Identifying Key Linguistic Variables of Second Language Speaking Proficiency Using Principal Component Analysis

Authors

  • Shinjae Park

    Department of General Education, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v6i6.7629
Received: 29 October 2024 | Revised: 13 November 2024 | Accepted: 15 November 2024 | Published Online: 10 December 2024

Abstract

This study conducted principal component analysis (PCA) to identify key linguistic factors distinguishing the speaking proficiency levels of Korean learners grouped by CEFR classifications. The PCA primarily focused on fluency, lexis, and complexity, with particular emphasis on syntactic complexity. The analysis revealed that PC1 explained the largest variance (31.6%) in proficiency levels, with syntactic complexity—measured as complex nominals per T-unit (CNT)—emerging as the most significant differentiating factor. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) confirmed statistically significant differences in CNT across proficiency levels, underscoring its critical role in evaluating grammatical ability. Fluency variables, such as articulation rate, and lexis variables, including lexical diversity, although statistically non-significant, provided valuable insights into learners’ broader proficiency development. The results also indicated that higher proficiency levels were associated with greater use of syntactically complex structures, highlighting the importance of grammatical sophistication in second-language speech. Additionally, learners at lower proficiency levels relied more on simple sentence constructions, which suggests a gradual progression in syntactic complexity as proficiency increases. These findings emphasize the pivotal role of syntactic complexity in assessing speaking proficiency and suggest that incorporating such measures into language evaluation frameworks could provide a more comprehensive and nuanced reflection of learners’ linguistic development. This, in turn, could facilitate the design of targeted instructional strategies and assessments that align more closely with learners’ developmental trajectories, addressing specific gaps in their linguistic skills.

Keywords:

L2 Speaking Proficiency; Syntactic Complexity; Lexical Complexity; Fluency; Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

References

[1] Skehan, P., 2009. Lexical Performance by Native and Non-Native Speakers on Language-Learning Tasks. In: Richards, B., Daller, M.H., Malvern, D.D., et al., (Eds.). Vocabulary Studies in First and Second Language Acquisition: The Interface Between Theory and Application. Palgrave Macmillan, London. pp. 107–124.

[2] Kuiken, F., Vedder, I., 2012. Task Complexity and Linguistic Performance in L2 Writing and Speaking. Applied Linguistics. 33(2), 176–193.

[3] De Jong, N.H., Perfetti, C.A., 2011. Fluency Training in the ESL Classroom: An Experimental Study of Fluency Development and Proceduralization. Language Learning. 61(2), 533–568.

[4] Norris, J.M., Ortega, L., 2009. Towards an Organic Approach to Investigating CAF in Instructed SLA: The Case of Complexity. Applied Linguistics. 30(4), 555–578.

[5] Skehan, P., Foster, P., 1997. Task Type and Task Processing Conditions as Influences on Foreign Language Performance. Language Teaching Research. 1(3), 185–211.

[6] Bulté, B., Housen, A., 2014. Conceptualizing and Measuring Short-Term Changes in L2 Writing Complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing. 26, 42–65.

[7] Tavakoli, M., Dastjerdi, H.V., Esteki, M., 2011. The Effect of Explicit Strategy Instruction on L2 Oral Production of Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners: Focusing on Accuracy, Fluency, and Complexity. Journal of Language Teaching & Research. 2(5), 989–997.

[8] De Jong, N.H., Steinel, M.P., Florijn, A., et al., 2012. Facets of Speaking Proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 34(1), 5–34.

[9] Biber, D., Gray, B., Staples, S., 2011. Assessing Grammatical Complexity in Second Language Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 20(1), 2–23.

[10] Lu, X., 2012. The Relationship of Lexical Richness to the Quality of ESL Learners’ Oral Narratives. The Modern Language Journal. 96(2), 190–208.

[11] Wang, Y.B., 2021. A Study on the Use of Hesitation Markers in Varied-Level EFL Learners’ L2 Speaking Process. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics. 11(5), 824–834.

[12] Clark, H.H., Fox Tree, J.E., 2002. Using Uh and Um in Spontaneous Speaking. Cognition. 84(1), 73–111.

[13] Gilquin, G., 2008. Hesitation Markers Among EFL Learners: From Discourse Functions to Language Awareness. Corpora. 3(2), 147–172.

[14] Crossley, S.A., Salsbury, T., McNamara, D.S., 2014. Assessing Lexical Proficiency Using Analytic Ratings: A Case for Collocation Accuracy. Applied Linguistics. 36(1), 1–24.

[15] Kyle, K., Crossley, S.A., 2015. Automatically Assessing Lexical Sophistication: Indices, Tools, Findings, and Application. TESOL Quarterly. 49(4), 757–786.

[16] Read, J., 2000. Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

[17] Lu, X., 2010. Automatic Analysis of Syntactic Complexity in Second Language Writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 15(4), 474–496.

[18] Bui, G., 2021. Influence of Learners’ Prior Knowledge, L2 Proficiency and Pre-Task Planning on L2 Lexical Complexity. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 59(4), 543–567.

[19] Tabari, M.A., Lu, X., Wang, Y., 2023. The Effects of Task Complexity on Lexical Complexity in L2 Writing: An Exploratory Study. System. 114, 103021.

[20] Park, S., 2023. Comparison of Lexical Complexity in L2 Speaking and Writing and Factors Predicting English Speaking Proficiency. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 29(1), 125–138.

[21] Johnson, M.D., 2017. Cognitive Task Complexity and L2 Written Syntactic Complexity, Accuracy, Lexical Complexity, and Fluency: A Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing. 37, 13–38.

[22] Laufer, B., Nation, P., 1995. Vocabulary Size and Use: Lexical Richness in L2 Written Production. Applied Linguistics. 16(3), 307–322.

[23] McCarthy, P.M., Jarvis, S., 2007. Vocd: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation. Language Testing. 24(4), 459–488.

[24] Segalowitz, N., French, L., Guay, J.D., 2017. What Features Best Characterize Adult Second Language Utterance Fluency and What Do They Reveal About Fluency Gains in Short-Term Immersion? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 20(2), 90–116.

[25] Skehan, P., 2003. Task-Based Instruction. Language Teaching. 36(1), 1–14.

[26] Tavakoli, P., Nakatsuhara, F., Hunter, A.M., 2020. Aspects of Fluency Across Assessed Levels of Speaking Proficiency. The Modern Language Journal. 104(1), 169–191.

[27] Park, S., 2024. Analyzing Fluency Factors Across Speaking Proficiency Levels and Gender Among Korean English Speakers. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning. 27(2), 60–70.

[28] Norris, J.M., Ortega, L., 2009. Towards an Organic Approach to Investigating CAF in Instructed SLA: The Case of Complexity. Applied Linguistics. 30(4), 555–578.

[29] Ortega, L., 2012. Interlanguage Complexity: A Construct in Search of Theoretical Renewal. In B. Kortmann & B. Szmrecsanyi (Eds.), Linguistic Complexity: Second Language Acquisition, Indigenization, Contact (pp. 127–155). De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, Germany.

Downloads

How to Cite

Park, S. (2024). Identifying Key Linguistic Variables of Second Language Speaking Proficiency Using Principal Component Analysis. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 6(6), 623–633. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v6i6.7629

Issue

Vol. 6 , Iss. 6 (December 2024)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2024 Moussa Diagne Faye, Vini Yves Bernadin Loyara, Amadou Keita, Mamadou Diop, Angelbert Chabi Biaou, Mahamadou Koita, Hamma Yacouba

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.