1. 研究目的与意义（文献综述包含参考文献）

literature review

there are still a lot of researches to do concerning how linguistic complexity influences fluency in oral performance since previous studies related to fluency mainly focus on the discussion of definition and the comparative studies between accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition. therefore, we have this literature review in four parts: firstly, the classification and definition of fluency; secondly, krashen#8217;s input hypothesis; thirdly, the factors that influence fluency; finally, the empirical studies of fluency.

as to the definition of fluency, scholars have different opinions. though definitions are varied, they mainly lie in two groups: in a broad sense or in a narrow sense. definitions in a broad sense deal more with efl learners#8217; overall language using abilities regardless of qualities of their output. like brumfit (1984:42), who believes that fluency is ”the maximally effective operation of the language system so far acquired by the student”. lennoch (1990) points out that high-order fluency (fluency in a broad sense) concerns more about oral language in general. when leeson (1990; 399) distinguishes oral fluency in the narrow and broad sense, he defines the latter as ”native like rapidity”, which also emphasizes the natural flow of one#8217;s output. however, definitions in a narrow sense are closely related to efl learners#8217; language proficiency. lennoch holds the opinion that the low-order fluency (fluency in a narrow sense) deals more with the speed and smooth in spoken language. leeson (1990; 399) also defines fluency in narrow sense as ”a cover term for oral proficiency”. peter skehan (1996) insists that fluency means language learners are able to produce speech with no hesitation or pausing. fillmore (1979) defines fluency by giving four indexes on this issue: to have few pause, to utter sentences consistently, to communicate appropriately under any circumstance, and to use language with creativity and imagination. as to the classification of fluency, faerch et al (1984) divides it into three types: sounding fluency, semantic fluency and syntax-lexical fluency. faerch et al#8217;s way of classification is the most famous one and has a great influence on scholars#8217; variable-choosing. when conducting their researches, scholars like brumfit and zhang choose variables mainly from these three respects: temporal fluency, linguistic fluency and performance fluency, which coincides with faerch#8217; et al#8217;s idea of classification. in these three dimensions, sounding fluency is closely related to fluency in a broad sense. scholars like brumfit applies this concept mainly in teaching activities and zhang finds out several indexes to measure it like speaking rate, articulation rate, phonation time ratio and so on. since semantic and syntax-lexical fluency are more like fluency in a narrow sense, indexes like ratio of error-free t-units and repairs per 100 syllables are widely used in doing specific researches when studying this kind of fluency.

2. 研究的基本内容、问题解决措施及方案

methodology

this study is set out to figure out the effect of linguistic complexity on efl learners#8217; fluency in story retelling. to adhere this, three questions are listed are follows:

1. does linguistic complexity influence efl learners#8217; speaking rate (sr) in the retelling context?