Total recall: haptic anchoring and integration vs cross-modal reinforcement of pronunciation

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

There are an almost infinite number of ways to create heuristics to assist learners in attending to and remembering sounds. For a good overview of suggestions as to how that works in different modalities in teaching phonetics and pronunciation, see this 2011 summary by Wrembel and Mickiewicz  of the University of Poznan. From that perspective, in EHIEP there are half a dozen or so modalities involved: sound, movement, touch, positioning in the visual field (which includes associated colours), sensations of resonance in the bones, muscles and flesh of the vocal tract--even olfaction in the form of aromatic hand creams, or "taste" with mint breath strips in some cases. It is one thing to anchor a sound using a color or phonaesthetic word association or gesture in teaching a sound, as in phonetics, yet quite another to systematically integrate that into classroom instruction. In other words, "cross-modal" reinforcement (linking sound to some other sense) makes very good sense but it just the beginning. That association has to be both balanced appropriately, so that one does not cancel the other modalities (an important issue - See previous posts) and scaffolded in over time. In EHIEP, the "haptic anchoring" (a convenient short cut for full-body, multi-modal engagement) is employed in class or in personal practice regularly, whenever required,  for presentation, correction, practice or integration . . .  total (sensory) recall!

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! 

Your vowels are within you . . .

Clip art: 

Clker

In many religious and meditative traditions, vowels have distinct character, quality and (often incredible) impact. In spoken English vowels do retain some subtle phonaesthetic qualities, as noted in earlier posts, but nothing comparable to those that form the basis of the great chakras and chants. (Not even backward build up drill or Jazz Chants) This video provides a nice introduction to the central role of vowels in that context. (Here is a bit more "analytic" and almost entertaining presentation of some of the same concepts.)

 When we work with the concept of the "felt sense" of a sound, we are working somewhere near the other end of the intensity continuum from the settings of those vowels, but a rich experience of resonance and the momentary, conscious situating of the "feeling" of a vowel someplace in the body is essentially the same goal. Here is one case where today's (over)emphasis (in my humble opinion) on metacognition in pronunciation teaching may just be on the right track. Got a vowel problem? Try meditating on it.