eesti teaduste
akadeemia kirjastus
SINCE 1997
TRAMES cover
TRAMES. A Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences
ISSN 1736-7514 (Electronic)
ISSN 1406-0922 (Print)
Impact Factor (2020): 0.5


Full article in PDF format | DOI: 10.3176/tr.2010.2.02

Hille Pajupuu, Krista Kerge, Lya Meister, Eva Liina Asu, Pilvi Alp

One of the problems in testing the proficiency of Estonian as a first or second language is that high-stake exams are assessed against the standards of the written language. Given this, we set out to describe the features of the actual use of educated language in different types of text. The goal was to develop L1 and L2 teaching and testing through models of educated language use which a language learner can approach step by step. To achieve this goal we compared the following features of educated use of Estonian as L1 and L2 in different situations: (1) lexical richness and vocabulary range; (2) con­textuality and formality of the text; (3) syntactic complicacy; (4) temporal charac­teristics of the dialogue; (5) strength and disruptiveness of the foreign accent; (6) sentence intonation. The results show that educated language use is mainly genre-dependent. This moves the focus of language learning onto texts of specific genres and confirms the suitability of an action-based approach centred on genres in L1 and L2 teaching and testing, and the need for regular assessor training.

Asu, Eva Liina (2006) “Rising intonation in Estonian: an analysis of map task dialogues and spontaneous conversations”. Fonetiikan Päivät 2006 / The Phonetics Symposium 2006. Helsinki University, 1–8.

Boersma, Paul and David Weenink (2006) Praat: doing phonetics by computer(Version 4.5.08). Computer program. (3.01.2007).

Bonk, William J. and Gary J. Ockey (2003) “A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task”. Language Testing 20, 1, 89–110.

CEFR = Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assess­ment. (2001). Strasbourg: Council of Europe; Cambridge University Press. [Internet document available at] (12.12.2009)

Chafe, Wallace and Deborah Tannen (1987) “The relation between written and spoken language”. Annual Review of Anthropology 163, 83–407.

Dewaele, Jean-Marc and Aneta Pavlenko (2003) “Productivity and lexical diversity in native and non-native speech: a study of cross-cultural effects”. In Effects of the second language on the first, 120–141. (Second Language Aacquisition.) Vivian Cook, ed. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.

Eckes, Thomas (2008) “Rater types in writing performance assessments: a classification approach to rater variability” . Language Testing 25, 2, 155–185.

Griffen, Toby D. (1991) “A nonsegmental approach to the teaching of pronunciation”. In Teaching English pronunciation: a book of readings, 178–190. Adam Brown, ed., London: Routledge. (Reprinted from Revue de Phonétique Appliquée 54, 81–94, 1980)

Heylighen, Francis and Jean-Marc Dewaele (2002) “Variation in the contextuality of language: an empirical measure”. Foundations of Science 7, 293–340.

Jarvis, S. (2002) “Short texts, best-fitting curves and new measures of lexical diversity”. Language Testing 19, 1, 57–84.

Kaalep, Heiki-Jaan and Kadri Muischnek (2002) Eesti kirjakeele sagedussõnastik. [Frequency dictionary of standard Estonian.] Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.

Keevallik, Leelo (2003) “Terminally rising pitch contours of response tokens in Estonian”. Cross­roads of Language, Interaction, and Culture 5, 49–65.

Kerge, Krista (2003) “Keele variatiivsus ja mine-tuletus allkeelte süntaktilise keerukuse tegurina”. [Language variation and mine-derivation as a factor of sublanguage syntactic complexity.] (Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikooli humanitaarteaduste dissertatsioonid, 10.) Tallinn: Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikooli Kirjastus.

Kerge, Krista (2008) Vilunud keelekasutaja. C1-taseme eesti keele oskus.[Proficient user. C1-level proficiency of Estonian.]Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.

Laufer, B. (2005) “Lexical frequency profiles: from Monte Carlo to the Real World: a response to Meare”. Applied Linguistics 26, 4, 582–588.

Little, Dave (2005) “The common European framework and the European language portfolio: involving learners and their judgements in the assessment process”. Language Testing 22, 3, 321–336.

Lumley, Tom and Tim F. McNamara (1995) “Rater characteristics and Rater bias: implications for training”. Language Testing 12, 1, 54–71.

Magen, Harriet S. (1998) “The perception of foreign accented speech”. Journal of Phonetics 26, 381–400.

Meister, Lya (2006) “Assessment of the degree of foreign accent: a pilot study”. In Fonetiikan päivät 2006 = The phonetics symposium 2006. Reijo Aulanko, Leena Wahlbergand Martti Vainio, eds., University of Helsinki 30.–31.8.2006, 113–119. (Publications of the Department of Speech Sciences, University of Helsinki, 53.) Helsinki.

Meister, Lya and Einar Meister (2007) “Perceptual assessment of Russian-accented Estonian”. In ICPhS XVI: proceedings of the 16th international congress of phonetic sciences, 6–10 August 2007, Saarbrücken Germany, 1717–1720. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes.

Munro, Murray J. and M. Derwing Tracey (1999) “Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners”. Language Learning 49, Supplement 1, 285–310.

Odé, Cecilia (2008) “Communicative functions and prosodic labelling of three Russian rising pitch accents”. In Evidence and counter-evidence: essays in honour of Frederik Kortlandt, Vol.1: Balto-Slavic and Indo-European linguistics, 377–401. (Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics, 32.) Alexander Lubotsky, Jos Schaeken, and Jeroen Wiedenhof, eds. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Orr, Michael (2002) “The FCE speaking test: using Rater reports to help interpret test scores”. System 30, 2, 143–154.

Pajupuu, Hille (1995) Cultural context, dialogue, time. Tallinn: EAS. Institute of the Estonian Language. (01.11.2009).

Ratcliff, Ann, Sue Coughlin, and Mark Lehman (2002) “Factors influencing ratings of speech naturalness in augmentative and alternative communication”. AAC: Augmentative & Alternative Communication 18, 11–19.

Read, John and Carol A. Chapelle (2001) “A framework for second language vocabulary assess­ment”. Language Testing 18, 1, 1–32.

Scott, Michael (1996) WordSmith Tools 3.0. Oxford: OUP.

Stamatatos, Efstathios, Nikos Fakotakis, and George Kokkinakis (2000) “Automatic text categoriza­tion in terms of genre and author”. Computational Linguistics 26, 4, 471–495.

ten Bosch, Louis, Nelleke Oostdijk, and Lou Boves (2005) “On temporal aspects of turn taking in conversational dialogues”. Speech Communication 47, 80–86.

Vermeer, Anne (2000) “Coming to grips with lexical richness in spontaneous speech data”. Language Testing 17, 1, 65–83.

Verzani, John (2004). Using R for introductory statistics. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman Hall and CRC Press.

Wennerstrom, Ann (2001) The music of everyday speech prosody and discourse analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Back to Issue