Individual differences in multilingual speakers’ fluency: a qualitative analysis of speech and eye-movement data
-
Elina Lehtilä
und
Pekka Lintunen
Abstract
The present study aims to examine individual differences in the connections between first (L1), second (L2), and third language (L3) utterance fluency and to investigate the potential of eye-tracking for multilingual cognitive fluency research, extending previous, mainly quantitative, research on the connections between L1 and L2/L3 fluency. Six Finnish multilingual speakers with differing L1 profiles and proficiency levels in the L2/L3 were selected from a larger dataset, and their speech and eye-movement data from picture description tasks in Finnish (L1), English (L2), and Swedish (L1/L3) were analyzed qualitatively, focusing on fluency measures and the relationship between eye movements and fluency features in the three languages. While the results indicated that some fluency measures were connected across all three languages, the results also demonstrated individual variation in the connections between L1, L2, and L3, particularly in the use of stalling mechanisms. The eye-movement data analysis showed that speakers’ eye movements can provide valuable insights into the cognitive processes underlying fluency features during complex, multi-utterance descriptions in different languages. The findings have methodological implications for fluency research, indicating the need for further fluency studies involving multilingual speakers and eye-tracking, and wider implications for fluency teaching and assessment.
Funding source: Svenska Kulturfonden
Award Identifier / Grant number: 177270
Acknowledgments
We thank the participants of the study for their time and effort, the research assistant for helping with speech data transcription, and Dr. Pauliina Peltonen for her advice and guidance during this project.
-
Research ethics: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.
-
Author contributions: The authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Competing interests: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: This work was supported by the Swedish Cultural Foundation in Finland (grant number 177270).
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
Appendix 1:
The picture prompts used in the picture description tasks, illustrated by Carmén Martin Ortega and reproduced with permission from the publisher Editorial Everest
Appendix 2:
Examples from the speech data with the relevant fluency features highlighted in bold and the location of silent pauses marked with the abbreviations E (end-clause) and M (mid-clause). For examples in Finnish and Swedish, an English translation (translated by the first author) is provided in italics below the original example
Misa
| varmaa (0.63, M) m:eteli on melkoinen (3.97, E) voi olla myös että popkorni tuoksuu |
| probably (0.63, M) the n:oise is quite loud (3.97, E) it might also be that popcorn smells |
| (1.39, E) uhm (.) people are having quite a fun time it seems (0.33, E) uh (0.88, E) |
| (1.25, M) öö (.) med (0.48, M) hjälp (0.66, M) av (0.45, M) m:annen- öm mannet där (1.18, E) öö (2.04, E) |
| (1.25, M) uh (.) with (0.48, M) help (0.66, M) of (0.45, M) the m:an- um man there (1.18, E) uh (2.04, E) |
| aika ömm mielenkiintonen tämä arkkitehtuuri (1.04, E) siihen on (1.42, M) käytetty paljon rahaa |
| quite um interesting this architecture (1.04, E) a lot of money has been (1.42, M) spent on it |
Sumu
| kaikil on niinku jotain tekemistä (1.08, E) kukaan ei oo niinku (1.22, M) vaan yksin |
| everyone has like something to do (1.08, E) no one is like (1.22, M) just alone |
| (0.76, E) and then (1.64, M) there’s like people swimming: (1.93, E) uh |
| sen: (2.88, M) öö (0.85, M) sen finns de:t (2.77, M) mm (0.32, M) barn som: (0.88, M) simmar |
| then: (2.88, M) uh (0.85, M) then the:re are (2.77, M) mm (0.32, M) kids who: (0.88, M) are swimming |
Viima
| uh there’s a paren- (0.80, M) there’s a family going in (.) and (0.26, E) |
| ja där en- (.) är det- so- som jag sade där är (0.61, M) ynga (0.78, M) barn som (.) spelar (0.27, M) basketboll |
| yeah there is- (.) is there- a- as I said there are (0.61, M) young (0.78, M) kids who (.) are playing (0.27, M) basketball |
| totanoinni tämmönen (1.15, M) vanhus katselee totanoinni (.) televi- televisiota (0.42, M) öö yksinään |
| FW this kind of (1.15, M) old man is watching FW (.) televi- television (0.42, M) uh alone |
| on the left (.) we have seen we have (.) seen that uh there’s a cinema |
| sen är- (0.48, M) klockan är nästan nästan öö fem- (0.37, M) aa halv halv fem (0.35, E) aa (0.58, E) |
| then it’s- (0.48, M) it’s almost almost uh five- (0.37, M) uh half half past four (0.35, E) uh (0.58, E) |
Helle
| siellä on tommonen (0.63, M) nurmikenttä missä jotku lapset leikkii- (0.76, M) lapset ja aikuiset leikkii |
| there’s a kind of (0.63, M) grass field where some children are playing- (0.76, M) children and adults are playing |
| okay we’re looking at a: s:tay at the seashore- (0.28, M) seaside kind of thing |
| och den där (0.68, M) äm (1.54, M) man som har (0.58, M) öö (1.02, M) klär av sig (0.52, M) som- (0.84, M) öm (1.37, M) ja okej jag kommer inte ihåg vad heter den |
| and that (0.68, M) um (1.54, M) man who has (0.58, M) uh (1.02, M) undresses (0.52, M) as- (0.84, M) um (1.37, M) yeah okay I can’t remember what that’s called |
| plats att köpa popcorn o:ch (.) och ett bibliotek och en konstgalleri: |
| place to buy popcorn a:nd (.) and a library and an art gallery: |
| with (.) er (.) kids and (0.36, M) and adults swimming in the swimming pool |
Ami
| siinä on tota (0.69, M) meressä (0.64, M) muutama e- (0.57, M) tyyppi uimassa |
| there FW (0.69, M) in the sea (0.64, M) there’s a few a- (0.57, M) guys swimming |
| and se- and then uhm (1.51, M) on the uh (1.66, M) other side there are children who are playing (0.27, M) on the field |
| det finns: (0.39, M) aa (.) barn som aam (1.16, M) spelar där- (1.41, M) aa vad heter det (1.70) aa nå kastar bollen där |
| there are: (0.39, M) uh (.) children who um (1.16, M) are playing there- (0.) uh what is it called (1.70, M) uh well are throwing the ball there |
Ruska
| kaikki näyttää aika ilosilta (4.53, E) näyttää lämpimältä (2.52, E) |
| everyone looks quite happy (4.53, E) it looks warm (2.53, E) |
| ihmisii jotka ui meressä (0.51, E) lapsii jotka tekee jotain hiekka (1.15, M) rakennelmia rannalla (0.70, E) vanhempi pariskunta kävelemässä (.) |
| people swimming in the sea (0.51, E) kids doing some sand (1.15, M) constructions on the beach (0.70, E) an older couple walking (.) |
| mm tossa tota (.) ton (0.46, M) niinku (0.37, M) terassialueen (0.50, M) aidalla istuu lokki |
| mm there FW (.) on that (0.46, M) like (0.37, M) terrace area (0.50, M) fence a seagull is sitting |
| och sen nere (0.67, M) nån sorts (0.25, M) läkares: (1.57, M) rum |
| and then downstairs (0.67, M) some sort of (0.25, M) doctors: (1.57, M) room |
| mm (1.33, E) to the right there seems to be a: (.) art museum of some sort |
References
Bosker, Hans Rutger, Anne-France Pinget, Hugo Quené, Ted Sanders & Nivja H. De Jong. 2013. What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing 30(2). 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532212455394.Suche in Google Scholar
Bradlow, Ann R., Midam Kim & Michael Blasingame. 2017. Language-independent talker-specificity in first-language and second-language speech production by bilingual talkers: L1 speaking rate predicts L2 speaking rate. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 141(2). 886–899. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4976044.Suche in Google Scholar
Brown-Schmidt, S. & M. Tanenhaus. 2006. Watching the eyes when talking about size: An investigation of message formulation and utterance planning. Journal of Memory and Language 54(4). 592–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.008.Suche in Google Scholar
Chang, Heejin & Scott Windeatt. 2024. Fluency issues in L2 academic presentations: Linguistic, cognitive and psychological influences on pausing behaviour. Language Teaching Research. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241233718 (Epub ahead of print).Suche in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & Jean E. Fox Tree. 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition 84(1). 73–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3.Suche in Google Scholar
Coco, Moreno I. & Frank Keller. 2015. Integrating mechanisms of visual guidance in naturalistic language production. Cognitive Processing 16(2). 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-014-0642-0.Suche in Google Scholar
De Jong, Nivja H. 2016a. Predicting pauses in L1 and L2 speech: The effects of utterance boundaries and word frequency. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 54(2). 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9993.Suche in Google Scholar
De Jong, Nivja H. 2016b. Fluency in second language assessment. In Dina Tsagari & Jayanti Banerjee (eds.), Handbook of second language assessment, 203–218. Boston & Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9781614513827-015Suche in Google Scholar
De Jong, Nivja H. & Hans Rutger Bosker. 2013. Choosing a threshold for silent pauses to measure second language fluency. In Robert Eklund (ed.), The 6th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (DiSS 2013) (TMH-QPSR), vol. 54, 17–20. Stockholm, Sweden. Available at: http://www.isca-speech.org/archive/diss_2013/papers/dis6_017.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
De Jong, Nivja H., Rachel Groenhout, Rob Schoonen & Jan H. Hulstijn. 2015. Second language fluency: Speaking style or proficiency? Correcting measures of second language fluency for first language behavior. Applied Psycholinguistics 36(2). 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716413000210.Suche in Google Scholar
De Jong, Nivja H., Margarita P. Steinel, Arjen Florijn, Rob Schoonen & Jan H. Hulstijn. 2013. Linguistic skills and speaking fluency in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics 34(5). 893–916. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000069.Suche in Google Scholar
Derwing, Tracey M., Murray J. Munro, Ronald I. Thomson & Marian J. Rossiter. 2009. The relationship between L1 fluency and L2 fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31(04). 533–557. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990015.Suche in Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2007. Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Duran-Karaoz, Zeynep & Parvaneh Tavakoli. 2020. Predicting L2 fluency from L1 fluency behavior: The case of L1 Turkish and L2 English speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(4). 671–695. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000755.Suche in Google Scholar
Foster, Pauline, Alan Tonkyn & Gillian Wigglesworth. 2000. Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics 21(3). 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.354.Suche in Google Scholar
Gao, Jianmin & Peijian Paul Sun. 2023. To correct or not: The role of L1 fluency in understanding and measuring L2 fluency. Tesol Quarterly 57(2). 643–655. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3198.Suche in Google Scholar
Gao, Jianmin & Peijian Paul Sun. 2024. How does learners’ L2 utterance fluency relate to their L1? A meta‐analysis. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 34(1). 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12493.Suche in Google Scholar
Götz, Sandra. 2013. Fluency in native and nonnative English speech (Studies in Corpus Linguistics), vol. 53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/scl.53Suche in Google Scholar
Griffin, Zenzi M. 2004. The eyes are right when the mouth is wrong. Psychological Science 15(12). 814–821. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00761.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Harris, Paul A., Robert Taylor, Brenda L. Minor, Veida Elliott, Michelle Fernandez, Lindsay O’Neal, Laura McLeod, Giovanni Delacqua, Francesco Delacqua, Jacqueline Kirby & Stephany N. Duda. 2019. The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 95. 103208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208.Suche in Google Scholar
Henderson, John M. & Fernanda Ferreira. 2004. Scene perception for psycholinguists. In John M. Henderson & Fernanda Ferreira (eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world, 1–58. New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Holšánová, Jana. 2006. Dynamics of picture viewing and picture description. In Liliana Albertazzi (ed.), Advances in consciousness research, vol. 67, 235–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/aicr.67.17holSuche in Google Scholar
Hu, Xin & Vahid Aryadoust. 2024. A systematic review of eye-tracking technology in second language research. Languages 9(4). 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9040141.Suche in Google Scholar
Huensch, Amanda & Nicole Tracy-Ventura. 2017. Understanding second language fluency behavior: The effects of individual differences in first language fluency, cross-linguistic differences, and proficiency over time. Applied Psycholinguistics 38(4). 755–785. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716416000424.Suche in Google Scholar
Ingves, Anna. 2024. Vägar mot ett svenskt ordförråd : Nyanlända ungdomars ordförrådsutveckling på språkintroduktionsprogrammet. Uppsala: Uppsala University PhD Thesis.Suche in Google Scholar
Kahng, Jimin. 2014. Exploring utterance and cognitive fluency of L1 and L2 English speakers: Temporal measures and stimulated recall. Language Learning 64(4). 809–854. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12084.Suche in Google Scholar
Kahng, Jimin. 2020. Explaining second language utterance fluency: Contribution of cognitive fluency and first language utterance fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics 41(2). 457–480. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000065.Suche in Google Scholar
Kassambara, Alboukadel. 2017. Practical guide to cluster analysis in R: Unsupervised machine learning. London: STHDA.Suche in Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Frieda Charalabopoulou, Maria Gavrilidou, Bondi Johannessen Janne, Saussan Khalil, Sofie Johansson Kokkinakis, Robert Lew, Serge Sharoff, Ravikiran Vadlapudi & Elena Volodina. 2014. Corpus-based vocabulary lists for language learners for nine languages. Language Resources and Evaluation 48(1). 121–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-013-9251-2.Suche in Google Scholar
Konopka, Agnieszka E., Antje Meyer & Tess A. Forest. 2018. Planning to speak in L1 and L2. Cognitive Psychology 102. 72–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.12.003.Suche in Google Scholar
Kormos, Judit. 2006. Speech production and second language acquisition, 1st edn. New York: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, Shinhye & Paula Winke. 2018. Young learners’ response processes when taking computerized tasks for speaking assessment. Language Testing 35(2). 239–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217704009.Suche in Google Scholar
Lehtilä, Elina. in preparation. Exploring connections between L1, L2, and L3 fluency using speech and gaze data: A quantitative perspective.Suche in Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, Kristin & Mirjam Broersma. 2012. Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods 44(2). 325–343. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0.Suche in Google Scholar
Lennes, Mietta. 2017. SpeCT – Speech Corpus Toolkit for Praat (v1.0.0). First release on GitHub. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.375923.Suche in Google Scholar
Lennon, Paul. 1990. Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning 40(3). 387–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 2000. Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In Colin M. Brown & Peter Hagoort (eds.), The neurocognition of language, 82–122. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198507932.003.0004Suche in Google Scholar
Li, Ping, Fan Zhang, Anya Yu & Xiaowei Zhao. 2020. Language History Questionnaire (LHQ3): An enhanced tool for assessing multilingual experience. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23(5). 938–944. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918001153.Suche in Google Scholar
Meyer, Antje S., Linda Wheeldon, Femke Van Der Meulen & Agnieszka Konopka. 2012. Effects of speech rate and practice on the allocation of visual attention in multiple object naming. Frontiers in Psychology 3. 1–3.10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00039Suche in Google Scholar
Olkkonen, Sanna, Maarit Mutta & Pekka Lintunen. 2024. Fluency profiles in L2 monologue production: The role of underlying cognitive factors. In Minnaleena Toivola, Pekka Lintunen & Leena Maria Heikkola (eds.), New directions in speech research – Freely produced speech as data. (AFinLA-Teema), vol. 17, 167–190. Jyväskylä: The Finnish Association for Applied Linguistics (AFinLA).10.30660/afinla.136716Suche in Google Scholar
Peirce, Jonathan, Jeremy R. Gray, Sol Simpson, Michael MacAskill, Richard Höchenberger, Hiroyuki Sogo, Erik Kastman & Jonas Kristoffer Lindeløv. 2019. PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods 51(1). 195–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y.Suche in Google Scholar
Peltonen, Pauliina. 2018. Exploring connections between first and second language fluency: A mixed methods approach. The Modern Language Journal 102(4). 676–692. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12516.Suche in Google Scholar
Peltonen, Pauliina & Pekka Lintunen. 2022. Multilingual speakers’ L1, L2, and L3 fluency across languages: A study of Finnish, Swedish, and English. Nordand 17(1). 48–63. https://doi.org/10.18261/nordand.17.1.4.Suche in Google Scholar
Peltonen, Pauliina, Sanna Olkkonen, Magdalena Szyszka & Pekka Lintunen. 2024. L2 repair fluency through the lenses of L1 repair fluency, cognitive fluency, and language anxiety. Applied Linguistics Review 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2023-0011 (Epub ahead of print).Suche in Google Scholar
Pérez Castillejo, Susana & Katherine Urzua-Parra. 2023. Predicting L2-Spanish fluency from L1-English fluency and L2 proficiency: A conceptual replication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 45(4). 1090–1103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263122000535.Suche in Google Scholar
Pistono, Aurélie & Robert J. Hartsuiker. 2021. Eye-movements can help disentangle mechanisms underlying disfluency. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 36(8). 1038–1055. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2021.1905166.Suche in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2023. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/.Suche in Google Scholar
Segalowitz, Norman. 2010. Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203851357Suche in Google Scholar
Segalowitz, Norman. 2016. Second language fluency and its underlying cognitive and social determinants. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 54(2). 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-9991.Suche in Google Scholar
Segalowitz, Norman & Barbara F. Freed. 2004. Context, contact, and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in at home and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26(2). 173–199. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104262027.Suche in Google Scholar
Skehan, P. 2009. Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics 30(4). 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Shungo & Judit Kormos. 2023. The multidimensionality of second language oral fluency: Interfacing cognitive fluency and utterance fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 45(1). 38–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000899.Suche in Google Scholar
Suzuki, Shungo & Judit Kormos. 2025. The moderating role of L2 proficiency in the predictive power of L1 fluency on L2 utterance fluency. Language Testing. 42(1). 73–99.10.1177/02655322241241851Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
