Structural Equation Modeling of the Individual, Linguistic, and Social Variables in Predicting Iranian Young Adult Immigrants’ Speaking Fluency, Accuracy, Complexity, and Pronunciation in Canada

Document Type : research article

Authors

Department of TEFL, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The study investigated the role of age of arrival, length of resistance, amount and types of input, language-richness, and parents’ educational background in predicting Iranian immigrants’ speaking fluency, accuracy, complexity, and pronunciation. Homogenized through the CELPIP-General Test, 108 Iranian intermediate EFL learners in Canada were selected based on the availability sampling to complete the Alberta Language Environment Questionnaire (ALEQ) and participated in a speaking test. The performances were assessed based on Wigglesworth and Storch’s (2009) fluency, Storch and Wigglesworth’s (2007) accuracy, and Skehan’s (2009) complexity. Pronunciation was measured according to Jenkins’ (2000) Lingua Franca Core (LFC). The structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and the schematic illustration confirmed the hypothesized model (x^2⁄df= .037 RMSEA=.043; RMR =.01; GFI = .95; AGFI =.74; NFI =.70; CFI =.79; IFI =.88; TLI=.89) revealing that age of arrival (AoA), schooling in L2, and language-rich activities could predict fluency, accuracy, complexity, and pronunciation, however, LoR was a significant predictor of neither complexity nor pronunciation. While siblings' input/output could predict only speaking accuracy, maternal education significantly predicted speaking complexity. The findings supported the Critical Period Hypothesis, the significant role of AoA in the development of bilingualism, and the effectiveness of L2 instruction. The results confirmed the direction of the path model exposing the inefficacy of paternal and maternal education and parents' input/output in predicting the variances in immigrants' speaking ability. The findings suggested that parents maximize the number of activities in the second language and migrate to second-language countries before their children’s critical age.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Abrahamsson, N. (2012). Age of onset and nativelike L2 ultimate attainment of morphosyntactic and phonetic intuition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(2), 187-214.
           https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000022
Alborzi Varaki, P. & Barzegar, B. (1398). Age effects on learning German pronunciation based on data from Iranian students. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 9(2), 347-364. (In Persian)
https://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2019.250663.465
Andersson, R., & Sandgren, O. (2016). ELAN Analysis Companion (EAC): A software tool for time-course analysis of ELAN-annotated data. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 9(3), 212-230. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.9.3.1
Audacity Team. (2018). Audacity(R): Free Audio Editor and Recorder Computer
application (Version 2.3.0) [Online] Available: https://audacityteam.org/
          (March 20, 2020).
Bagheri Nevisi, R., & Farmoudi, S. (2022). The Relationship between extroversion/introversion, field dependence/field independence, and EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Foreign Language Research Journal, 12(1), 31-48.
https://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2021.329752.883
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2005). PRAAT: Doing Phonetics by Computer software (Version 5.2.34) [Online] Available:  https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/ (March 20, 2020).
Duncan, T. S., & Paradis, J. (2020). Home language environment and children's SL acquisition: The special status of input from older siblings. Journal of Child Language, 47(5), 982–1005.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000919000977
Golberg, H., Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2008). Lexical acquisition over time in minority first language children learning English as a SL. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(1), 41–65.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271640808003X
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language: New models, new norms, new goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Labov, W., & Rosenfelder, I. (2011). The Philadelphia neighborhood corpus. [Online] Available:  http://fave.ling.upenn.edu/pnc.html
Lennes, M. (2015). Mietta’s Praat scripts. Available:  http://www.helsinki.fi/~lennes/praat-scripts/
McNamara, D., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  
Mostafa, T., Crossley, S. A., & Kim, Y. (2021). Predictors of English as SL learners’ oral proficiency development in a classroom context. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(31), 223-249.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12358
Nushi, M., & Ghasemi, F. (2021). Teachers’ teaching styles and their beliefs about incorporating technology into SL instruction: The case of Iranian EFL context. Foreign Language Research Journal, 11(3), 511-539.
https://doi.org/10.22059/JFLR.2021.329359.879
Paradis, J. (2011). Individual differences in child English SL acquisition: Comparing child-internal and child-external factors. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(3), 213–237.
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.3.01par
Paradis, J., Emmerzael, K., & Sorenson Duncan, T. (2010). Assessment of English language learners: Using parent report on first language development. Journal of Communication Disorders, 43(1), 474–497.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.01.002
Paradis, J., Soto-Corominas, A., Chen, X., & Gottardo, A. (2020). How language environment, age, and cognitive capacity support the bilingual development of Syrian refugee children recently arrived in Canada. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(6) 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000017X
Pham, G., & Tipton, T. (2018). Internal and external factors that support children's minority first language and English. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 49(3), 595–606.
https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_LSHSS-17-0086
Saito, K., Ilkan, M., Magne, V., Tran, M. N., & Suzuki, S. (2018). Acoustic characteristics and learner profiles of low-, mid-and high-level SL fluency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(3), 593–617.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000571
Singleton, D., & Pfenninger, S. E. (2018).  SL acquisition in childhood, adulthood and old age: Misreported and under-researched dimensions of the age factor. Journal of SL Studies, 1(2), 254–275.
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00003.sin
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling SL performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
Storch, N. & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: Comparing individual and collaborative writing. In M. P. G. Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157-177). London, UK: Multilingual Matters.
 
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445–466.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209104670
Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in SL monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1
Journal of Foreign Language Research
Volume 13, Issue 1
May 2023
Pages 79-92

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics