear, but how to convert the original state into the objective state is uncertain. Planning has been a widely tracked construct within the study of L2 tasks. It can be inferred from previous studies that planning has developed into an area of inquiry and “become a burgeoning area of investigation with task-based learning” (Ortega, 2005). From the perspective of psychology, planning is one of the executive functions of the brain. Some certain parts of the brain have turned out to be playing an intrinsic role in cognitive planning and even some associated executive traits such as working memory. According to D'Ely (2004), planning can provides learners the chance to implement some control over what they know towards achieving gains in oral performance which is a problem-solving activity.

Some studies have investigated the effect of planning on L2 oral production. In L2 studies and task-based studies, planning is conceptualized as the opportunity to prepare and design your task performance before the actual performance. That is to say, it is the cognitive process of thinking about or organizing what you will do in the event of something happening. Some of the previous studies have shown that, planning time can help individuals improve their oral performance. (Mehnert, 1998; Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Guará, 2009)

2.1.4 The interplay of working memory and planning time on oral production

According to the previous studies, studies on oral fluency are quite rich and deep.

According to Skehan (1998), fluency is the ability to speak easily and smoothly, especially the ability to speak a foreign language easily and effectively. In Skehan’s opinion, fluency consists of the capacity to mobilize one’s linguistic resources in the service of real-time communication. Some researches on the effects of planning on L2 speech performance discuss results in terms of a limited attentional model of learning. They claim that gains in accuracy, fluency and complexity may not be achieved simultaneously since these aspects of speech performance compete for our limited working memory capacity (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Mehnert, 1998,). Guará Tavares (2008), who investigated the interaction between pre-task planning and WMG, reveals that planning, in general, and working memory capacity interact in complex and intricate ways to affect L2 learners’ oral performance. Individuals with higher WM capacity have more attentional resources available to allocate towards these processes more effectively and, thus, achieve more fluent and accurate speech performance (Fortkamp, 2000).

2.2 Empirical studies

2.2.1 Studies on the effects of working memory on oral production

In 1986, Green and Daneman developed the Speaking Span Test. The Speaking Span Test can be used to measure individuals’ working memory capacity. in their study, they investigated whether there was a relationship between the ability to produce synonyms for words appeared in context and working memory capacity. The results of the study showed that there was a correlation between oral production test scores and working memory capacity scores. Later, Daneman (1991) assessed working memory by speaking span test and reading span test in order to find out whether working memory can be a predictor of speakers’ verbal fluency. The results of his study indicates that reading span correlates with oral fluency on both the speech and reading tasks, while reading span was only correlated with individual differences in oral fluency on the reading task.

In order to investigate the effect of working memory capacity on L2 oral fluency, Fortcamp (1999) conducted a thorough research based on Daneman’s study. In his study, he took 16 advanced EFL learners as subjects and conducted both the speaking span test and the reading span test. The results of the research confirmed his conjecture that working memory capacity is functional, “varying according to the individual’s efficiency in the processes specific to the cognitive task with which it is correlated”.

2.2.2 Studies on the effects of planning on oral production

Many studies have proved that learners would be more fluent in their speech performance when they are given planning time (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Mehert, 1998; Ortega, 1999). Drawing on Levelt’s (1989) model of speaking, Yuan and Ellis (2003) suggested that, when learners have the time to plan both formulated their message more carefully and monitor the output of the formulation and articulation phases of production. Yuan and Ellis (2003) found that whereas planning would lead to a gain in fluency and syntactic variety, an engagement in unpressured online planning resulted in greater accuracy, due to the reason that participants without planning would more or less be distracted by the need to formulate and monitor under pressure, which accounts for less satisfying writing performance in terms of the accuracy, complexity, and fluency.

Wendel (1997) proposed that pre-task planning time promotes fluency, whereas on-line planning enhance accuracy. Yuan and Ellis’s study lent greater support to Wendel’s position. Thus, pret-ask planning time aids fluency.

What’s more, researchers have investigated planning from a variety of perspectives such as different types pf planning (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Sangarun, 2005), different amounts of planning time (Mehert, 1998), planning and different task types (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996), effects of planning on different levels of proficiency (Kawauchi, 2005), and what learners do when they plan (Ortega, 1999).

In general, some studies have shown that planning has positive effect on oral production. However, the results are still controversial for the different aspects of oral performance.

2.2.3 Studies on the effects of WM and planning on oral production

Many researchers did studies about L2 learners’ oral production, but few researchers exploded the effects of planning time and working memory capacity on L2 learners’ oral production. According to Ellis (2003), planning can help language learners improve their oral performance by overcoming limitations in their working memory capacity. In Ortega’s opinion (1999), there were two reasons to suppose that individual’s working memory capacity affected their planning performance. First, planning can trigger a range of strategic, metalinguistic and metacognitive behaviors so that it can improve the oral performance. Research on memory has shown that individuals with higher working memory capacity tend to be more strategic (Mendonça, 2002; McNamara; Scott, 2001; Weissheimer, 2004). That is to say, working memory capacity may play a role on how successful one is in engaging in strategic behavior during planning. Second, the benefits of planning on performance may also depend on the ability to execute what was planned into performance (Ortega, 1999). In other words, the benefits pf planning on performance depend on the ability to tranfer planning into on-line performance. According to Engle and Rosen (1997), working memory capacity can help individuals in Retrieva.

Previous studies on planning have raised the issue of trade-off effects in performance due to limitations in attentional resources (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Mehnert, 1998; Yuan amp; Ellis, 2003). Guará Tavares (2008), who investigated the interaction between pre-task planning and working memory capacity, reveals that planning, in general, and working memory capacity interact in complex and intricate ways to affect L2 oral performance. Individuals with higher WM capacity have more attentional resources available to allocate towards these processes more effectively and, thus, achieve more fluent and accurate speech performance (Fortkamp, 2000).

Studies on the effects of planning on L2 oral production discuss results in terms of a limited attentional model of learning. Researchers claim that gains in accuracy, fluency and complexity may not be achieved simultaneously since these aspects of speech performance compete for our limited attentional resources (Foster amp; Skehan, 1996; Mehnert, 1998).

2.2.4 Limitations of previous studies

In the past few decades, many researchers have come into notice the necessities of studying the potential relations between working memory and planning time and EFL speakers’ oral performances, especially oral fluency. However, there are still some limitations in related researches.

First, most related studies took EFL learners from other country and few of them took Chinese EFL learners as the study subjects. Second, in recent years, though there were some researchers have been discussed the influence factors of L2 learners’ oral fluency and obtained a certain result. But the relevant results still have some controversy.

请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：45034字