Touching English Language Teaching . . . Using Touch!

If you are going to be at the BCTEAL 2023 Conference on May 6th (at 11 a.m.) at the University of British Columbia, please join me in a 1-hour workshop, "Embodied touch in teaching and touching students (metaphorically!)" Here is the program summary:

This workshop reviews neuroscience-based research related to the impact touch in English language teaching, both physical/tactile touch and touch as metaphor (emotion and affect). Following that overview, participants explore the application of those principles in several areas, including enhancing memory for meaning and vocabulary, expressiveness and pronunciation teaching.

Here also is a nice excerpt from S Subramanian's 2021 book, How to feel: the science and meaning of touch, that represents the focus of the session well:

"We live in bodies that are most alive when they're open and permeable to what is around us . . . When the handrail wobbles, we know to exercise caution in the face of potential danger; a hug from a family member conveys love and comfort; the cool caress of a silk blouse is synonymous with luxury; plunging our fingers into damp earth to plant a seed makes us feel in tune with nature . . . Touch is a constant affirmation that we exist as selves, separate from our surroundings but connected to them."

Loofa, bark, hand cream and metaphor provided . . .

Pronunciation teaching not your cup of tea? It may be your metaphor or M-Cat!

Clipart:

Neuroscientist, Glaser, of King's College, as reported in the Guardian, may just have the "answer": adjust your metaphors! For example, if your students are not as friendly or malleable as they should be, have them all hold a cup of warm tea for a bit. (Caveat emptor: The following is serious fun!) In one study:

"Those holding hot drinks were also more likely to be generous, and less likely to display behaviour thought of as selfish. This is due to the strong linguistic and metaphorical links created in the brain by repeatedly using the words ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ to describe personalities."

"This is due . . . " Wow. That is a bit of a stretch, of course, but he is getting warm . . . Pretty strong claim there, that it is the specific use of such adjectives alone that generates the visceral, affective response. Without digging too deeply into the evidence (which he doesn't, in fact), just hold your warm latte in both hands and read on. 

I've reported earlier on the blog similar research "linking" the metaphorical and somatic/tactile link between words such as "rough" or "coarse", for example, and how the brain seems to interpret those in a way very similar to when one actually touches a surface possessing that tactile quality.

Similar studies connect language and olfaction (smell/aroma therapy), e.g. That argument stinks! Likewise, beginning with work such as Metaphors we live by,  Lakoff and Johnson (2003), and continuing more recently in language teaching, e.g.,  Holme (2004) Mind, Metaphor and Language Teaching, in a very real sense, anything in the classroom is in principle, amenable to intentional (metaphorical) design and adjustment.

In the past, asking students to hold something random to affect their perception of something else was seen as pretty far out--objectionable to the point of unconscious manipulation. But today, with both research on the impact of placibos and pop-neuroscience that encourages a wide range of conscious adjustment of perception, it is a different "ball game"! (I make extensive use of balls in pronunciation teaching.) But first we need to ferret out all the classroom behaviors that are potentially working against us!

What we might term "meta-cup-a-tea" (M-Cat), that is the sensation evoked by touch or physical contact and presence is a variable in all instruction, including pronunciation. In general pronunciation instruction M-Cat may rarely be attended to consciously, but in haptic pronunciation instruction (HaPT) it can be critical, since it can divert awareness away from pronunciation-focused touch-based techniques. (For more on that see this!) In L2 work, however, cultural "misinterpretation" of in-class touching can of course go almost anyplace imaginable.

So let's just look at a few traditional pronunciation teaching "tactile experiences" (other than what goes on in the mouth or what is involved in HaPT) for their potential "Meta-cup-a-tea" contribution (or lack of contribution) to instruction. Listed below are some of my students' best M-Cats. On the face of it many of these are done to reinforce or correlate with a targeted sound or pattern. In practice, it is not at all clear what if any connectedness is realized, nonetheless. In many cases the "contact" or pressure can be counterproductive, interfering or distracting attention--but still fun:

Clker.com

• blowing air on tissue paper or hands: X is mostly hot air, germ dispersing 
• touching the face: X is untrained; has not taken course in public speaking
• clapping or tapping hands: X is attention-deprived
• stretching rubber bands: X is all thumbs, overextended
• snapping fingers: X impulsive, too much math, phonetics or syntax
• overly precise hand writing: X is scary or boring or compulsive
• hands holding things that are not warm: X is cold, unfeeling
• spinning pencils: X is neurotic, not from this culture, not a native speaker!
• fingers on smart phones, especially when multi-tasking: X is "situ-phrenic"
• hands excessively on books, notebooks: X is bookish, introvert, anachronist, dead-tree-ite
• hands excessively on body parts: X has pronounced problem
• hand or marker moving on iPad or white/smart board: X is hip, maybe even creative
• going through practice cards: X is a dealer
• caressing keyboard or mouse: X is geek-ish, L2-a-phobe, possibly closet rat
• glutes on chair: X is sedentary, butt stable
• sitting on chair in language lab: X is antisocial, isolationist
• full body on bed: X is seriously sedentary, probable "sound-nambulant"
• earphones on/in ears: X is audio-phont, "ear-y" at best
• chewing, eating, drinking: X is hypoglycemic or language hungry
• continually wiping finger prints off iPhone screen: dys-Appled, but possibly good follower
• head scratching: lice, itching to learn, excessive meta-cognition in process

Got any more good M-Cats? Post'em and I'll add them to the list.

Pronunciation change anxiety? Check your analogy!

Clip art: Clker

As explored in an earlier blogpost, golf may be one of the best analogies for the process of pronunciation learning, especially the relationship between skill development and "competence" on the course under pressure. There is a mind-boggling array of techniques and mental tricks to keep the golfer in the game, "mindful," as noted in another recent post. In studying why professional athletes "choke," exploring the effect of, for example, paying too much attention to mechanics momentarily--and how they manage not to, researchers were surprised to find a common strategy: analogies. Who'd of thought . . .

Here is one they suggest: "For example, a golfer who grips the club too tight when she's nervous might benefit from an instruction like 'Imagine you have an open tube of toothpaste between your hands and the contents must not be pushed out.' This would both address the problem and get her attention away from how well she's doing."

Wow! I never thought of that. We clearly need some good haptic analogies like that one. Do you have any? Well . . . how about: Imagine you have an open tube of grey poupon in your hand and the contents must be pushed out gently on your stressed syllables as you talk to your boss, telling him that he is a real jerk and you quit! See if you can squeeze or "sandwich" that one in sometime!

Sticky, persistent, integrated pronunciation change

Disintegration of Persistence
of Memory by S. Dali:
Credit: Wikipedia

A favorite image or visual metaphor of mine for the current state of pronunciation teaching, especially understanding of how to make change "stick" is Dali's "Disintegration of Persistence of Memory." Although the 1954 painting probably relates a little better to the evolving mind and memory of modern man than getting learners to integrate repaired or new pronunciation, the existential issue is the same: flooded with information, insight and other random "edutainments," how can we remember anything? Better yet, with virtual memory in the "clouds" all around us now, why bother?

Several aspects of pronunciation change still require decidedly "pre-modern" kinaesthetic engagement to stick efficiently, where the potentially neurotic, "self talk" interference is at least temporarily absent--what a recent post referred to as "mindfulness" focusing on just one objective: anchoring in memory, or in HICP terms, haptic anchoring. In yesterday's workshop, in response to the question: "What makes pronunciation change stick?",  the suggestions from the audience ranged from "context" to "real communication" to "opportunities for usage" to "collocation" to "paradigm-relation" (similar form) to "comprehensible input" to "personal relevance."

What was not mentioned is most revealing: saying the word or phrase out loud for practice or some kind of somatic "felt sense" of the sound(s), the basis of HICP work. It is as if much of the basic understanding of how pronunciation was to be integrated or "drilled in" of only a couple of decades ago has been lost. Stick with us. Memory persists here . . .

Pronunciation of "w" - a colorful green EYE-dea that sweeps curiously

With apologies to Chomsky, previous posts have explored the potential "hexus," or connections between the perceptual and neurophysiological nature of the visual field, the color spectrum and the phonaesthetic qualities of the English vowel system. (In addition to the metaphorical visual "space" used by various philosophical and other more down-to-earth conceptual systems.)

Clip art:
Clker

Clip art:
Clker

We have known for some time that the pedagogical movement pattern (PMP) for the English glide, 'w,' produces a momentary green hue in the center of the visual field. (Try this: Imagine a 6 inches in diameter, about 3 inches in front of your face, centered on your nose. Beginning at 11 o'clock, trace that circle with you right forefinger with both eyes fixed upon it, at moderate speed.) The PMP for 'w' begins with a semi-circle in that area as the sound is articulated. Actually the PMP begins in the green quadrant (NW) and ends in the blue (SW) or sweeps back up to NW.

Exactly why that happens is not entirely clear but obviously the circuits between the red and green sensors in the eyes are getting entangled. (Here is a summary of how the eyes process color, in general, that suggests something of what is probably involved.) As a student once remarked, it creates a temporary, rat-like worldview. That PMP, by the way, is a great quick fix for a learner who cannot do a word-initial 'w' as in "wood." The word, woo, even has that PMP on both ends! In HICP/EHIEP, even going around in (curious, colorful, green) circles can be productive . . .

Coloring (haptic-integrated) English vowels

There are traditions and analogous studies related to synaesthesia and vowel symbolism that link colors with vowel quality, both neurophysiologically and metaphorically. How about if were were to combine some of those frameworks, identifying vowel positioning in the visual field with their relative intensity, energy and hue, roughly speaking: high-front=yellow, mid-front=orange, high & mid-back=green, low central and back=blue, and schwa=dark gray. It might look something like this: We linked this 2007 study by Lowrey and Schrum last year in an earlier post on the phonaesthetics of English vowels. (with "gray-ground," of course!) 

In HICP we use something similar, except typically "coloring" only stressed vowels in words and/or phrases and altering hues as appropriate. (The coloring of the previous sentences uses only basic colors.) There are many different pedagogical systems that use colors mnemonically to connect to vowels, such as blue, red, green, etc., to help students remember vowels. One of those three, "red" colored red, actually does, in fact, match the HICP framework, using the intense red/orange for the mid-front (relatively vibrant) vowel felt sense in (at least) some dialects of English, including my own! (Note: This is a pedagogical system that has developed and been tested in the classroom, primarily.) 

The connections to research are intriguing but not the "prime mover" in what has evolved in the last year.) Forgive the vocal singing performance pun, but what your vowel teaching may need is just a little "color-a-tour-a!"

Selecting a "sound" haptic anchor

So if you were trying to find a good anchor, you'd go to a "Pro," right? Having looked to fishing for paradigms and metaphors a couple times before, will try one more. Here is the Bass Pro Shop's criteria for a good anchor:

(1) Strong craftsmanship
(2) Can be set and re-set quickly and easily under all conditions

Clip art: Clker

(3) Good holding power (Holds well in all types of bottom: weed, rock, sand, mud.)
(4) Can be stored easily (on deck) -- compact
(5) Can be retrieved easily
(6) Can be released easily and effortlessly from the bottom.
I'm sure you can quickly extrapolate the first four parameters to haptic anchoring of pronunciation.

The 5th and 6th focus on two additional features worth elaborating. Ease of "retrieval" translates to how readily and effectively awareness of the "stored" new sound is triggered later, during conversation or listening. Probably the most important experiential benchmark in haptic-based change is when the learner becomes aware, after the fact, of either correct usage or the lingering mispronunciation. That is often experienced primarily as a body sensation, not a visual or "self-talk" auditory signal that would interfere with communication or relationships!

The final parameter, releasing the anchor, is also important. Haptic anchoring tends to fade quickly--unless practiced and re-experienced frequently--which works out just right for fast, short-term change. So, if your pronunciation teaching seems adrift,  doesn't seem to be "catching," lately, don't throw it overboard . . . just get some better (haptic) anchors.

How sound touches us

There have been many relatively recent studies of synaesthetic metaphor (combing senses, e.g., a moving speech, a sharp flavor) in various disciplines. In a 1996 study by Day, it was shown, for example, that in English literature, the dominate synaesthetic metaphor tends to be "sound-touch," such as a "piercing scream." In music metalanguage, the audio-tactile metaphors related to pitch, loudness and other qualities are so pervasive that it would be nearly inconceivable to speak of musical sound otherwise (e.g., G-sharp or G-flat).

The cognitive-affective-visual-auditory-kinesthetic-tactile "hexus" (see earlier "hexus" post) that is a word or sound in language can be  committed to memory or accessed in any number of ways, but that close affinity between touch and sound, both metaphorically and neuro-physiologically, is especially relevant in teaching pronunciation.

The EHIEP system, with about a dozen distinct touch types tied to pedagogical movement patterns that anchor L2 sounds and sound structures, is certainly a sound, touching step in the right direction . . .