A Comparison Between the Impact of Rhetorical Argumentation and Narrating Stories as Communicative Tasks on Achieving the Mastery of Fluency and Accuracy

Abderrahim Bouderbane

Abstract


The present study is an investigation of the impact of the patterns of rhetorical argumentation, and narrating stories (together with describing past experiences) on students’ fluency and accuracy in speaking. Accordingly, the merit of speaking in any language is entirely based on identifying the components of speaking to design comprehensive tasks each in its specific context (Nunan, 1984), while the criterion for evaluating speaking a second or a foreign language is divided into fluency and accuracy (Brumfit, 1984). In the same sense, fluency and accuracy are two broad to be considered as components of speaking, specifically when it comes to testing the communicative proficiency of the students. Consequently, the task of identifying precisely the components of fluency and accuracy can be traced to the organizational patterns of speaking and the implementation of the different tasks to promote speaking.

Keywords


Rhetorical argumentation；Narrating Stories; Tasks; Fluency and accuracy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: David O, Mackey.

Brown, A. (2003). Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency. Language Testing, 20, 1-25.

Brumfit, C. (1984). Communicative methodology in language teaching: The roles of fluency and accuracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bygate, M. (1996). Effects of task repetition: Appraising the developing language of learners. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp.136- 146). Oxford, UK: Heinmann.

Cameron, D. (2001). Working with spoken discourse. London: Sage.

Crisp, V., & Sweiry, E. (2006). Can a picture ruin a thousand words? The effects of visual Resources in exam questions. Educational Research, 4(2), 139-154.

Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 communication: A psycholinguistic perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(3), 349–385.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in second language Acquisition 18, 299-323.

Freeley, A. J., &Steinberg, D. L. (2004). Argumentation and debate. England: Wordswarth.

Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing second language speaking. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Nunan, D. (1984). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: CUP.

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27-57.

Robinson, P. (1995). Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99-140.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93-120.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/%25x

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2014 Abderrahim Bouderbane

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Share us to:   

Remind

We are currently accepting submissions via email only.

The registration and online submission functions have been disabled.

Please send your manuscripts to ccc@cscanada.net，or  ccc@cscanada.org  for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.

 

 Articles published in Cross-Cultural Communication are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

 CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION Editorial Office

Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138 
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture