disfluencies in spontaneous english dialogues poduced r by ... · pdf file english dialogues...

Click here to load reader

Post on 19-Mar-2020




3 download

Embed Size (px)


  • 53วารสารมนุษยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยนเรศวร ปีที ่13 ฉบบัที ่3 ประจ�าเดือนกนัยายน - ธนัวาคม 2559

    Disfluencies in Spontaneous English Dialogues Produced by Thai Learners of English: A Pilot Study1


    ของผู้เรียนชาวไทย: การวิจัยน�าร่อง พัชรินทร์ ดวงศรี

    Patcharin Duangsri เสาวภาคย์ กัลยาณมิตร

    Saovapak Kallayanamit

    Abstract This study aimed to quantitatively examine types of the disfluencies (DFs) in spontaneous English dialogues produced by Thai learners of English, their intentions, and native English-speaking hearers’ interpretations of each DF-type. The instruments were spontaneous dialogues and a checklist for intentions/interpretations of DFs. The findings revealed that the learners produced three main DF-types with their sub-types: pauses, repetitions and repairs. Through cognitive view, pauses and repetitions tended to reflect the learners’ difficulties in speech production process. Through sociolinguistic view, the hearers interpreted L2 DFs as the learners’ difficulties of speech production at the highest frequency, as the learners’ communication strategies serving interpersonal functions for social-interaction purpose at the second highest, while as discourse markers serving the textual functions for semantic coherence and relevance purpose as intended by the learners at the lowest frequency. Keywords: Disfluencies, Intentions, Interpretations, Spontaneous English Dialogues บทคัดย่อ การวิจัยนี้มีวัตถุประสงค์เพื่อศึกษา การพูดติดขัด ขณะสนทนาภาษาอังกฤษโดยไม่เตรียมการณ์ล่วงหน้า

    ของผู้เรียนชาวไทย เจตนารมณ์ของผู้พูด และการตีความการพูดติดขัดจากมุมมองของเจ้าของภาษา เครื่องมือ

    ประกอบด้วยบทสนทนาภาษาอังกฤษ และแบบสอบถาม ผลการศึกษาพบว่าการพูดติดขัดของผู้เรียนประกอบด้วย

    การหยุดชะงัก การพูดซ�้า และการแก้ไขถ้อยค�า เมื่อวิเคราะห์ตามแนวคิดด้านพุทธิปัญญาพบว่า การหยุดชะงัก

    และการพูดซ�า้สะท้อนปัญหาในกระบวนการผลติถ้อยค�าของผูเ้รยีน เมือ่วิเคราะห์ข้อมลูตามแนวคดิด้านภาษาศาสตร์


    ถึงปัญหาในกระบวนการผลติถ้อยค�ามากทีส่ดุ และมแีนวโน้มจะตคีวามการพูดตดิขดัเป็นกลยุทธ์ในการสือ่สารเป็น

    อันดับรอง และแนวโน้มตีความว่าเป็นดัชนีปริเฉทที่ท�าหน้าที่เชื่อมโยงเนื้อหาตามเจตนารมณ์ของผู้เรียนน้อยที่สุด

    ค�าส�าคัญ: การพูดติดขัด การสนทนาภาษาอังกฤษแบบไม่เตรียมการณ์ล่วงหน้า เจตนารมณ์ การตีความ

    1 This article is based on a Ph.D. dissertation titled Disfluencies in Spontaneous English Dialogues Produced by Thai Learners of English, Naresuan University (2015).

  • 54 Journal of Humanities, Naresuan University Year 13 Volumn 3, September - December 2016

    1. Introduction Speech communication is considered a fundamental ability of people. However, all related knowledge needed for forming the ability is rather complicated and requires a combination of a variety of knowledge and skills such as language knowledge, contextual knowledge, sociocultural knowledge, communication strategies knowledge, appropriate applicability knowledge, speaking skill, conversational skill, and interactional skill (e.g. Levelt, 1989; Levelt et al., 1999; Kormos, 2011; Swain, 1995; Schiffrin, 1987; Dornyei, 1995). Since speaking is a real-time phenomenon, all the required knowledge and skills are needed to be processed within a very limited time. The speaker’s speed in planning, formulating, and articulating an utterance is bound to the current time of communication (Levelt, 1989, Fulcher, 2003). Speakers’ speech production depends on their language proficiency, lexical range, ability to plan about what to say, ability to retrieve vocabulary, grammar, self-monitor for detecting errors in an utterance, hearer effect, and the nature of speaking topic (Levelt et al., 1999; Vural, 2008). Moreover, the interactional nature of speaking situation also requires speakers to make choices of language use to suit the social contexts and of interactional practices to conform to the conventions held by the native speakers (Fulcher, 2003; Levinson, 2003). The degree that the speakers can automatically control all the processes involved in speech production and appropriate speed in communication reflects speakers’ speaking fluency (Fulcher, 2003; Gass & Selinker, 2008). Due to these various sorts of knowledge and skill required for producing speech, it is common that there are some breaks occur in mid-utterance; especially, in the spontaneous speech made by second language speakers (Guara-Tavares, 2013) and they are considered indicators for the fluency (and the lack of fluency) in the speech through second language. Such breaks are known as disfluency phenomena (Johnson, 1961). “Disfluencies” (hereafter, DFs) is a technical term used to refer to normal breaks that disrupt the flow of speech without changing the meaning of the utterances (e.g Brutten, 1963; Jonhson, 1961; Wingate, 1984b; Fox Tree, 1995). They are seen common in spontaneous speech (Swerts et al., 1998). It was reported that, as a native norm of American English speakers’ conversational speech, DFs occur at the rate of 6 times per 100 words and in every 15 words (e.g. Bortfeld et al., 2001; Fox Tree, 2002; Shriberg, 1994).The forms of DFs that are widely recognized are uh, um, ah, er, slips of the tongue, and repetition or correction of words (e.g. Clark & Fox Tree, 2002; Oomen & Postma, 2001; Watanabe, Hirose, Den, & Minematsu, 2007). DFs that have been proposed by previous studies (e.g. Johnson, 1961; Schnadt, 2009; Allwood et al., 1990; Savova, 2002) can be broadly classified as pauses (filled pauses, unfilled pauses (silent pauses), repairs, prolongations, and repetitions. These DFs are found in the speech produced in both first language (L1) and second language (L2) (e.g Fehringer & Fry, 2007; Belz & Klapi, 2013; Hilton, 2007).Through the cognitive view, DFs can reflect speakers’ difficulties in processing speech production (Watanabe et al., 2007; Levelt, 1989; Levelt et al., 1999;

  • 55วารสารมนุษยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยนเรศวร ปีที ่13 ฉบบัที ่3 ประจ�าเดือนกนัยายน - ธนัวาคม 2559

    Harley, 2000). In contrast, through the sociolinguistic view, DFs serve as a conversational mechanism for facilitating interaction in communication (e.g. Hartsuiker & Notebaert, 2010; Shriberg, 1996; Clark & Fox Tree, 2002). For example, L2 Speakers tend to use repairs, repetitions, fillers and/or hesitation devices such as using filling words or gambits to fill pauses as their communication strategies to stalling or time-gaining strategies (Dornyei,1995; Canale & Swain, 1980; Fulcher, 2003).The occurrence of DFs is found associated with social and cultural factors: places, time, hearers, purposes, or speaking topics; that is, sociolinguistic competence or appropriateness is involved (e.g. Canale & Swain, 1980; Hymes, 1972; Luoma, 2004; Vural, 2008). When facing difficulties in speaking, L2 speakers tend to use communication strategies to manage their communication to be more efficient (Canale & Swain, 1980; Bachman, 1990; Fulcher, 2003). In spontaneous-speech condition, L2 speech is likely to be characterized with DFs and ungrammaticality while in planned speech condition, L2 speakers tend to demonstrate more fluency and complexity (Belz & Klapi, 2013; de Jong et al., 2013; Guara-Tavares, 2013). L2 disfluent sp

View more