(Haptic) Marking for better pronunciation: Going through the motions

If you are a dancer, you'll get this one! Dance instruction and the dance "mind set" have long been two of my favourite analogues to pronunciation work. According to Warburton, Wilson, Lynch and Cuykendall of University of California, Santa Cruz, reported by Science Daily, the "conflict between the cognitive and physical aspects of dance practice" is central to highly artistic performance. A new study suggests an intriguing remedy: dance marking (where the routine was done in slow or slower motion) " . . . essentially . . . a run-through of the dance routine, but with a focus on the routine itself, rather than making the perfect movements." (emphasis, mine.) 

Clip art: Clker

Furthermore, according to the researchers, "Smaller scale movement systems with low energetic costs such as speech, sign language, and gestures may likewise accrue cognitive benefits, as might be the case in learning new multisyllabic vocabulary or working on one's accent in a foreign language."

Previous posts have reported similar "marking" systems by "power learning" practitioners,  athletes, actors and weightlifters. In haptic pronunciation work, "marking" is done by using movement and touch to in some sense rehearse and anchor any aspect of the pronunciation. To get an idea of how this works, get a copy of the Guide to AH-EPS, which is part of the Instructor's Package. (See the GETONIC tag at the top of the right hand column.) Another way to get one is to join IAHICPR for a year and I'll send you a PDF copy, free!

Marking the territory: What wolves can teach us about integrated anchoring and learning of L2 pronunciation

Clip art:
Clker

There are many who report using haptic anchoring in teaching pronunciation, techniques such as clapping hands, stomping feet, tapping on the desk or pulling at rubber bands-- coordinated with stressed words or rhythm groups in speaking. Such "marking of the territory" does certainly help to reinforce the goal of the activity, but it is not "haptic-integrated," in the sense that we use it here.

In the 2003 study of the marking behavior of wolves in Poland, by Zub, Theuerkauf, Jędrzejewski, Jędrzejewska, Schmidt and Kowalczyk, an elaborate system was revealed such that each incidence of territorial marking could only be interpreted by considering three parameters simultaneously: (a) significance, (b) variability, and (c) relationship to other marking(s). In other words, the efficacy and meaning of the "mark" was dependent entirely upon its relative place in an integrated, multi-dimensional map of the territory.

In the same sense, haptic anchoring of new pronunciation only contributes effectively when it is thoroughly integrated into speaking, listening, reading or writing tasks. If it is experienced outside of meaningful discourse, narrative and task sequencing, as traditional, isolated pronunciation exercises inserted in the midst of a lesson--no matter how vividly or dramatically the haptic anchoring is executed, chances are it will not be all that different or memorable in principle than when the wolves, themselves, employ the same marking "technology" for other, more mundane functions in the Bialowieza woods . . .