Sound discrimination training: perceived "phon-haptic" distance

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

Ask any Japanese EFL student how they managed to perceive and later produce the distinction between [i] and [I] or [u] and [U] in English and they'll probably tell you that it was difficult . . . or impossible. The same goes, of course, for L1/L2 phoneme mismatches for most learners, at least initially. The problem, of course, is the "competition" between phonetic or articulatory distance, that is how different, physically it is to produce two sounds, and phonemic categorical distance. If the brain "decides" that two sounds represent the same phoneme, regardless of how different it "feels" to produce them--case closed. At least that is what most research suggests. A 2004 study by Gerrits and Schouten of Utrecht University (linked here at the University of Rochester) suggests that the task used in the discrimination process can significantly impact perception of phonemic categories.

In plain English, what does that mean? Basically this: The method you use to assist learners in hearing or producing a phonemic distinction in their L2 can, itself, affect whether they get it or not. Really? Well, maybe . . .  So how do you usually do that? Do a class listening discrimination task of some kind? Give them an audio to listen to? Show them line drawings and have them repeat after you? Sit down with the learner and use a Starbucks coffee stir to get their articulators realigned?

 As described in earlier blogposts, the EHIEP approach is to establish points in the visual field where the hands touch as the sound is articulated, what we term "phon-haptically." Those points, or nodes, are strategically placed so that distinctions such as those above are experienced as being both physically distant from each other and somatically have very distinct texture or type of touch involved (tapping, pushing, scratching, brushing, twisting, etc.) The touch-type is chosen to "imitate" the felt sense of producing the vowel in the the vocal tract in some way, if only metaphorically. Does it work? Try it and let us know. Keep in touch. 

"Phonetic" Justice

An excerpt from "Poetic Justice" by rapper, Kool Moe Dee. The full text of the linked rap is not recommended or endorsed, but he does make an interesting link, metaphorically--depending on your worldview, between phonetic and justice which is worth considering briefly:

"They play the weak cause the weak won't speak

But that just makes a fan go seek

A station that they know will bust this

(Who's on the radio) poetic justice

Poetic Justice

What goes around, comes around

Goes around, comes around (2x)

Doing justice to poetry

Poetic, phonetic, genetic, fanatic - you connect it."

The primary focus of HICP work has evolved to center on the classroom where

(1) There is minimal technology, only video playback.
(2) The instructor has minimal, if any training in phonetics and pronunciation.
(3) The students may be motivated (or not-probably not) to practice outside of class and may or may not be literate.
(4) All sound change work (what is still referred to by some as "pronunciation instruction") is seamlessly integrated into class work.
(5) The students generally cannot afford or wouldn't bother with an Android or iPhone pronunciation app. to work on their "intelligibility."

I had years earlier joked that I specialized in "those with accents and money." EHIEP protocols still work with  those clients, of course, but "phonetic justice" demands something more . . .