The "music" of pronunciation teaching: Just "duet!"

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

It would be difficult to find anyone who does not support the use of music in language teaching, for any number of reasons. For the most part the rationales are common sense and intuitive--and backed by generations of validating classroom and extra-classroom experience. But here is a study by Lindenberger and colleagues at the Max Planck Institute (reported by Science Daily) that goes the other direction, examining the synchronous brain activity that is evident in "making music together," in this case two guitarists playing a duet, connected up to fMRI technology (including the usual bathing caps with dozens of wires attached!)

There are similar studies of "duets" of conversationalists, lovers, mothers and infants and others, which show coordination or mirroring of minds and brains. Likewise, studies of empathy show analogous "sync-ing" in between participants. (In EHIEP work, there is extensive mirroring, complementary background music and use of music in supporting rhythmic practice.) Can you imagine a more effective occasion for anchoring of new or changed pronunciation than when instructor and learner are locked in (neurophysiologically and pedagogically appropriate) synchronized dance from across the room--making music together? That is music to more than the ears--and not a bad place to begin in understanding when instruction enables uptake and when it doesn't. Take note . . . and your mp3 player. 

The scent of pronunciation work: what you don't know can help you!

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Previous posts have looked at the potential impact of olfaction on pronunciation instruction. A new study by de Groot, Smeets, Kaldewaij, Duijndam, Semin of the University of Utrecht, summarized by Science Daily, looked at the role of scent in signalling emotion. One conclusion: "The findings provide support for the embodied social-communication model, suggesting that chemosignals act as a medium through which people can be 'emotionally synchronized' outside of conscious awareness." Basically, subjects reactions were recorded as they sniffed sweat collected earlier  from people in various states of stress. Not surprisingly, as we all know from lived experience, body odor communicates, often quite unambiguously.

So what? Apparently, if a student is stressed, fearful or threatened that can covertly contaminate the lesson with the same emotional unease. Is that important? Research on multiple modality learning would suggest that it certainly can be. Can that be mediated with "de-stressing" exercises and techniques? (Check with your local "Affective" colleague!) To some extent, yes, but a more practical solution at this point may be to just mask it.

Also as noted earlier, I have experimented with mixed success over the years with a number of room scents or hand creams. Some students, of course, know how to use chemo-signals, such as perfumes and pheromones, very effectively! This research reaffirms the concept that aspects of embodied social communication which function generally outside of conscious awareness such as body motion and scent . . . are certainly nothing to sneeze or sniff at . . .  

The music of haptic pronunciation teaching

Clip art: Clker

The research on the impact of music on exercise is extensive. (The empirical evidence as to how music may influence general verbal learning, at least in laboratory studies, is not as clear cut, however.) A nice downloadable summary article by Foster, Pocari and Anders on the ACE.org website cites one well known researcher in the field as follows:

Clip art: Clker

"Over the past 20 years of research, Karageorghis (London’s Brunel University School of Sport and Education) has identified three primary things about music that could possibly influence exercise performance: 1) the tendency to move in time with synchronous sounds (e.g., tapping your toe in time with music or the beat of a drum); 2) the tendency of music to increase arousal (e.g., the desire to move rather than to sit); and 3) the tendency for music to distract the exerciser from discomfort that might be related to exercise."

In developing the EHIEP system over the years I have used music from various perspectives. Recent research I have reviewed, such as that noted above, has convinced me to go back to a more systematic use of both background and movement-synchronized tracks with most of the training. One problem has been either creating or finding commercially available tracks that fit both the mood and time structure of the instruction. Now have that figured out. Am creating new (garage band-like) tracks to accompany all videos. In some cases, you can still use pop, country or rock songs, or at least the performance track without lyrics.  By popular demand--and just to give you a sense of the "mood" of the practice videos, here a few links that "work": Warm up, Matrix anchoring, Vowels (review only), TaiChi fluency, and Conversational Rhythm Fight Club.

Better looking pronunciation of L2 English vowels

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

 Have done many blogposts that review research related to the nature of the visual field. Most accord with Casasanto of the University of Pennsylvania's comment that "Up equals good, happy, optimistic; down the opposite. Right is honest and trustworthy. Left, not so much. That's what language and culture tell us." Other research uses the parallel terms: bright~dark~hot~cool or external~internal~change~stability.

In EHIEP the standard vowel chart used in pronunciation teaching (based on the IPA system) is flipped around so that the front vowels are in the right visual field and the back vowels are in the left visual field. That was done, in part, based on marketing research that demonstrated that the phonaesthetic character of vowels fits much better with the right to left presentation, that is the "hot" vowels are the front vowels (and consequently should be in the right visual field, etc.)

Casasanto's research seems to shed new "light" on why we represent the visual field with such spatial metaphors. According to Casasanto,  given two identical objects or people, standing side by side, right handers tend to judge the one to the right more positively--and left handers tend to favor the one on the left. And furthermore, using techniques that change the felt sense of fluency in the "other" hand, a subject's response can be altered to become more positive (or negative). In other words, to some degree, the "body" dictates our immediate evaluation of both phenomena in the visual field and in our value system itself. And furthermore, ". . . those linguistic tropes? They probably enshrine the preferences of the right-handed majority." Interesting.

Perhaps we could set about retraining the roughly 10~15% of our students to feel more like right handers. Or we could do the same for the 85-90% of the right handers to get the "right" felt sense from the standard left to right IPA vowel chart. Have new sympathy, by the way, for left handers who have difficulty with the system--and for right handers who find learning (left to right) phonetics such an ordeal.

The two fluency-based pedagogical movement patterns of EHIEP (one resembling TaiChi; the other, boxing) probably work to create some balance between left and right. But, clearly it is time to figure out how to "give the other 15% more of a hand" as well! 

Speaking of pronunciation: We get no respect!

 Have talked about this before, but, obviously, it deserves a little more attention!

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

About a decade ago, at the TESOL conference in Long Beach, we had something of a talent show. The topic of the 12-bar blues that I wrote for that evening was the lack of respect afforded the syllable in pronunciation teaching at the time. (Actually, that hasn't changed much since!) Of course there is nothing quite as effective in making you feel better about most anything than singing the blues about it. Turns out there is now empirical evidence that that works--and how! Two studies reported in Science Daily confirm that if you just talk it out, even in the most negative of terms, it'll make you feel better about it, whatever it is. (Granted that may be yet another candidate for the "Well . . . duh!" file.) Anyway, if you want to feel better about your syllables or the fact that we "Pronunciattis" just get no respect, here's an excerpt from  the song: (If you need the other 8 verses to get all the way to feel good, email me!) 

The Syllablues

Oh, I am just a syllable
But I got this vowel in my heart. (2x)‏
Sometimes there’s a consonant
Or even a glide at the start.

Oh but suprasegmentally, you say
I become something else. (2x)‏
Not just a crummy syllable
I can be myself.

Yeah, sometimes I do get stressed, Honey,
Sometimes I don’t. (2x)‏
But when I do, Teacher
Just swish you’d take note.

Yes, my timing as a syllable
Could be more lonely and blue (2x)
If my speech stream wasn’t filled with so many . . . hot
Discourse processes like you.

Vivid, emotionally-enhanced pronunciation instruction?

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Here's another one for the "Well-duh . . . " file. Researchers at the University of Toronto have just: " . . . discovered that we see things that are emotionally arousing with greater clarity than those that are more mundane," Furthermore, " . . . how vividly we perceive something in the first place predicts how vividly we will remember it later on . . . " They even have a term for it: emotionally enhanced vividness. There is a new acronym for us: Emotionally-enhanced, vivid pronunciation! (EVP) That topic has been addressed on the blog from several different perspectives. Now we have "empirical" evidence. Wow. Actually, there is something there worth mention, the use of the word "clarity" in that context--as long as you keep the terms "arousing" and "clarity" together. In other words, conceptual clarity must always be coupled with controlled emotional engagement--and even enthusiasm! Research has also repeatedly established that arousal, by itself, can also serve just as well to encode in memory all sorts of baggage that later interferes with efficient recall of specific targets in instruction--or life, in general. Emotion and attention management are key to our work, and pronunciation instruction, in general. For more memorable (and arousing!) lessons, try a little more (haptic-integrated) EVP.

Hehehe! (De-stressing with high front tense vowels!)

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

This should be enough to make you smile--or at least make your students smile . . . 2009 research by Kraft and Pressman, reported by Psychological Science, appears to demonstrate that even faking a smile can be de-stressing. In pronunciation work we often tell students to smile as they pronounce high, front tense vowels, like in "Hehehe!" or when attempting to make the distinction between 's' (as in see) and 'sh' (as in she), slightly rounding the lips on the latter. I'm not saying that that is the best way to fix and s/sh problem necessarily, but sometimes it is helpful. I have also used something similar when working on word-final velar nasals, as in 'ing'. In effect just activating the muscles of the face to look and feel like a smile "orders" the brain to feel better, less stressed, physiologically. For the native speaker, we generally think of facial expression as being driven by attitude or "feelings." For nonnative speakers--and actors--it often happens in the opposite direction, taking on the paralanguage of the other results (if only temporarily) in changes in attitude and personna. Even if you don't believe that is the case, at least smile when you say it. 

A "critical hypersensitivity period" for pronunciation learning?

This may fall into the "Well, duh . . . " category of research findings. According to Steinberg of Temple University, Summarized by Science Daily, teenagers develop intellectually well before they do emotionally, experiencing an extended period of "hypersensitivity to immediate rewards," especially when hanging out with friends. Ya think? Actually, that is worth considering a bit in relation to pronunciation work, especially haptic-integrated pronunciation work. A couple of decades ago, the idea of the "critical period" in language learning, ending roughly with puberty, was seen as giving children an enormous advantage over adults. Subsequent research has very much moderated that view; adults learn in different ways but are still capable, given appropriate conditions, of very effective learning, even of sound systems. (It is interesting that most studies compared children with adults, not children with teenagers, nonetheless.) The Steinberg analysis suggests something of what the difference is, especially to the extent that emotional engagement--and management is critical to language learning. The same principle is very evident in haptic-integrated pronunciation work, as noted in previous posts: when movement and touch are involved, any affective or visual distraction from the target of instruction during the process of anchoring can be enormously disruptive. That is one of the reasons that the EHIEP system is carefully designed to avoid over-emotional responses and "dramatic" gesture and dialogue. Should you, too, constrain your use of highly enthusiastic, pronounced, motivational, over-the-top, out-of-control "cheer leading" and nervous giggling? Need to be a little more "hypersensitive-sensitive?"