No (pronunciation teaching) experience . . . REQUIRED!

Got a comment on a recent YouTube video clip: "I'll admit that I am a doubter . . . I have never tried Bill Acton's method, but in my experience . . . "

Normally, I prefer doing teacher training with those who have not had too much phonetics or have not been teaching pronunciation using an "orthodox" method for too long. (I suspect that the commenter meets neither criteria!)

I try to avoid retreating to the post-modernist's ultimate cliche of "If you aren't an X then you can't possibly know or understand an X's method"--but in this instance, I think I will. Too often, criticism of this (experiential) system is from those who have never, will not or cannot try it. There are several posts that consider valid psychological, pedagogical and neurological grounds for those responses.

Admittedly, haptic pronunciation teaching (EHIEP) is for some experiential learning in the extreme. Buy in to the system is unquestionably so. Typically, if we can get a teacher to attend a workshop--or students to do the first three modules of the system, they're sold.

We are always working on ways to truncate that process, but so far it is inescapable: You have got to do some of this stuff to get it. For "Newbees," it should be a piece of cake; others should just try to tone down "fossilized" pre-frontal chatter and let their bodies figure it out for them--first.

"Train the body first." (Arthur Lessac)

HICP, EHIEP, HICPR, HPT, IAHICPR, AH-EPS . . . and HIPOECES!

Clip art: 

Over the course of the last five years or so the acronyms we have been using, along with the theory, models and methods have evolved.
Here is a brief tour:

• HICP (Haptic-integrated Clinical Pronunciation)  – The term we use now for the general approach, especially the "clinical" side that focuses on integration into spontaneous speech and systematic,  invasive management of homework practice
• HICPR (Haptic-integrated Clinical Pronunciation Research)  – The mother blog; can also be "Haptic-integrated Clinical Pronunciation Researcher"
• HPT (Haptic pronunciation teaching) – The other blog
• EHIEP – The application of HICP to English. Each of us really has our own take on that. EHIEP doesn't require haptic video, per se. AH-EPS does. We have been training people at workshops in the non-video-based use of some of the protocols for five years or so.  
• AH-EPS (Acton Haptic - English Pronunciation System) – The haptic video system that is coming on the market now. 
• HIPOECES (Haptic-integrated Pronunciation for other- and extended circle- English Speakers) Name of the blog when it started in 2010. It made sense at the time . . .
• IAHICPR (International Association of Haptic-integrated Clinical Pronunciation Researchers). Have list of people who will become charter members of that later this fall when I kick it off officially. 
• HIC (Haptician-in-Chief) A term referring to me on occasion



Clker

• KIT (Keep in touch!) Our favorite sign off. 

KIT

EHIEP Haptic Pronunciation Workshops

Here is the basic announcement format of the courses we are beginning to offer this year in various venues. (If you'd like one in your neighbourhood, let us know.) Later this year, we'll have the online version ready as well. Keep in touch. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a 10-week, noncredit course to help nonnative speakers of English improve their pronunciation and accent. The course meets Tuesday afternoons, from 3 to 4:15, beginning January 29^th.  

Preference is given to graduate students, but any student or staff member of any level of English proficiency is invited to attend the course. Class size is limited to 24. 

If you are interested in joining the class, a brief telephone interview is required. Required textbook: Oxford Basic Dictionary of American English.

The course fee of $90 includes a student workbook and 9 basic video files.  Ideally, students should have access to a computer or smart phone for practice but that is not absolutely necessary.

·      The topics of the 10 classes are:

o   Introduction to the course

o   Warm up and dictionary orientation

o   Vowels and consonants I

o   Vowels and consonants II

o   Stressed words and phrases

o   Intonation and melody of speaking

o   Speaking fluently

o   Conversational speaking style

o   Expressiveness and pronunciation self-improvement plan

o   Public speaking style

Each week students

o   Discuss their homework at the beginning

o   Are introduced to the pronunciation topic

o   Practice the exercises with a video model and their instructor

o   Practice the pronunciation topic in a everyday conversation

o   Practice a list of words that use the pronunciation topic and are valuable for them, individually.

o   Prepare for homework

§  Students should practice their homework 3 times per week, if possible. (20 minutes each time)

§  Students may purchase optional, downloadable video and audio files for additional practice

The "Mudder" of all pronunciation programs

Image: Toughmudder.com

Have been trying to figure out what pronunciation systems or books are the big sellers for some time now. As you can imagine, those #s are not easy to get at. The plan is to evaluate some of the top programs for embodiment or "physical presence." Have done some preliminary analysis on a few of the student books from the big publishers which I will use as blog fodder later. ("Blog fodder" . . . nice term there, too.) The idea is to develop a more elaborated framework for applying principles of haptic anchoring to commercially available speaking, listening and pronunciation books. Will begin reporting on that project in a couple of weeks.

The basic EHIEP system provides the orientation to the sound system necessary and a set of techniques to use in working with it, but the point is that those "tools" are then ready to be applied to texts and vocabulary in content-based instruction--where the real pronunciation change actually "happens." With such integrated pronunciation instruction now the "flavor of the month," perhaps the day of the free-standing "Mudder of all pronunciation programs," with its wonderfully clear-cut "follow the yellow brick road" syllabus is over.

In part as a consequence, pronunciation methodology has become progressively more complex, nuanced and messier as the theoretical and pedagogical waters have muddied. Particularly for the less experienced instructor, doing pronunciation can appear to be nothing short of a very "tough mudder" at best. But it need not be. 

Mimic movement and pronunciation? Not always your cup of coffee!

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

That's right. Observed a great example of that recently at a conference. According to research by Ondobaka, de Lange, Wiemers, and Bekkering of University of Nijmegen, and Newman-Norlund of the University of South Carolina, summarized by Science Daily, it only works if your students have the same goals that you do: "If you and I both want to drink coffee, it would be good for me to synchronize my movement with yours  . . . but if you're going for a walk and I need coffee, it wouldn't make sense to be coupled on this movement level." Hmm. I can see where not being "coupled" might not facilitate a walk, but how about the impact of the same effect in pronunciation instruction, especially kinaesthetic or haptic-integrated work?

Previous blogposts have looked at a range of factors that may affect effectiveness of mirroring of pedagogical movement patterns, from personality, cognitive preferences and clutter in the visual field, to lack of achievable objectives. Orienting learners (and instructors) to why they should consistently "dance along with" the EHIEP  model on the video--or even the usual practice of mirroring videotaped conversations for fluency, is critical.

As one participant at our workshop commented, "This stuff is paradigm shifting!" (A common response, of course!)  Another participant, however, one who came in late and missed hearing the theory and "goals" of the workshop and left early, had a very different take. Later he told me apologetically--in part by his clearly unambiguous, uncoupled paralanguage over coffee--that it made "absolutely no sense, whatsoever" to him without "getting it all," up front. Q.E.D. (quod erat (non) demonstrandum), so to speak!

Navigating, resetting and remapping pronunciation change

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

When is a pronunciation "error" or mis-speak so serious that it interferes the developing L2 interlanguage model in the learner's  brain? Some early Behaviorists' models would have (and may still) predict(ed) that avoiding errors of almost any kind is critical. Contemporary theorists and methodologists see that differently, for a number of reasons. When it comes to spatial navigation "errors," (at least in rat brains) research by Valerio and Taube of Dartmouth College summarized by Science Daily suggests that there is a discernable threshold in that regard:

"When the animal makes a small error and misses the target by a little, the cells will reset to their original setting, fixing on landmarks it can identify in its landscape. "We concluded that this was an active behavioural correction process, an adjustment in performance," Taube says. "However, if the animal becomes disoriented and makes a large error in its quest for home, it will construct an entirely new cognitive map with a permanent shift in the directional firing pattern of the head direction cells." This is the "remapping.'"

In haptic-integrated work, coordination of sounds and pedagogical movement patterns is central to the methodology. Numerous blogposts have made that connection, especially as it contributes to how well learners of different cognitive preferences (e.g., visual, auditory, kinaesthetic or tactile) relate to the EHIEP system. We have repeatedly seen an effect analogous to what is described by Valerio and Taube: For some, if the visual model on the screen which learners are moving along with deviates "substantially" from their perspective from the anticipated, regular point in the visual field, they quickly become very frustrated and report that they seem to lose that "node" at least temporarily. Minor deviations, like allophonic variations are ok. 

In this case, to paraphrase Bateson, a difference that (does) make a difference--does make a difference. Rats . . . 

Confident, successful pronunciation?

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Yet another potential piece for your "Well . . . duh!" file. The term "self confidence" and "pronunciation" are commonly associated, getting over 1,000,000 hits on Google . . . For example, in this introduction to a short piece by Shelly Vernon, the website ESLBase.com begins like this: "Do you avoid teaching pronunciation in your classroom? In this article, Shelley Vernon suggests going right back to the level of the phoneme to build learners' confidence." (Bold face, mine.) Now although implying it perhaps, Vernon never actually says that explicitly in the article. I do like that point of departure, nonetheless.

In a research report, entitled "Minority Report" about to be published (with apologies to the real Minority Report, one of my favorite movies), however, one of the findings may relate to the impact of confidence "on the job" --seemingly supporting Vernon's perspective. In a Science Daily summary, Hasmath and colleagues at the University of Melbourne report " . . . a strong correlation between confidence and occupational success." There are several other tidbits included such as one referring back to earlier studies suggesting height and attractiveness may also contribute to confidence or

 " . . . that workers who described themselves as 'extroverted', 'neurotic', 'open to experiences' or 'agreeable' (standard indicators of conscientiousness) were also found to be more motivated, and doing well professionally." And then the pies de resistance: "Interestingly, members of visible ethnic minorities reported lower rates of confidence, but similar levels of conscientiousness . . . This may partially explain why their wages and rates of advancement are consistently lower than members of a non-visible ethnic minority."

Where to begin . . . psychotherapy, obedience training, elevator shoes, cosmetics or phonemes? 

In your ears!!! (Not for accurate sound discrimination!)

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Have long recommended that learners NOT use headsets when working on pedagogical movement patterns--and also go easy on that practice in general sound discrimination work. (For one thing their arms get tangled up in the cords!) Now there is an empirical study that adds a little support to that principle. As reported in Science Daily, Okamoto and Kakigi of the National Institute for Physiological Sciences, Japan, along with Pantev and Teismann from the University of Muenster, have demonstrated that listening to loud music with mini earphones may have a detrimental effect on ability to make fine judgements on sound discrimination. Although the "damage" was not detectable using standard hearing tests, the effect was striking with their more sensitive instrumentation. They termed the effect one of losing perception of "vividness" in contrast. The impact would then be even more "pronounced" with a learner that does not have good sound discrimination ability in the first place--especially one who plays his or her mp3 player at levels well beyond "vivid!" On the other hand, the learner may be cranking up the volume to compensate for lack of perceived vividness--especially men with typical loss of high frequency response with age. So, help students learn to carefully manage the volume of their recorded pronunciation practice and the rest of their mp3-ing. Sound advice. 

Advice on pronunciation teaching: What do you expect?

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

According to Warrington of Asia University, asking questions in a class discussion such as '“What do you need to learn in this class?” and “Why do you need to learn that?” offers an avenue for adult learners to express their preferences and desires about the kind of language they want to learn and how it is relevant to their lives."' Ever done that? If you have--and were satisfied that you had accomplished something--you might want to rethink that, according to research by Liu of UCSD and GAL of Northwestern. What they found was ""Stating expectations tended to make consumers focus on themselves and their own needs, and . . . (as a consequence) created a sense of distance between the participant and the organization . . . " Soliciting advice, on the other hand, " . . . tends to have an intimacy effect whereby the individual feels closer to the organization,"

So how do you achieve the right balance between setting up (often unrealistic) learner expectations and doing an effective needs analysis that serves the real needs of both you and your students? In pronunciation work that can be especially problematic because just conceptualizing what the learner's problems are is difficult enough for the instructor, let alone the learners.

If you must carry on that kind of dialogue involving pronunciation--and I generally do not recommend it--one of the better ways is to manage it in the appropriate channel: personal, pronunciation journals, not general class discussions. On the other hand, asking students for their ongoing input on how things are going and advice on how you could improve use of class time in a confidential format, based on clearly stated goals and objectives for the course,  can be enormously helpful, if done right, where expectations for that kind of openness and candor are invited and well established. So what do you expect? 

Hearts and hand grenades: Why students must like you using movement in pronunciation teaching!

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Now here is a very interesting, relevant study. According to Aziz-Zadeh and colleagues at USC, (Summarized by Science Daily, of course!) if your students like you, they will be more likely to mirror your movements more accurately--and enjoy doing it. Not only will they be able to "lock on" better, they will perceive your actions to be relatively faster than were they to like you "less." There have been studies demonstrating the impact of attitude toward the speaker on perception of message, etc. for decades, but this one demonstrates how that happens, how it affects the observer's response.

This "I like the way you move, there!" effect is, in part, behind the use of video as the "lead instructor" in EHIEP work. Learners are initially oriented to and trained in the protocols (sets of procedures that teach one or more techniques that can be used in the classroom or for independent study) in short, aerobic-training-like videos. (Currently, I am the model, but we will replace me before long!)  Getting to that strategy took over a decade of experience with training ESL/EFL teachers in how to do selected techniques themselves in front of the class. What we discovered was that most trainees could learn to do the techniques easily but the results when they took them back to the classroom were mixed, at best. Once the entire system was in place we could begin to see why a particular strategy did or did not work.

One thing became obvious: the relationship between the instrutor and learner was crucial, from several  perspectives. Having someone mirror your movements is, in many respects--as reported in previous blog posts--analogous to requiring better rapport and empathy, obviously something many students may not buy into! Ironically, why a technique didn't seem to work could be due to lack of "liking" or excessive "liking." Either one. Going in the opposite direction from the USC research, if you are "too close" to a student or students in front of you not only can it cause you to look at them too often but it can also easily disrupt your ability to execute and monitor the pedagogical movement patterns in play.

The solution: have a video model do the critical initial training--and then the instructor and students can use the PMP as necessary in presenting, correcting, monitoring and recalling a sound or word or phrase with a "repaired" sound in it. You're gonna like EHIEP (or the instructional videos your create yourself, even of yourself)--so will your students. 

The bread and butter of pronunciation use and homework: units of change and practice

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

There is virtually no systematic published research on what goes on outside of class when learners practice their L2 pronunciation assignments  or work on their own. (There was a blogpost earlier based on a study by three linguists who talked about their own self-directed pronunciation strategies and practice but the concept of what size of unit or speech string was the focus was not specifically adressed.) A very interesting study by Christiansen and Bod at Cornell, summarized by Science Daily, "How hierarchical is language use? brings into question the idea that language production relies on a seemingly multi-layered deep structure, analogous to that proposed 50 years ago by Chomsky and friends. Specifically:

" . . . language is actually based on simpler sequential structures, like clusters of beads on a string . . . What we're suggesting is that the language system deals with words by grouping them into little clumps that are then associated with meaning," he said. Sentences are made up of such word clumps, or "constructions," that are understood when arranged in a particular order. For example, the word sequence "bread and butter" might be represented as a construction, whereas the reverse sequence of words ("butter and bread") would likely not."

Any number of models of language use and instruction rely on a similar core constructs, relatively "shallow" structure and meaning "circuits" involved in moment by moment language production. EHIEP, for example, is based on the idea of using only noun and verb  phrase "length" units as vehicles of pronunciation change focus--not word-length or longer than phrase-length sequences.

Not doing enough pronunciation work? You may be doing too much . . .

Paying attention to pronunciation - II (the FBI approach)

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Following up on the previous post, it appears that a little non-attention is perfectly normal--in fact, essential. In a study by Constantino, Pinggera, Paranamana, Kashino, and Chait of the UCL Ear Institute, summarized by Science Daily, "Detection of appearing and disappearing objects in complex acoustic scenes," it is demonstrated how the brain prefers to attend to novel sounds and may often not even notice the absence of sounds in the background. That explains, in part, why an experienced instructor can often hear one "deviant" sound segment being produced by one student in a class of 30. The question is, why should we occasionally bother to stop and briefly do a choral (full-body) interdiction (FBI) for just one "problem?" By "FBI" I mean having students do the pedagogical movement pattern (PMP), which generally includes articulating the sound along a upper body movement/gesture of some kind. For the 29 who have an acceptable version of the sound already, the PMP serves to momentarily reestablish (for the required 3 seconds!) what we might call "somatic speech awareness," where sound production can generally be monitored in speaking without seriously interfering with things like . . . thinking, while at the same time, for some, defusing anxiety and promoting relaxation. And the beauty of that is, of course, you probably won't hear the that one "error" again either! 

Pronunciation teaching without repetition?

Clip art: Clker

Indeed. In a good paper in the Proceedings of the 2011 PSLLT Conference, Messum, applying his application of Gattegno's work, Teaching pronunciation without using imitation: Why and how," makes that argument persuasively. As noted in previous posts, I am a fan of Messum and Young's PronSci. The problem with their framework, as he readily concedes, is that it takes a rather radical change of approach and re-training to work within "Silent Way" methodology. That it works in some contexts is irrefutable, with over 50 years of "data" and experience to draw on.

(To repeat again!) my reservations about that approach are only that it (a) is relatively difficult and time consuming to learn to do well, that it (b) has a strong "visual-auditory" bias in basic classroom "inter-diction," and that it (c) depends on associating approximation of motor control of sounds with auditory schema, mediated by color-coded symbols. In other words, the anchoring and keys to accessing anchored sounds are essentially visual-auditory, not haptic as in EHIEP. Our experience is simply that haptic-integrated anchoring is more efficient and accessible to instructors, especially for those with little or no previous training in linguistics and pronunciation teaching.

But don't take my word for it or Messum's. Get trained in the Silent Way so you can work with it in one class and see how it works . . . and then get the complete EHIEP system of haptic videos (which will be available in late Spring 2013) and let it train you and your students in 8, 30-minute weekly segments . . . Note: Versions of many of the basic EHIEP system haptic videos are linked off the blog in earlier posts. If you are interested in seeing some recent, pre-release stuff and perhaps field testing it in your class for us, let me know (wracton@gmail.com)!

Full citation: Messum, P. (2012). Teaching pronunciation without using imitation: Why and how. In. J. Levis & K. LeVelle (Eds.). Proceedings of the 3rd Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Sept. 2011. (pp. 154-160). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.

Accurate mirroring in (haptic-integrated) pronunciation teaching

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Mirroring, having learners move along with a model, is a common technique in pronunciation teaching, especially at more advanced levels such as this by Goodwin at UCLA. There are any number of applications of the concept, for various purposes. In EHIEP work, mirroring figures in prominently from the beginning. As noted in previous posts, some highly visual learners find imprecise modelling by the speaker being mirrored to be very disconcerting. For example, one pedagogical movement pattern (PMP) involves moving the left hand across the visual field in an ascending motion as a rising intonation contour is spoken. For sometime we have been looking at the possibility of using avatars that would perform perfectly precise PMPs in new versions of the haptic videos to compensate for the fact that a human model (namely me on the current videos) cannot possibly be consistent enough to satisfy the few most radically visual learners. Research by Thomaz at Georgia State University seems to suggest that the only way to do that with robotic models--would be to build in "human-like" variability of motion into the repetitions of PMPs in training. In other words, the slight differences in the track of the gestural patterns is essential to creating a sufficiently engaging model to effectively keep subjects' attention. Rats. Better go back to figuring out both how to be more "humanly" precise in modelling PMPs and developing techniques that will assist the "visually-challenged" in loosening up a bit. Figuring out exactly what acceptable deviations from ideal PMPs are is, in principle, doable, of course. Just a matter of studio time and field testing. Keep in touch. 

Raising expectations by lowering pitch

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

At least in North American culture, lowering the pitch of one's voice has relatively predictable consequences. In the 2012 research summarized by Science Daily, summarized by Anderson at Duke, both men and women perceived female politicians with lower pitch to be stronger, more competent and trustworthy. Only males, however, perceived the lower pitch in men as a sign of strength and greater competence. Women apparently saw the lower-pitch male voices as only more trustworthy. Exactly why that happened, the researchers would not speculate, of course, but there are times when advising a student to assume a voice lower or higher in pitch does or does not make sense. The process of helping learners do that often involves haptic or kinaesthetic techniques to establish new awareness of the voice and resonance centers. It is relatively easy, in fact, using body-based procedure to achieve at least temporarily the appearance or feeling of being more confident, what a colleague terms the "Whistle a happy tune" effect. Whether you should explicitly suggest that to students as a strategy, given their respective cultures and interlanguage "identities"-- or even alter your own voice simply to achieve that effect--is another question entirely. In most cases, probably not. Generally, better that the indices of confidence emerge over time, progressively from success and integration of L2 (especially pronunciation) and self, rather than de-contextualized, affective staging. Caveat Emptor . . . 

Virtual boundaries in pronunciation instruction

Clip art: Clker

 If a picture is worth a thousand words, it appears that a virtual boundary may be even more valuable in pronunciation instruction. As reported by Science Daily, a series of research studies by Lee at Columbia, and Zhao and Soman at the University of Toronto have demonstrated that those who see themselves " . . . in-system individuals [those who perceive themselves as being inside a virtual boundary of specific types] demonstrate increased action initiation, persistence in completing tasks, and overall optimism." Those types of situational boundaries include, for example, visual markers of waiting queues, recurrent verbal messages indicating one's precise place in a system, or imagined pathways. What the research suggests is that once one moves inside the boundary, what they refer to as the "in-system boundary," either figuratively or literally, the effect can be striking.

Clip art: Clker

The parallels in pronunciation work include (a) visual schema, such as vowel charts; (b) auditory schema such as model sentences used in instruction and practice; (c) kinaesthetic schema such as range of motion of the lips, tongue and jaw in articulation; (d) tactile schema such as points where teeth touch the lips; (e) somatic schema such as vowel resonance; (f) situationally, the boundaries present in signalling a time interval identified for attention to pronunciation or focus on form, and, of course, (g) haptic-integrated schema such as EHIEP pedagogical movement patterns which terminate in touch. The key, of course, is how those boundaries are established, maintained and managed. Step outside yours for a bit and consider how they function for your students. If they are problematic, it may well be time that you get more in touch. 

Cooperative pronunciation (fluency) learning

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

For most learners, efficient pronunciation change requires having consistent opportunities to practice the new sounds socially, in "friendly" situations and groups. I learned early that in most cases small group pronunciation work is consistently superior to one-on-one tutoring, from several perspectives. New research by Rand and colleagues at Harvard on what enables effective cooperation in groups suggests something of why that might be. In essence, cooperative communication or engagement proceeds much more efficiently when participants interact or respond "intuitively" or "quickly" without undue pausing to reflect, think or plan what they are going to say. Of course, the right kind of classroom-based group conversation activities can create those conditions consistently, where learners not only can but must experiment with the new or changed forms. The key is in the task design and "community of practice" that allows both targeted usage and corresponding supportive social setting. In that environment not only can learners speak and respond spontaneously but targeted feedback by both the instructor and their classmates can be experienced as absolutely appropriate. The bottom line here: Don't even think about not doing it in your work . . . 

Scattergun2: Integrated vs haptic-integrated pronunciation instruction

I am really getting into this "scattergun" metaphor lately . . .

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

A recent blogpost, "Scattergun . . . " revisited the idea of what it means to be systematic in integrating pronunciation instruction. Here is a link to a solid, 2007 Independent Study by Bradly-Bennett, a Colorado consultant, apparently designed for those who have no background in pronunciation teaching. (There are even a few nice "visual/physical" recommendations included!) One of the "uses" of the course is defined as: "After reading the Introduction and Theory continue to Best Practices, where you will find descriptions of strategies and techniques you can use in your own classroom, using your own core curricula, to improve the oral production of your students." That is, from the standpoint of most methodologists today, an almost perfect "recipe" for integrating pronunciation instruction. The key notion there is beginning with the "core curriculum" and then inserting procedures wherever the content, activities or potential targets of opportunity allow. That is certainly a step in the right direction, of course, but what experience shows us that that approach tends to result in numerous "mini-presentations and exercises" with relatively little follow up, whether in homework or later, related "inter-dictions" by the instructor or learners (See Baker, 2011, for example.)  So what is the answer? Haptic-integrated systematic integration! (You saw that coming, eh!) The EHIEP approach is based on the idea of all students doing the same set of (8, 20-minute) scaffolded instructional videos, either in class or out of class, which take them through the set of principles and techniques that instructors MUST make use of in class on an ongoing basis in integrating and dealing with pronunciation issues at any moment in the instructional process. That is not to say that the EHIEP system is the only way to do that . . . just the best! What that does, however,  in a sense, is bring back the idea of the learner needing to have a good sense of how it all fits together and what to do about it, not all that different, in principle, from Gilbert's well-known "Pronunciation Pyramid." (Which I highly recommend, by the way!) Gilbert's approach is essentially the same as that of Bradley-Bennett (acknowledged clearly as a matter of fact.) Gilbert does the presentational/practice side of things well but does not, for very principled reasons, "dictate" a clear order of march or provide much corresponding direction on moment-by-moment "interdictions." We can do that; we must. Keep in touch. 

Teach rhythm before pronunciation, Baby!

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: CLker

Think that it is time we extracted "rhythm" from the concept of "pronunciation."  Whenever pronunciation priorities  are mentioned, the usual follow on is "rhythm, stress and intonation--and segmentals, of course." Now why "rhythm" should appear first has only to do with certain phonaesthetic and phonotactic rules of English, certainly not based on real practices in the field. Were that the case, the order would probably be more like: stress, intonation, segmentals--and rhythm, if at all. According to new research by Zentner and Eerola, reported by Science Daily, babies, it turns out, have it right, however: " . . . that infants respond to the rhythm and tempo of music and find it more engaging than speech . . ." and " . . . the better the children were able to synchronize their movements with the music the more they smiled." Will one of us please do a study on how rhythm is taught in pronunciation work and language teaching in general? There are, of course, any number of systems that foreground rhythm to varying degrees, especially in working with children, but few with adults, other than recommendations for doing songs, jazz chants, poetry, etc., occasionally--and procedures that focus on analysis of rhythm grouping and listening activities to identify rhythm grouping in speech (all very valuable contributions, nonetheless.) But the idea of systematically establishing rhythm up front first is, for the most part, absent--with a few obvious exceptions such as Chela-florez 1997--one of my very favorites, by the way, which almost gets there but stops short of providing an easily adoptable system of kinaesthetic or haptic anchoring. (I won't bother mentioning how the EHIEP system attempts to do it right . . . ) Just the idea of starting out each pronunciation "inter-diction" (doing a quick, impromptu pronunciation focus during speaking instruction for correction or modelling or anchoring, for example) by doing a little taiko-drum-accompanied dance work would at least be enough to make students smile apparently . . . 

Scattergunning: A-systematic pronunciation instruction

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Nice set of slides from Derwing's plenary: What should L2 learners be able to expect from their language classrooms? A research perspective. from Pronunciation Symposium at the recent ACTA conference. The current case from a research perspective for what should be the focus of pronunciation-related instruction is (as usual) well articulated. The last two slides are worth the tour through the other 62: Moving from ~ Moving to. One in particular: (Move to) "Focus mainly on problems likely to interfere with communication--as opposed to "Scattergun pedagogy, giving everything equal importance." Interesting. The idea that limited, highly selective attention to problematic targets of intelligibility is the optimal approach in integrated pronunciation instruction needs to be (re)examined carefully. One of the "casualties" of current thinking on achieving greater intelligibility for learners is disregard for the systematic nature of speech production. For example, just because final devoicing of word endings seems to be the presenting problem does not mean that rhythm, stress and intonation can be neglected--in part because re-integration of change seems to depend critically on prosodic involvement. Likewise, orienting learners briefly to "problems that they don't have" may have any number of tangible benefits, from general awareness of the sound system and "healthy" vocal production to affirmations of "Hey, I can do that!" A little integrated pronunciation "scattergunning" may not be a bad thing after all . . .  Much more on this topic later!