(Haptic) pair-a-linguistic pronunciation teaching

Clip art: Clker

Saw a recent discussion thread that (incorrectly) identified gesture as a paralinguistic feature of speech. That term, paralanguage, typically refers to pitch, loudness, rate and fluency. Gesture or body movement may be synchronized with speech in a way that it can reflect some aspect of paralanguage, as in when arm gesticulating is coordinated with the stress or rhythm pattern, such that a baton-like gesture comes down on key points for emphasis in a lecture, etc.

Actually, I like that idea, combing or pairing (haptic-anchored) gesture with paralanguage. In EHIEP work we do something of that with pitch, rate and fluency, using special gestures terminating in touch, what we refer to as pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs), that function to control those three features of speech in various ways (typically done in either modelling or error correction or expressive oral reading of fixed texts). To see a demonstration of each go to the Demo page on the AH-EPS website:

pitch - the Expressiveness PMP
rate - the Rhythm Fight Club PMP
fluency - the Tai Chi Fluency PMP

We have yet to figure out an effective PMP for loudness. If you can think of one . . . give us a shout!

Keep in touch.

EHIEP PMP as haptic communication

Clipart: Clker

Clipart: Clker

The pedagogical movement patterns (PMP) of the Essential haptic-integrated English pronunciation (EHIEP) system, which involve both movement of hands across the visual field, along with systematic self-touch of hands and upper body, like all "interpersonal and intrapersonal" gestures, are culturally defined and express meanings beyond the specific pedagogical functions assigned (e.g., stress marking, intonation "tracing," rhythm grounding, sound-change anchoring.) Those serve both intra- and interpersonal functions, and given recent research on mirror neurons, it is clear that the brain makes far less distinction between the felt sense of self- versus other-touch than previously thought. Jones and Yarbrough (1985), for example, identified 10 categories of such "haptic communication." That framework serves as a nice template for understanding these "parallel" or complementary meanings or unconscious suggestions inherent in the EHIEP protocols:

1. Touch as Positive Affect - Aside from doing a regular body and vocal tract warm up, the "positive" felt sense of connecting up new or changed sound patterns with "their" words is a definite upper!
2. Touch as Negative Affect - For some learners, getting comfortable with the haptic system takes time. When done carefully and thoughtfully, however, it is rarely problematic.
3. Touch as Play - A sense of focused, yet relaxed and playful engagement is fundamental. directed body movement, itself, does much to create that.
4. Touch as Influence - That goes in both directions: the precision of the PMPs help create a more controlled and confident speaking style which, in turn, affects those with whom the learner is interacting.
5. Touch as Interaction Management - As noted in earlier posts, haptic engagement is the "glue" of many learning systems, that which controls attention and anchors key targets better in memory.
6. Touch as Interpersonal Responsiveness - The use of haptic-integrated protocols in class, especially for efficient correction of pronunciation is perhaps the strongest argument in favor of doing it.
7. Touch as Accidental - The distinction between designed, productive use of haptic anchoring as in the various PMPs and more typical types of touch used in the classroom, such as hand clapping or stretching rubber bands is striking. The former type enhance anchoring; the latter may as well confound it. (See earlier posts on that subject.)
8. Touch as Task Related - That is, of course, the bottom line with EHIEP, task-related touch and movement.
9. Touch as Healing - I could take this one several places but suffice it to say that, if only metaphorically, haptic-integration does greatly enable productive change.
10. Touch as Symbolism - The PMPs are both somatic and symbolic in a sense, connecting the felt sense of a word, for example, with its meaning and orthographic signature, but also involve the set of intrinsic "meanings" listed above.

Body movement on tonic stress and emphasis

In this 2009 study in the Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, Bull and Connelly make a striking observation about the relationship between emphasis and tonic (word or phrasal) stress in English as expressed paralinguistically by native speakers. In essence, some kind of synchronized body movement was (visually) evident on most tonic syllables in the study. Emphasis, on the other hand, tended to be evident in more exaggerated head and arm movement, mapped onto tonic syllables. What it points to is the felt sense of English rhythm: moving along with and on tonic syllables, most of that grounded in subtle (or not so subtle) upper torso nods or movement generated in part by the diaphragm contracting and pushing more air "up" on stressed vowels. So, does it make sense in EHIEP work to practice haptically-integrated rhythm groups (with some kind of touch located on the tonic syllable)? It does from a couple of perspectives, in fact. First, it anchors the stressed element of the word or phrase. Second, most of the pedagogical movement patterns are designed to be synced with a slight head nod and upper torso nod--although the explicit focus is only on the arm movement and hands touching. (In some cases, the PMP is preceded by explicit "breathe in" and executed with controlled exhaling of air as well.) I cannot emphasize enough how effective that anchoring can be. Tonic syllables are definitely worth stressing (and moving) over!

Passion or anger? (pitch-accent vs stress-accent)

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Watched a fascinating video today where the speaker (a native speaker of English) who was attempting a motivational presentation had an extremely limited pitch range in his voice and appeared, for the most part, to be using primarily volume for stress accent, rather than "pitch accent," the combination of pitch and volume, common in most dialects of English. Combined with his rapid rate of delivery it was, at times, difficult, even for me, to tell when he was transitioning between thoughts or quoted and unquoted speech. I can only imagine the problem for a nonnative speaker in the audience.

At the end of the video, there was a fascinating interchange between two attendees: one sensed that the speaker was "passionate:" the other, that he seemed "angry." The former was familiar with the general content of the lecture: the latter, was not, adding that the overall effect was a very "pushy," demanding presentation. The scene reminded me of working with some Korean businessmen who, initially, would come off the same way.

But most intriguing was the body motion of the speaker who, rather than moving forward and back with upper torso motion or gesture, moved rhythmically--almost hypnotically--back and forth, from side to side, behind the podium. Often the stressed word would occur at the end of the "sway," either left or right, paralinguistically conveying something of the same message of flat tonality. (We can fix that haptically, of course.) For most in the room, the "pitch" fell decidedly flat as well! 

Moving accents (a kinaesthetic, Hollywood approach)

Photo credit: DrLillianglass.com

Over a decade ago I had explored the concept of beginning by attempting to change the overall body posture and typical gestural patterns of learners to be more "English-like" (whatever that was going to mean!) In a few specific instances, where the ethnic nonverbal "accent" was markedly different from, for example, typical North American business presentation style, I had some success, but as I became more involved with haptic work, I gave up on trying to identify a more general body-language-based "target" for  learners.

I have read numerous accounts of how Hollywood approaches the problem, seeing accent or dialect and body representation as being almost inseparable. Dr Glass (and her blog) provide a hint (only) into the way it is done. (Note the list of her former clients!) At some point in the future, using virtual reality technology--with haptic interface, of course--we will be able to truly "train the body first!" For the time being, however, we must be satisfied with just a glimpse into the "Looking (at) Glass" . . .