Oral fluency is one of the more difficult variables to track and measure in L2 speech. This paper reports on an empirical study to identify how fluency in both monologues and dialogues changes over three ranges of proficiency as marked by the TOEIC standardized test. Twenty-seven Japanese students were asked to give a self-introduction monologue, which was then followed by a three-question dialogue. Based on the TOEIC scores of these participants, three groups were formed, with the first group having scores that ranged from 150 to 370, the second from 371 to 570, and the third from 571 to 770. The interactions were videotaped and transcribed, with the transcriptions making up the Japanese University Student Fluency Corpus (JUSFC2018), which has 23,539 words. Research questions focused on significant differences among the three groups concerning the variables of monologue speaking time, dialogue speaking time, total speaking time, articulation rate, speaking rate, and the number of words spoken, and mean length runs. Results showed that for the first two proficiency groups monologue speaking time, speaking rates, and the number of words spoken showed significant differences, whereas in comparing the second and third proficiency groups, no significant differences were found. Furthermore, fluency showed a decrease on all variables with the highest proficiency group.

1. Bygate, M. (1999). Task as context for the framing, reframing and unframing of language. System, 27(1), 33–48. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(98)00048-7
2. Chambers, F. (1997). What do we mean by fluency? System, 25(4), 535–544. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(97)00046-8
3. Dechert, H. W., & Raupach, M. (1980). Temporal variables in speech. Berlin, Germany: Mouton Publishers.
4. Deschamps, A. (1980). The syntactical distribution of pauses in English spoken as a second language by French students. In H. W. Deschert & M. Raupach (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech (p. 255-262). Berlin, Germany: Mouton Publishers.
5. Freed, B. F. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In Studies in bilingualism. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
6. Hansen, L., Gardner, J., & Pollard, J. (1998). The measurement of fluency in a second language: Evidence from the acquisition and attrition of Japanese. In Proceedings of the JALT 1997 Conference on Language Teaching and Learning, Tokyo, Japan.
7. Lennon, P. (1990). The advanced learner at large in the L2 community: Developments in spoken performance. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 28(4), 309–324. doi:https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1990.28.4.309
8. Lennon, P. (2006). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40(3), 387–417. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.x
9. Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Miller, J. L., Grosjean, F., & Lomanto, C. (1984). Articulation rate and its variability in spontaneous speech: A reanalysis and some implications. Phonetica, 41(4), 215–225. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000261728
11. Mochtar, M. (2018). Language education policy at schools in the era of Southeast Asian economic community integration. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(3), 95-101. doi:https://doi.org/10.26500/jarssh-03-2018-0302
12. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching & learning. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
13. Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). The secret life of fluency. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(6), 237–241. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.014
14. Raupach, M. (1980). Temporal variables in first and second language speech production. In H. W. Dechert & M. Raupach (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech (p. 263-270). Berlin, Germany: Mouton Publishers.
15. Riggenbach, H. (1991). Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Processes, 14(4), 423–441. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539109544795
16. Schmid, R. (1992). Did you mean: Schmidt (1992 fluency search results web results psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency search results web results psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
18. Sutthipornphalangkoon, C. (2016). A study on the relationship between company characteristics, demography of engineers and their perception of the AEC and its environment influencing the decision to develop their foreign language skills, in bang poo industrial area, Samuthprakarn, Thailand. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 2(1), 13-27. doi:https://doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.2.20002-1
19. Svoboda, M., & Zagar-Sostaric, P. (2019). The challenges of learning and teaching German (as a foreign/second) language in times of migration. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 5(1), 20-26. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.5.10003-1
20. Towell, R. (1987). Approaches to the analysis of the oral language development of the advanced learner. In J. A. Coleman & R. Towell (Eds.), The advanced language learner (p. 157-181). London, UK: CILT.
21. Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second language narrative production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University, Tokyo, Japan.

Watanabe, H., & W. Long III, R. (2019). Is there an increase in fluency over levels of proficiency? A study of English L2 usage of Japanese university students. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 5(6), 215–223. doi:10.20469/ijhss.5.20001-6