Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Speakers, Potential New Speakers, and Their Experiences and Abilities in Scottish Gaelic

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Speakers of Minority Languages

Abstract

This chapter examines the features of adult L2 Gaelic that distinguish highly proficient new speakers from less proficient potential new speakers. Gaelic usage practices are also investigated and compared between the two groups. Sixteen adult L2 Gaelic users provided data about their language practices via semi-structured interviews and questionnaires. Proficiency was assessed using data from two Gaelic language tasks: a semi-structured interview and a narrative. These data were analysed within the Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency framework. Data were also rated on a CEFR-based proficiency scale by L1 Gaelic users. Results highlight the ways in which linguistic experiences and practices manifest themselves in the oral performances of L2 Gaelic users, both in terms of objective proficiency criteria and in how their performance is perceived.

This research was supported by a PhD studentship from Soillse, the National Research Network for the Maintenance and Revitalisation of Gaelic Language and Culture.

I am very grateful to this volume’s editors, and the two anonymous reviewers, for their very helpful guidance and feedback on previous drafts of this chapter. Any shortcomings are my own.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Reference to inaccuracies raises the question of whether native-speaker norms are appropriate in interlanguage analyses. However, as Tenfjord et al. (2006) argue, accuracy coding addresses whether an utterance is interpretable from the perspective of linguistic analysis, without making assumptions about ideal varieties or speakers. See also Davies (2003).

  2. 2.

    The strength of this result may, at least in part, be due to the small sample size. A larger sample size with similar patterns of results may show a weaker (but still significant) relationship.

References

  • Arche, M. J. (2008). SPLLOC Transcription Conventions [Online]. Available: http://www.splloc.soton.ac.uk/trancon.html. Accessed 19 Oct 2011.

  • Armstrong, T. C. (2013). “Why Won’t You Speak to Me in Gaelic?”: Authenticity, Integration and the Heritage Language Learning Project. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 12, 340–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S., McConville, M., McLeod, W., & Ó Maolalaigh, R. (2014). Dlùth Is Inneach: Linguistic and Institutional Foundations for Gaelic Corpus Planning—Final Project Report for Bòrd na Gàidhlig [Online]. Accessed 25 Mar 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. (2005). Interviewer Variability in Oral Proficiency Interviews. Bern: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A., Iwashita, N., & McNamara, T. (2005). An Examination of Rater Orientations and Test-Taker Performance on English-for-Academic-Purposes Speaking Tasks. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carty, N. (2015). Slighean gu fileantas: An Exploratory Study of the Nature of Proficiency in Adult L2 Scottish Gaelic. PhD, University of Glasgow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A. (2003). The Native Speaker: Myth and Reality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, N. H., & Bosker, H. R. (2013). Choosing a Threshold for Silent Pauses to Measure Second Language Fluency. In: R. Eklund (Ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (DiSS). Stockholm: Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH).

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A. F., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2012). The Effect of Task Complexity on Functional Adequacy, Fluency and Lexical Diversity in Speaking Performances of Native and Non-native Speakers. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorian, N. (1981). Language Death: The Life Cycle of a Scottish Gaelic Dialect. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. (2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, P., & Tavakoli, P. (2009). Native Speakers and Task Performance: Comparing Effects on Complexity, Fluency, and Lexical Diversity. Language Learning, 59(4), 866–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring Spoken Language: A Unit for All Reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freed, B. F. (2000). Is Fluency, Like Beauty, in the Eyes (and Ears) of the Beholder? In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on Fluency. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics: Experiments in Spontaneous Speech. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012a). Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency: Definitions, Measurement and Research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012b). Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O’Hagan, S. (2008). Assessed Levels of Second Language Speaking Proficiency: How Distinct? Applied Linguistics, 29, 24–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. (2015). Defining the New Speaker: Theoretical Perspectives and Learner Trajectories. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2014, 21–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kormos, J., & Dénes, M. (2004). Exploring Measures and Perceptions of Fluency in the Speech of Second Language Learners. System, 32, 145–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCaluim, A. (2007). Reversing Language Shift: The Social Identity and Role of Scottish Gaelic Learners. Belfast: Cló Ollscoil na Banríona.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacWhinney, B. (2012). The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malvern, D. D., & Richards, B. J. (1997). A New Measure of Lexical Diversity. In A. Ryan & A. Wray (Eds.), Evolving Models of Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • McEwan-Fujita, E. (2010). Ideology, Affect and Socialization in Language Shift and Revitalization: The Experiences of Adults Learning Gaelic in the Western Isles of Scotland. Language in Society, 39, 27–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, W., & O’Rourke, B. (2015). “New Speakers” of Gaelic: Perceptions of Linguistic Authenticity and Appropriateness. Applied Linguistics Review, 6, 151–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro, G., Armstrong, T. C., Mac an Tàilleir, I., Cormack, M., & McLeod, M. (2012). Sgèilichean sgilean cànain. Sleat: Sabhal Mòr Ostaig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF: Defining, Refining and Differentiating Constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30, 590–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, A., & Murray, N. L. (1996). What Raters Really Pay Attention to. In M. Milanovic & N. Saville (Eds.), Performance Testing, Cognition and Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pujolar, J., & Puigdevall, M. (2015). Linguistic Mudes: How to Become a New Speaker in Catalonia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2015, 167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purpura, J. E. (2008). Assessing Communicative Language Ability: Models and Their Components. In E. Shohamy & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. (2013). Predicting Communicative Success in L2 Task Performance: Does Adequacy Depend on Speed, Accuracy, and Linguistic Complexity? Paper presented at EuroSLA 23, University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. N. (2014). The Effects of Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency on Communicative Adequacy in Oral Task Performance. Applied Linguistics, 35, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., & Isaacs, T. (2015). Using Listener Judgments to Investigate Linguistic Influences on L2 Comprehensibility and Accentedness: A Validation and Generalization Study. Applied Linguistics, 36, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sato, T. (2012). The Contribution of Test-Takers’ Speech Content to Scores on an English Oral Proficiency Test. Language Testing, 29, 223–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2012). Complexity, Accuracy, Fluency and Lexis in Task-Based Performance: A Synthesis of the Ealing Research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency: Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Christmas, C. (2016). Family Language Policy: Maintaining an Endangered Language in the Home. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, L. (2017). Final Report: Survey of Adult Learners of Gaelic 2016. TKM Consulting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenfjord, K., Hagen, J. E., & Johansen, H. (2006). The Hows and Whys of Coding Categories (or “How and Why an Error-Tagged Learner Corpus Is Not ‘ipso facto’ One Big Comparative Fallacy”). Rivista di Psicolinguistica Applicata, 6, 93–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J., & O’Rourke, B. (2014). Becoming a New Speaker of Irish: Linguistic Mudes Throughout the Life Cycle. Digithum, 16, 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Celtic & Gaelic, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Nicola Carty

Authors
  1. Nicola Carty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    Cassie Smith-Christmas

  2. Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

    Noel P. Ó Murchadha

  3. Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

    Michael Hornsby

  4. University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    Máiréad Moriarty

Appendices

Appendix 1: Communicative Adequacy Scale

Beginner

A1

A2

 

Can produce simple statements unsupported by other arguments. The basic message is incoherent and difficult to comprehend. In order for communication to be successful, the speaker relies on the interviewer to rephrase and repair.

The text may lack coherence and cause confusion at times, but overall, the speaker can be understood. The speaker does not show exertion in routine exchanges. Can exchange simple information. Can recognise when it is appropriate to comment on interlocutors’ statements, although ability to do so may be restricted to one- or two-word oral gestures.

Intermediate

B1

B2

 

Is willing to talk at length, but support from the interviewer may be necessary to do so, and coherence may be lost. Appears confident in performance. Can actively participate in the interaction by turn-taking and commenting on the interlocutor’s statements. Taking the floor, however, may be inappropriately slow. Can link statements into a connected sequence of points. Can use a simple word meaning something similar to the concept he/she wants to convey or can describe the concept. Can ‘Gaelicise’ an English word and ask for confirmation.

Actively participates in conversation by taking initiative, turn-taking appropriately and commenting on interlocutors’ statements. Interaction is not strained for either participant and there are no breakdowns in communication resulting in misunderstanding. Can indicate significant aspects of what they are saying through emphasising strategies. Discourse is coherent, though may be slightly jumpy in longer contributions. Can use circumlocution and paraphrase to cover gaps in vocabulary and structure.

Advanced

C1

C2

 

Can relate contributions skilfully to those of the interviewer. Can produce clear, well-structured, coherent speech. Information is elaborate, complex, and well-developed. Support is not necessary and interjections can be handled well. Communication seems effortless and is spontaneous. Can comfortably speak at length. Can backtrack when he/she encounters a difficulty and reformulate what he/she wants to say without fully interrupting the flow of speech.

Can interact with ease, interweaving their own contribution into the discourse with natural turn-taking. Discourse is coherent and cohesive; the speaker makes appropriate use of a range of organisational patterns. Arguments and information are very complete, and finer shades of meaning can be expressed without leading to misunderstanding.

Appendix 2: Spearman’s Rho Results for D and CAF Measures and Communicative Adequacy

  

D

SR

MLC

% Accurate AS-units

Inaccuracies /AS-unit

MLR

PT

WPM

Communicative adequacy

rs

0.661

0.539

0.308

0.521

−0.651

0.616

0.865

0.747

p

0.005

0.031

0.246

0.038

0.006

0.011

0.000

0.001

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Carty, N. (2018). New Speakers, Potential New Speakers, and Their Experiences and Abilities in Scottish Gaelic. In: Smith-Christmas, C., Ó Murchadha, N., Hornsby, M., Moriarty, M. (eds) New Speakers of Minority Languages. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57558-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57558-6_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-57557-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-57558-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation