1. Fluency, Intelligibity,
and Spoken Language
(Week 3)
ORAL I V
(HE281)
Prof. Dr. Ron Martinez
drronmartinez@gmail.com

2. Goals for the week
• Review and catch up!
• Introduce and discuss the nature of oracy and
spoken language in general

3. Today’s agenda
• How much do you remember?

4. Review
1. What was the purpose of the ‘Friends’ clip (with the character
‘Chandler’)? What (if anything) did it illustrate about the concept of oral
fluency?
2. Three different types of fluency were presented. What were they?
3. What is Levelt’s model of speech production? (Hint: the first part is
‘Conceptualization’.)
4. Aside from issues of language proficiency, what else can cause
‘dysfluencies’?
5. Do you believe L2 fluency can be ‘taught’?
6. Is there such a thing as an ‘ideal’ accent? Can having a Brazilian accent
in English be a ‘bad’ thing?
7. Do you think identity has anything to do with accent?
8. How is intelligibility defined, and how is it researched?
9. What criticisms have been made concerning intelligibility research?
10. “The best judge of intelligibility is a native speaker.” Do you agree?

5. The ‘Chandler’ Lesson

6. “I want to sound like a native speaker.”

8. 3 types of fluency (Segalowitz, 2010)
Cognitive
Fluency
Perceived
Fluency
Utterance
Fluency

9. • “Cognitive fluency refers to the efficiency of the
speaker’s underlying processes responsible for
fluency-relevant features of utterances…”
(Segalowitz, 2010, p. 50)
• “Utterance fluency refers to the oral features of
utterances that reflect the operation of
underlying cognitive processes…” (ibid.)
• “Perceived fluency is the fluency that is ascribed
by a listener to a speaker, based on impressions
drawn from hearing speech samples produced by
the speaker” (Segalowitz, 2010, p. 49)

10. COGNITIVE
FLUENCY
UTTERANCE
FLUENCY
PERCEIVED
FLUENCY

11. Levelt’s model of speech production
• Conceptualization
• Formulation
• Articulation
• Self-monitoring
• - Levelt, W.J.M. (1989) Speaking: From
Intention to Articulation
Part of cognitive fluency

12. Tarzan (by Gary Larson)

18. Where did the fluency breakdown
occur?
• Conceptualization
• Formulation
• Articulation
• Self-monitoring
• - Levelt, W.J.M. (1989) Speaking: From
Intention to Articulation

19. FORMULATION ARTICULATION
Cognitive
Fluency
Utterance
Fluency
Perceived
Fluency

20. What causes fluency breakdowns?
• Reflect on both the ‘Friends’ clip and the
‘Tarzan’ comic strip: What inferences about
causes of ‘dysfluencies’ in speech can be
drawn?
• (Hint: Think about the opposite –
situations/occasions in which you are usually
quite fluent.)

21. • Main Entry: flu·ent
Pronunciation: 'flü-ent
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin fluent-, fluens, present participle of fluere
1 a : capable of flowing : FLUID b : capable of moving with
ease and grace <the fluent body of a dancer>
2 a : ready or facile in speech <fluent in Spanish> b :
effortlessly smooth and rapid : POLISHED <a fluent
performance>
- flu·ent·ly adverb

22. • Main Entry: flu·ent
Pronunciation: 'flü-&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin fluent-, fluens, present participle of fluere
1 a : capable of flowing : FLUID b : capable of moving with
ease and grace <the fluent body of a dancer>
2 a : ready or facile in speech <fluent in Spanish> b :
effortlessly smooth and rapid : POLISHED <a fluent
performance>
- flu·ent·ly adverb

23. • Main Entry: ready
Pronunciation: 're-dE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): read·i·er; -est
1 a : prepared mentally or physically for some
experience or action b : prepared for
immediate use <dinner is ready>
2 : immediately available <had ready cash>

24. Fluency = ‘Readiness’
• Main Entry: ready
Pronunciation: 're-dE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): read·i·er; -est
1 a : prepared mentally or physically for some
experience or action b : prepared for
immediate use <dinner is ready>
2 : immediately available <had ready cash>
Any deficiency in any of these elements
may cause dysfluencies.

25. Summary for Week 1
• It is important to define what ‘fluency’ in spoken
language means.
• Fluency is not related to ‘native’-ness.
• Fluency is (minimally) broken down into cognitive
fluency, utterance fluency, and perceived fluency.
Each of these, in turn, may be influenced by a great
number of variables.
• Fluency can be thought of as ‘readiness’, on different
levels: mentally/emotionally prepared, knowing what
to say and how to say it (‘prepared’ utterances), and
having what to say ‘at the ready’ (i.e. automaticity).

26. 1. Read Radajurai (2007) article on
‘intelligibility’ (online), answer questions
about the article (online), and bring your
answers to class on Monday.
2. Watch Jackie Chan clip (online), answer
questions (online), and bring notes to class.

28. A definition

29. 3 Components of Intelligibility
according to Smith and Nelson (1985)
• Intelligibility
• Comprehensibility
• Interpretability

30. How and why is intelligibility
researched?

31. How and why is intelligibility
researched?
• Elicitation
• “Even in studies that attempt to elicit ‘natural’ speech
as the stimulus material, the laboratory-like conditions
under which the experiments are conducted negate
such attempts. These techniques produce artificial and
inauthentic data, and consequently place severe
limitations on the findings of the research.” (p. 90)
• “With a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of
studies seem to ignore the fact that speech is context-
specific and highly dependent on the topic,
participants, and situation.” (p. 90)

32. Other issues?
• “It is also fairly obvious that intelligibility is
strongly influenced by the listener’s biases and
preconceived ideas about speakers and
accents.” (p. 90)
• Example: Rubin (1992)

33. 4 Groups: same lecture audio,
different images
“CAUCASIAN” “ASIAN”
HUMANITIES
(Group 1)
SCIENCE
(Group 2)
HUMANITIES
(Group 3)
SCIENCE
(Group 4)

34. SAME AUDIO!!!

35. “(I)ntelligibility may be as much in the
mind of the listener as in the mouth
of the speaker” (Morley, 1991: 499).

37. Other misconceptions and myths
• Misconception 1: Only non-native speech is accented.
• Misconception 2: Non-native speech lacks intelligibility.
• Misconception 3: The non-native speaker is responsible
for communication problems.
• Myth 1: The native variety should constitute the norm.
• Myth 2: The native speaker is always the best judge of
what is intelligible.
• Myth 3: The native speaker is always the best
representative of what is intelligible.

39. Fluency and the peculiarities of spoken
language

40. Spoken vs. Written

41. Spoken vs. Written (cont.)

43. ‘Conversational Grammar’ (Carter &
McCarthy, 2015)
• non-sentence-based
• much language is ‘freestanding’
• ‘co-constructed’ and highly interactive
• ‘poses questions’ concerning metalanguage

44. ‘Non-sentence-based’: an extreme case

46. ‘metalanguage’
“Spoken grammar has, in many respects,
come of age. However, problems remain. We
are still struggling under the burden of a
grammatical metalanguage inherited from
writing that does not seem always to work for
speaking, and many teaching resources have
yet to reflect what everyday speaking is really
like. Meanwhile, technology forces us to re-
think the conventional spoken/written
distinction.” (Carter & McCarthy, 2015, p. 8)

49. ‘Chunks’ and ‘the idiom principle’

50. What about teaching?

51. Carter and McCarthy (2015, pp. 3-4)
“Henry Sweet’s (1899) work on the teaching and learning of
languages stressed the principle of‘starting from the spoken rather
than the literary language’ (p. vii), rejecting the notion that
speaking was a corruption of writing (p. 50). Sweet pointed to the
paratactic nature of spoken utterances, noting the importance of
phrases, (today’s chunks or clusters) which, he asserted, were
neglected in pedagogy because they could not be brought within
the purview of the conventional grammar rules (p. 121). However,
he admitted that everyday conversation, with its characteristic
ellipses and disconnectedness, if reproduced unedited, would be an
unsuitable model for foreign language learners (p. 169). Conversely,
he had harsh words for those who wrote unnatural-sounding
dialogues for language learning (pp. 215–18). In his 1900 grammar,
Sweet refers frequently to distinctions between the grammar of
speaking and the grammar of writing…”

52. Homework
• Go to ‘COCA’ and generate 2 frequency lists
for adverbs: 1 list for ‘academic’ language,
and 1 list for ‘spoken’ language.
• Identify 3 differences between the lists and
write your opinion on why those differences
exist. Bring your examples to class.
• Watch ‘Grammar Cops’ video (on class
website). Do you think this was a good EFL
teaching activity? Why (not)?

56. Today’s agenda
• Explore some of the practical – especially
pedagogical – implications of the theory
presented and discussed regarding ‘spoken
grammar’.
• Will look at how technology has shaped the
way we think about spoken and written
language.

57. ‘metalanguage’
“Spoken grammar has, in many respects,
come of age. However, problems remain. We
are still struggling under the burden of a
grammatical metalanguage inherited from
writing that does not seem always to work for
speaking, and many teaching resources have
yet to reflect what everyday speaking is really
like. Meanwhile, technology forces us to re-
think the conventional spoken/written
distinction.” (Carter & McCarthy, 2015, p. 8)

58. English Trivia!
1. What is the most common word in English?
2. What is the most common pronoun in
English?
3. What are the three most common verbs in
English?

60. COCA exercise
1. Look up the most common verbs in spoken English. Make
a note of the first 5.
2. Choose at least one verb and make a note of interesting
examples of how it is used.
3. Look up the most common verbs in academic English.
Make a note of the first 5.
4. Choose at least one verb (it may be the same one) and
note interesting examples of how it is used.
5. Generate a list of the most common adverbs in spoken
English, and then another list for written. What
differences do you notice?
6. Find one adverb that appears in both lists. Are they used
in the same way? Make a note of some examples.

64. ‘metalanguage’
“Spoken grammar has, in many respects,
come of age. However, problems remain. We
are still struggling under the burden of a
grammatical metalanguage inherited from
writing that does not seem always to work for
speaking, and many teaching resources have
yet to reflect what everyday speaking is really
like. Meanwhile, technology forces us to re-
think the conventional spoken/written
distinction.” (Carter & McCarthy, 2015, p. 8)

65. The “Grammar Cops” Activity

67. “Grammar Cops”

72. “Grammar Cops”: 1st viewing
• You will watch the video twice.
• 1st question: Do you think the students enjoyed the
activity? Why?

75. “Grammar Cops”: 2nd viewing
• Now watch again, and think of these two questions while
watching:
1. What did you like about the activity? Anything you did not
like? (You may use the worksheet.)
2. Reflecting on the Carter and McCarthy (2005) article you
read, how reflective is the activity of current thinking?

77. “Grammar Cops”: 2nd viewing
discussion
Discuss in small groups for 10 minutes:
1. What did you like about the activity? Anything you did not
like? (You may use the worksheet.)
2. Reflecting on the Carter and McCarthy (2005) article you
read, how reflective is the activity of current thinking?

78. Language as choice

80. Homework
• Choose a TED talk to watch and identify
elements of spoken grammar.
• Is the talk formal, informal, or both (or
neither)?