1. Giles Witton-Davies, National Taiwan University, Taiwan giles@ntu.edu.tw

2. Outline of talk Previous analyses of repair A new classification of repair A study of repair in L1 and L2 speech How repair types relate to speech rate How repair differs in L1 and L2 speech

3. Temporal & other measures of fluency Articulation rate Pause time, frequency (MLR), duration Pause distribution Repair – frequency & number of words [Coherence and cohesion]

4. Combined measures of fluency Speech rate (SR) = articulation rate (AR), pause time Pruned speech rate = AR, pause time, repair pruned speech = speech minus repair & filled pauses

5. Lennon 1990 Repair frequency Pruned speech Riggenbach 1991 Retraced and unretraced false starts How much rejected? Freed 1995 Frequency of repetitions, reformulations, corrections, partial repeat of word

6. Tavakoli, P. and Skehan, P. (2005) Frequency of repetition, reformulation, false start, substitution. “The repair fluency group loads together consistently, and separately from other aspects of fluency suggesting that a concern to modify utterances on-line is somewhat distinct from a capacity to organise speech in real time.”

7. Maclay and Osgood 1959 Repetition that non-significant semantically False starts: retraced (reformulations) and non- retraced Repetitions of form words, before lexical word. Retraced false starts of lexical items before lexical items Negative correlation between SR and combined total hesitations

8. Olynyk, M., A. d’Anglejan and D. Sankoff (1990) Investigation of “speech markers”: filled pauses, transitions, repetitions, repair conversions, cut-offs Progressives (prepositioned repair) Regressive (postpositioned, after the repair) High fluency speakers have more repeats and transitions, low fluency speakers more repair conversions, cut-offs.

9. Classification of repair All repair together Repetitions, reformulations, substitutions, false starts separately Classification of repair context Measures of repair Frequency No. of words Repair context

10. Repair frequency: no. of words per repair repairs per n. words Repair rate: % of pruned speech % of repaired speech All repair

11. Learner Data: 17 Taiwanese university students Work in pairs English language and literature dept. 1 st and 8 th semesters Picture story monologue – 2 mins each Discussion dialogue – 4-5 mins: e.g. prioritise qualities of friends. Data

12. Native speaker data: 6 native speakers aged 19-30. Same tasks, in pairs. Processing & Analysis Transcriptions using ”Transcriber”. Fluency measurement. Repair tagging for each occurrence of repair.

13. Fluency analysis Articulation rate, speech rate, pruned speech rate Pause frequency, pause time, mean length of pause, mean length of run Pause distribution – between clauses, between constituents, between words. Repair: pruned speech rate, percentage of pruned speech

14. External Between clauses At beginning/ end of clause Internal Within clauses After clause has started Number of words Words rendered unnecessary by repair

15. Repetition exactly the same words no rhetorical or emphatic effect Reformulation lexis, grammar, lexis and grammar same start, lexis or grammar False start new start, new lexis and grammar

16. Repair context what comes before repair what comes next what is changed

17. Repetition before lexical or form words Seach for lexis or grammar e.g. lexis |so he ‘s made up his mind ::{to #####εεε} to lose weight. e.g. form {and they are they are} #####they are very scared {maybe t-h-e-y} ####maybe they didn ‘t have anything

18. Reformulation – change of grammar or lexis or both Grammar = form: morphology, syntax, form words (articles, prepositions) Lexis = meaning: content words Expression = new word(s), new structure(s)

19. Examples: Grammar but he still {keeps on keep on} kept on walking Lexis and.......{εεε} the robber told {one of the bank ####εε} one of the workers Expression maybe they didn ‘t have anything to εε they} maybe they,,,,didn ‘t have the ///right knowledge|

20. Repair tagging: E-3-RP-L, I-2-RF-G 1. External/ Internal 2. No. of words 3-4. Repetition (RP), reformulation (RF), false start (FS) 5. Repetition followed by: lexical word (L), form word (F), nothing (X). Reformulation of lexis (L), grammar (G) or both: expression (E) False start ends with lexical (L) / form (F) word.

21. Pearson correlations of repair measures with learners' speech rate: All repair frequency=.56 – no. of words=.65 Repetition – frequency=.20 - no. of words=.53 Reformulation – frequency =.56 - no. of words=.61 Mean length of repair=.32

22. External repair frequency=.61 -words=.65 Internal repair frequency=.27 -words=.46 Repetition before lexis -words=.55 before form -words=.38 Reformulation of lexis - frequency=.40 -words=.60 Reformulation grammar -frequency=.294 -words=.24

23. No reformulation of grammar Negative correlations all repair: SR = -.26 repetition (words): SR =-.53 Internal repair correlates negatively with speech rate, but external does not correlate significantly.

24. Native speaker - non-native speaker repair means % repaired words: 14.7 3.9 % repeated words: 6.4 1.8 % reformulated words: 6.7 1.5 % false starts: 1.5 0.6

25. Non-native speaker repair examples: |{εεεεε.......it is a bank}E4RFGit was a bank| |so they could find out....::{εεεεε who the robber is}E4RFG#######who the robbers are| |{a-n-d he find} E2RFE ###### a-n-d {h-e want ::to find a job εεε} E6RPF he want ::to ////find a jobs to do|

26. Examples: | and it was beginning ::to show on {his} I1RPL {εεε} his tummy|....... |a couple of {er old lady} I2RFL older ladies,,,,,looking quite smart| |{and it} E2RPL and { it s- e-} E3FSF the weather {changed} I1RFL took a bit of a change for the worse|

27. Conclusions For learners, more repair correlates with slower speech rates. For native speakers, more repair correlates with faster speech rates. Repetition before lexical/ form words: no significant difference. Reformulation of grammar: absent from NS, low correlation with speech rate for learners. Conclusions

28. Repair frequency and repair extent/ no. of words behave differently. External repetition more significant than internal for learners. False start & reformulation of expression could be brought together. More data & analysis required... Conclusions

29. Freed, B. (1995). “What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent?” In B. Freed (Ed.) Second language acquisition in a study abroad context. (pp. 123-148). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Lennon, P. (1990). “Investigating fluency in EFL: a quantitative approach.” Language Learning 40: 3, 387-417. Maclay, H., & Osgood, C. E. (1959). Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous English speech. Word, 15, 19–44. Riggenbach, H. (1991). “Towards an understanding of fluency: a microanalysis of non-native speaker conversation.” Discourse processes, 14, 423-441. Olynyk, M., A. d’Anglejan and D. Sankoff. (1990). “A quantitative and qualitative analysis of speech markers in the native and second language speech of bilinguals.” In R Scarcella, R. Anderson and S. Krashen (Eds.) Developing communicative competence in a second language. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House, 139-155.

30. Tavakoli, P. and Skehan, P. (2005). ‘Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing.’ In R. Ellis (ed.) Planning and Task performance in a second language, Amsterdam: John Benjamin, pp. 239-273.

31. Thank you for coming! Any comments or questions? giles@ntu.edu.tw