Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)
This study examines the associations between the speaking proficiency of 181 adult learners of Dutch as a second language and their linguistic competences. Performance in eight speaking tasks was rated on a scale of communicative adequacy. After extrapolation of these ratings to the Overall Oral Pro...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Language testing 2012-04, Vol.29 (2), p.203-221 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 221 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 203 |
container_title | Language testing |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | Hulstijn, Jan H Schoonen, Rob Jong, Nivja H. de Steinel, Margarita P Florijn, Arjen |
description | This study examines the associations between the speaking proficiency of 181 adult learners of Dutch as a second language and their linguistic competences. Performance in eight speaking tasks was rated on a scale of communicative adequacy. After extrapolation of these ratings to the Overall Oral Production scale of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001), 80 and 30 participants (on average per speaking task) were found to be, respectively, at the B1 and B2 levels of this scale. The following linguistic competences were tapped with non-communicative tasks: productive vocabulary knowledge, productive knowledge of grammar, speed of lexical retrieval, speed of articulation, speed of sentence building, and pronunciation skills. Discriminant analyses showed that all linguistic competences, except speed of articulation, discriminated participants at the two levels of oral production. Subsequent comparisons showed that the distance between B1ers and B2ers was smaller in knowledge of high-frequency words than in knowledge of medium- and low-frequency words. Extrapolation from scores on the vocabulary test yielded estimations of productive vocabularies of, on average, 4000 and 7000 words for B1ers and B2ers, respectively. The grammar test assessed grammatical knowledge in 10 domains. B2ers were found to outperform B1ers on all parts of the test. Thus, the differences in lexical and grammatical knowledge of B1ers and B2ers appear to be a matter of degree, rather than a matter of category or domain. The paper ends with a research agenda for a linguistic underpinning of the CEFR. (Verlag). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0265532211419826 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1023037370</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ971381</ericid><sourcerecordid>1023037370</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3396-6b90e3c88e46159d0d52faa3d9a77f165083e46a3e6133a181867217f20bfcae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUFP3DAQhS3USmxp76ji4CM9hHrsjR0fYdmFVitVQuUcGWcMLkkc7ISK38UfxGERlXqa0bzvPY81hBwCOwFQ6jvjsiwF5wBL0BWXe2QBS6UKppfyA1nMcjHr--RTSn8YYxqEXJDnre9vJ59Gb6kN3YAj9hYTDY62aGKP8bU_n0Z7R02ihia0oW9oa7LP3CI1Ix3vkJ4BNXl8xrPvEdtXVxrQ3Od8OsTgvPU5-mmez_wqdF3o6XqKIVM93UTT4d8Q72fgCh3GeRHqQqTbt6cSPV6tN1ffPpOPzrQJv7zVA3K9Wf9eXRbbXxc_VqfbwgqhZSFvNENhqwqXEkrdsKbkzhjRaKOUA1mySmTJCJQghIEKKqk4KMfZjbMGxQE53uXm9R8mTGPd-WSxzV_HMKUaGBdMKKFYRtkOtTGkFNHVQ_SdiU8Zquf71P_fJ1uOdhaM3r7j659agaggy193cuOHf2lalUyV4gX1epSg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1023037370</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Hulstijn, Jan H ; Schoonen, Rob ; Jong, Nivja H. de ; Steinel, Margarita P ; Florijn, Arjen</creator><creatorcontrib>Hulstijn, Jan H ; Schoonen, Rob ; Jong, Nivja H. de ; Steinel, Margarita P ; Florijn, Arjen</creatorcontrib><description>This study examines the associations between the speaking proficiency of 181 adult learners of Dutch as a second language and their linguistic competences. Performance in eight speaking tasks was rated on a scale of communicative adequacy. After extrapolation of these ratings to the Overall Oral Production scale of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001), 80 and 30 participants (on average per speaking task) were found to be, respectively, at the B1 and B2 levels of this scale. The following linguistic competences were tapped with non-communicative tasks: productive vocabulary knowledge, productive knowledge of grammar, speed of lexical retrieval, speed of articulation, speed of sentence building, and pronunciation skills. Discriminant analyses showed that all linguistic competences, except speed of articulation, discriminated participants at the two levels of oral production. Subsequent comparisons showed that the distance between B1ers and B2ers was smaller in knowledge of high-frequency words than in knowledge of medium- and low-frequency words. Extrapolation from scores on the vocabulary test yielded estimations of productive vocabularies of, on average, 4000 and 7000 words for B1ers and B2ers, respectively. The grammar test assessed grammatical knowledge in 10 domains. B2ers were found to outperform B1ers on all parts of the test. Thus, the differences in lexical and grammatical knowledge of B1ers and B2ers appear to be a matter of degree, rather than a matter of category or domain. The paper ends with a research agenda for a linguistic underpinning of the CEFR. (Verlag).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0265-5322</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1477-0946</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0946</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0265532211419826</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LATEEU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adult Learning ; Adult Students ; Articulation (Speech) ; Correlation ; Empirische Forschung ; Foreign Countries ; Grammar ; Grammatik ; Guidelines ; Indo European Languages ; Language Proficiency ; Language Tests ; Linguistic Competence ; Measures (Individuals) ; Niederländisch ; Oral Language ; Pronunciation ; Quantitative Forschung ; Scores ; Second Language Learning ; Speech Communication ; Sprachkompetenz ; Task Analysis ; Vocabulary ; Wortschatz ; Zweitsprache</subject><ispartof>Language testing, 2012-04, Vol.29 (2), p.203-221</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3396-6b90e3c88e46159d0d52faa3d9a77f165083e46a3e6133a181867217f20bfcae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3396-6b90e3c88e46159d0d52faa3d9a77f165083e46a3e6133a181867217f20bfcae3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://www.fachportal-paedagogik.de/fis_bildung/suche/fis_set.html?FId=975075$$DAccess content in the German Education Portal$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ971381$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hulstijn, Jan H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoonen, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jong, Nivja H. de</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinel, Margarita P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Florijn, Arjen</creatorcontrib><title>Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)</title><title>Language testing</title><description>This study examines the associations between the speaking proficiency of 181 adult learners of Dutch as a second language and their linguistic competences. Performance in eight speaking tasks was rated on a scale of communicative adequacy. After extrapolation of these ratings to the Overall Oral Production scale of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001), 80 and 30 participants (on average per speaking task) were found to be, respectively, at the B1 and B2 levels of this scale. The following linguistic competences were tapped with non-communicative tasks: productive vocabulary knowledge, productive knowledge of grammar, speed of lexical retrieval, speed of articulation, speed of sentence building, and pronunciation skills. Discriminant analyses showed that all linguistic competences, except speed of articulation, discriminated participants at the two levels of oral production. Subsequent comparisons showed that the distance between B1ers and B2ers was smaller in knowledge of high-frequency words than in knowledge of medium- and low-frequency words. Extrapolation from scores on the vocabulary test yielded estimations of productive vocabularies of, on average, 4000 and 7000 words for B1ers and B2ers, respectively. The grammar test assessed grammatical knowledge in 10 domains. B2ers were found to outperform B1ers on all parts of the test. Thus, the differences in lexical and grammatical knowledge of B1ers and B2ers appear to be a matter of degree, rather than a matter of category or domain. The paper ends with a research agenda for a linguistic underpinning of the CEFR. (Verlag).</description><subject>Adult Learning</subject><subject>Adult Students</subject><subject>Articulation (Speech)</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Empirische Forschung</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Grammatik</subject><subject>Guidelines</subject><subject>Indo European Languages</subject><subject>Language Proficiency</subject><subject>Language Tests</subject><subject>Linguistic Competence</subject><subject>Measures (Individuals)</subject><subject>Niederländisch</subject><subject>Oral Language</subject><subject>Pronunciation</subject><subject>Quantitative Forschung</subject><subject>Scores</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Speech Communication</subject><subject>Sprachkompetenz</subject><subject>Task Analysis</subject><subject>Vocabulary</subject><subject>Wortschatz</subject><subject>Zweitsprache</subject><issn>0265-5322</issn><issn>1477-0946</issn><issn>1477-0946</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkUFP3DAQhS3USmxp76ji4CM9hHrsjR0fYdmFVitVQuUcGWcMLkkc7ISK38UfxGERlXqa0bzvPY81hBwCOwFQ6jvjsiwF5wBL0BWXe2QBS6UKppfyA1nMcjHr--RTSn8YYxqEXJDnre9vJ59Gb6kN3YAj9hYTDY62aGKP8bU_n0Z7R02ihia0oW9oa7LP3CI1Ix3vkJ4BNXl8xrPvEdtXVxrQ3Od8OsTgvPU5-mmez_wqdF3o6XqKIVM93UTT4d8Q72fgCh3GeRHqQqTbt6cSPV6tN1ffPpOPzrQJv7zVA3K9Wf9eXRbbXxc_VqfbwgqhZSFvNENhqwqXEkrdsKbkzhjRaKOUA1mySmTJCJQghIEKKqk4KMfZjbMGxQE53uXm9R8mTGPd-WSxzV_HMKUaGBdMKKFYRtkOtTGkFNHVQ_SdiU8Zquf71P_fJ1uOdhaM3r7j659agaggy193cuOHf2lalUyV4gX1epSg</recordid><startdate>201204</startdate><enddate>201204</enddate><creator>Hulstijn, Jan H</creator><creator>Schoonen, Rob</creator><creator>Jong, Nivja H. de</creator><creator>Steinel, Margarita P</creator><creator>Florijn, Arjen</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>9S6</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201204</creationdate><title>Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)</title><author>Hulstijn, Jan H ; Schoonen, Rob ; Jong, Nivja H. de ; Steinel, Margarita P ; Florijn, Arjen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3396-6b90e3c88e46159d0d52faa3d9a77f165083e46a3e6133a181867217f20bfcae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult Learning</topic><topic>Adult Students</topic><topic>Articulation (Speech)</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Empirische Forschung</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Grammatik</topic><topic>Guidelines</topic><topic>Indo European Languages</topic><topic>Language Proficiency</topic><topic>Language Tests</topic><topic>Linguistic Competence</topic><topic>Measures (Individuals)</topic><topic>Niederländisch</topic><topic>Oral Language</topic><topic>Pronunciation</topic><topic>Quantitative Forschung</topic><topic>Scores</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Speech Communication</topic><topic>Sprachkompetenz</topic><topic>Task Analysis</topic><topic>Vocabulary</topic><topic>Wortschatz</topic><topic>Zweitsprache</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hulstijn, Jan H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoonen, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jong, Nivja H. de</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinel, Margarita P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Florijn, Arjen</creatorcontrib><collection>FIS Bildung Literaturdatenbank</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Language testing</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hulstijn, Jan H</au><au>Schoonen, Rob</au><au>Jong, Nivja H. de</au><au>Steinel, Margarita P</au><au>Florijn, Arjen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ971381</ericid><atitle>Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)</atitle><jtitle>Language testing</jtitle><date>2012-04</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>221</epage><pages>203-221</pages><issn>0265-5322</issn><issn>1477-0946</issn><eissn>1477-0946</eissn><coden>LATEEU</coden><abstract>This study examines the associations between the speaking proficiency of 181 adult learners of Dutch as a second language and their linguistic competences. Performance in eight speaking tasks was rated on a scale of communicative adequacy. After extrapolation of these ratings to the Overall Oral Production scale of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001), 80 and 30 participants (on average per speaking task) were found to be, respectively, at the B1 and B2 levels of this scale. The following linguistic competences were tapped with non-communicative tasks: productive vocabulary knowledge, productive knowledge of grammar, speed of lexical retrieval, speed of articulation, speed of sentence building, and pronunciation skills. Discriminant analyses showed that all linguistic competences, except speed of articulation, discriminated participants at the two levels of oral production. Subsequent comparisons showed that the distance between B1ers and B2ers was smaller in knowledge of high-frequency words than in knowledge of medium- and low-frequency words. Extrapolation from scores on the vocabulary test yielded estimations of productive vocabularies of, on average, 4000 and 7000 words for B1ers and B2ers, respectively. The grammar test assessed grammatical knowledge in 10 domains. B2ers were found to outperform B1ers on all parts of the test. Thus, the differences in lexical and grammatical knowledge of B1ers and B2ers appear to be a matter of degree, rather than a matter of category or domain. The paper ends with a research agenda for a linguistic underpinning of the CEFR. (Verlag).</abstract><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0265532211419826</doi><tpages>19</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0265-5322 |
ispartof | Language testing, 2012-04, Vol.29 (2), p.203-221 |
issn | 0265-5322 1477-0946 1477-0946 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1023037370 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List |
subjects | Adult Learning Adult Students Articulation (Speech) Correlation Empirische Forschung Foreign Countries Grammar Grammatik Guidelines Indo European Languages Language Proficiency Language Tests Linguistic Competence Measures (Individuals) Niederländisch Oral Language Pronunciation Quantitative Forschung Scores Second Language Learning Speech Communication Sprachkompetenz Task Analysis Vocabulary Wortschatz Zweitsprache |
title | Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T07%3A35%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Linguistic%20competences%20of%20learners%20of%20Dutch%20as%20a%20second%20language%20at%20the%20B1%20and%20B2%20levels%20of%20speaking%20proficiency%20of%20the%20Common%20European%20Framework%20of%20Reference%20for%20Languages%20(CEFR)&rft.jtitle=Language%20testing&rft.au=Hulstijn,%20Jan%20H&rft.date=2012-04&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=221&rft.pages=203-221&rft.issn=0265-5322&rft.eissn=1477-0946&rft.coden=LATEEU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0265532211419826&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1023037370%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1023037370&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ971381&rfr_iscdi=true |