Upload
dane-cote
View
26
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
. 2007. INTRODUCTION. Difficulties in learning a foreign/second language range from SYNTAX, SEMANTICS, PRAGMATICS, to MORPHOLOGY and PHONOLOGY . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
INTRODUCTION
• Difficulties in learning a foreign/second language range from SYNTAX, SEMANTICS, PRAGMATICS, to MORPHOLOGY and PHONOLOGY.
• The role of correct pronunciation in learning a language has been regarded vital (Celce-Muria, 1987; Morley, 1991; Pennington, 1989; Leather, 1983)
• On the contrary, pronunciation teaching does NOT receive much attention by the practitioners due to its difficult-to-teach nature.
I agree with Arbor (1992)
SPOKEN ENGLISH
SPEECH PRODUCTION SPEECH PERFORMANCE(A focus on specific elements of pronunciation) (A focus on general elements of oral communication)
PRONUNCIATION: MICROFOCUS ORAL COMUNCATION: MACRO FOCUS
-clear, precise articulation of consonant and vowel sounds -overall clarity and precision of speech -consonant combinations both within and across word -general vocal effectiveness boundaries, elisions, assimilations, etc. -neutral vowel use, reductions, contractions, etc. -overall fluency and ongoing, planning
and structuring of “speech” as it proceeds -syllable structure, phrase groups, and linking words -overall intelligibility across word boundaries -general command and control of grammar -features of stress, rhythm, and intonation -general command of appropriate vocabulary -features of rate, volume, and vocal qualities -expressiveness of nonverbal behaviors
• Native-like pronunciation is impossible?• Accurate pronunciation is SUBSTANTIALLY
BEYOND the control of educators (Suter, 1976 and Suter & Purcell, 1980 cited in Otlowski, 1998:2)
SO, let’s just ignore pronunciation.
The Cinderella of Language Teaching (Dalton, 1997)
• Problem sounds of English;
//, //, //, //, //, and //. • Non-existing sounds should of course be
practiced.
• How about the importance of the learners’ native language?
• Turkish students have major problems with //, //, and //; //, //, and //; final // and // and // and //
Research Questions• How intelligible and successful are Turkish
learners in their production and discrimination of English /v/, judged and spoken by native and non-native speakers?
• Is there a significant success difference between native informants and Turkish students in discriminating /v/ and /w/ pairs, spoken by a native speaker?
• Is there a significant success difference between native informants and Turkish students in discriminating /v/ and /w/ pairs, spoken by Turkish speakers?
METHODOLOGY
• Subjects: 40 freshman English Language Teaching students with at least 6 years of background in learning English, and with similar levels of knowledge about English.
• Informants: 10 American speakers of English (NI).
Data Collection
• Instrument: 22 different lists of the same 20 minimal pairs of /v/ and /w/.
• List 1: the ones spoken by Turkish Student Speakers (TSS) to test 10 native informants and 20 other Turkish Student Listeners (TSL).
• List 2: spoken by a native speaker to test 10 native informants.
• List 3: spoken by a native speaker to test 20 TSLs.
IPA Transcriptions of Minimal Pairs
vest—west /-/ vet—wet /-/vary—wary /-/ vine—wine /-/vent—went /-/ veil—whale /()-()/ vile—while /()-()/ veal—wheel /()-()/verse—worse /-/vie—why /-/
vein—wane /-/viper—wiper /-/vend—wend /-/visor—wiser /-/ veered—weird /-/very—wherry /-/ vale—wail /()-()/vim—whim /-/vow—wow /-/vair—wear /-/
Data Analysis
• Descriptive statistics
80% (16 items)
• One sample t-test
• Independent t-test
Data Set 1
Native Speaker
Native Listeners Turkish Listeners
Data Set 2
Turkish Speakers
Native Listeners Turkish Listeners
FINDINGS/RESULTS• Mean scores lower than 16 and
• Percentages lower than 80%
mean that participants are either unintelligible as a speaker or unsuccessful as a listener
• NS NI 19.8 & 98%
• NS TSL 10.3 & 51.5%
• TSS NI 5.73 & 28.65%• TSS TSL 12.29 & 60.7% as listeners
11.55 & 60.82%as
speakers
Significance of the Scores
Table A Number Mean Std. Dv. t df p
Native Speakers
10 19.6 0.699
7.696 28 .000 Turkish Students
20 10.3 3.757
Table B Number Mean Std. Dv. t df p
Native Speakers
10 5.73 0.374
9.961 28 .000 Turkish Students
20 12.295 2.049
CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION
Turkish students;
• are not successful listeners (10.3)
• are not intelligible speakers (5.73)
in terms of producing and perceiving the difference between /v/ and /w/.
WHY?
• English /v/ sound DOES NOT exist as a phoneme in Turkish language.
• English /v/ sound is a labiodental, fricative and voiced consonant while
• Turkish sound is a labiodental, voiced and
Central Approximant sound, shown as //• The same alphabetical symbol, letter v. • The English sound is an allophone of // in
Turkish language, and is used when // preceded by a voiceless stop or fricative sound [//--//]
Most of the teachers and almost all students of English in Turkey are unaware of the difference between // & /v/.
“If the English sound is not clearly perceived, the brain of the learner converts it into the closest sound in their own language” Dalton (1997).
That’s why we need language-sensitive pronunciation books and/or programs.