"Fontastic" anchoring of sound!

Clip art: Clker

Credit: Science/AAAS

Taken a close look at a learner pronunciation book lately? (I have some insider information here . . . ) The assumption is that, other than the usual selection of boldface, italics and underlining, the character of the visual display presented in working with sound is essentially no different than any other subject matter. The best analogy might be teenage middle school social science texts--the book making one last effort to mimic the web. Even if the text has brilliant color, artistic images and other text manipulation as a few do, to paraphrase a recent pop song far too often: What happens in student books . . . stays in student books! INTEGRATED pronunciation instruction? Now that is another matter. Sorry, that's about all the special effects blogger will allow: boldface, italics, underlining, all caps, font color and background color. The research on those text features in marketing and advertising is extensive, all of which seem to come to the same conclusion: Try to hold the eyes hostage for a bit. A recent study (using fMRI, of course) summarized by ScienceShots looked at the relationship between font size and emotional response " . . . emotional signals [in the brain] elicited by the larger font size lasted a total of 180 milliseconds longer. The results are similar to emotional responses to large and small versions of pictures with fearful, disgusting, or sex-related content. Pictures hold biological relevance for people, since a big photo of a predator probably signals proximity to you." And then comes a classic "Well . . . Duh . . . ": "Similar emotional effects on font sizes probably reflect the importance language holds in our society, the authors speculate. " (Italics, mine.) So what is the bottom line here in creating classroom-visual materials in haptic-integrated anchoring of pronunciation change, especially in terms of prominence? More and more teacher-based publishers are going to e-Materials, where you can adjust font and visual display characteristics yourself. For the time being, however, --after the Pedagogical MOVEment Pattern is anchored, of course--stick on a few extra milliseconds of visual processing whenever you can--anyway you can. And may your FONTs be with you! 

3-second hugs and pronunciation practice!

Talk about short attention span. Turns out that most everything we do as humans (and the same applies to animals) is processed at some level in 3 second chunks--even hugs. Research in language development and use confirms the same principle: relatively short chunks of speech or text are fundamental to understanding. What is fascinating about that study and others like it is what it may tell us about how to best present and work with language, especially pronunciation. In other words, if we want something to be "absorbed" or anchored well, there is an optimal packaging, rhythm or even visual configuration. There is in fact, as shown by studies of learning and training in various disciplines. As elaborated in several earlier blogposts, HICP is based on the idea of using "pedagogical movement patterns (PMPs)," hands moving through the visual field with one touching the other on prominent syllables. None of the PMPs are 3 seconds in duration but the time interval occupied by one such action, including the "silence" preceding and following certainly fits within that model. A sentence or phrase may be longer than 3-seconds, of course, although for conversational interaction, at moderate speaking pace, that can be pretty demanding for beginning and intermediate learners, but it will typically still consist of two or more PMPs when practiced--reflecting basic conversational rhythm. Just imagine--in some other less interpersonal touch-averse culture and time--a typical "hug-as-haptic-anchor" used in the classroom with the "peak" squeeze occurring on the prominent syllable of a utterance being articulated such as "How wonderful to have interACTed with you in class today, Joe!"

Who needs word stress patterns anyway? And which?

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

A good question! Any number of studies suggest that learners can guess at some patterns with more or less success. For example, this one or this one, both of which focus on vowel quality in English as a primary "beacon" for learners. How much explicit instruction in word stress patterning is optimal will, of course, depend on the learner population and where they are developmentally. For most instructors, a basic, working understanding of word stress patterns is essential. At the recent British Columbia Teacher of English as an Additional Language (BCTEAL) conference in Vancouver, I attended two very nice presentations that presented the basic word and phrase stress patterns "tool kit" nicely: "Unlocking the Mysteries of Syllable Stress" and "Integrating Prosodic Practice with Grammar Instruction" by Egle. (I'm sure she'll be happy to share those handouts or powerpoint with you, if interested.) Her work is generally with white collar clients in business and industry, often with serious fossilization issues. What I found most interesting was that the set of patterns that she has identified over time that are necessary for her students-- are almost identical to those that I use in basic teacher training, especially for nonnative English speaking instructors. The apparent difference in application, however, is worth noting. Egle needs to do a great deal of deductive work up front, presenting patterns and then proceeding to examples. In my work, especially in the EHIEP system, the instructor must have the patterns "in hand" to refer to them constantly, for the most part after the fact, as more and more examplars of the pattern accrue or emerge in the course of "normal" classroom instruction, especially in speaking and listening work. Other classroom contexts require different mixes of those two approaches, of course, but somebody in the room has to have a good handle on the tools, regardless. (If you are not sure what those are, you are part of the problem!) 

How NOT to assign English sentence stress and intonation

Clip art: Clker

In more than a few respects, the non-native speaking instructor may have a distinct advantage over the native speaker. Keeping the PEPI framework in mind, here is an example from three years ago that changed my approach to teaching sentence stress, both how to determine it and how to teach it.

I had a native speaking grad student in the MA TESOL who had very little background in linguistics and grammar--more the rule now, rather than the exception. We were doing the standard type of exercise where you are handed a dialogue and asked to underline sentence stress and intonation, based on the typical set of simple rules found in student textbooks, such as this one. What was amazing, was that he would generally underline 2 or 3 times the number of words in a sentence and then indicate that ALL of them had a RISE-FALL intonation "move" as well.

The nonnative speaker sitting next to him, on the other hand, was able to consistently get it "right," at least in agreement with me. His frustration was understandable. Regardless of how much he practiced, his performance not only did not improve, it seemed to get worse. Finally, just before the next quiz, I asked him the right question: How do you go about figuring out where to put stress? His answer: I just say it to myself and underline the words that have more energy on them. Wow.

A few days later, he aced the quiz and became one of the very best at assigning stress and intonation. His solution: Suppress his "inner speech"--and stick with the simple rules and grammatical structure, along with aiming for the most direct, unmarked (lacking contrastive stress) interpretation in that conversational context. Once those focal or prominent locations are identified, THEN haptically-integrate and anchor them affectively or emotionally.

In other words, begin with structure, go to context, anchor stress and intonation--and then pile on attitude! In the PEPI model: UP to LEFT to DOWN to RIGHT. I realize that may sound a bit counter to current "top-down" discourse models for initial prosodic assignment--my own, included! The EHIEP model, however, is designed for the nonnative speaking instructor first--not the linguistically sophisticated (or informed) native speaker.

For those highly auditory native speakers without linguistic training or the emotionally "off-the-charts," it also works like a charm. For nonnative speakers, most of whom do grammar in the extreme already, it clicks immediately, often giving them at least an initial advantage and forcing them to move on to context and mood. Counter-intuitive (and counter clock-wise)? Perhaps. But "PEPI-gogically," on target!

Drawing (and anchoring prominence) on the left side of the brain

Several earlier posts have referred to the "meaning" of the visual field, including the optimal placement of vowel schema in the visual field. Any number of visualized models of psychological and social systems have been represented on similar X~Y axes, with process being located on the X axis and positioning, on the Y axis. For example, many popular characterizations of personality preferences, management or cognitive style can be situated in that conceptual field.

Clip art: Clker

                                                  External  


  
                               Stability                         Change 




                                                  Internal  

In the 2007 study by Des Roches et al. (linked above; available in Abstract form only), it was discovered that when processing novelty, the right eye/left hemisphere was favoured. When the image was demonstrably negative (rather than positive) in emotional loading, there was a tendency for processing to favor the right hemisphere/left eye. The same general asymmetry appeared to be present when presented with analogous olfactory stimuli as well. (To avoid the problems of culture, individual variability and language, the research was done using 38 Arabian mares.)
          Not coincidentally, in the EHIEP framework,  anchoring of word stress, phrasal stress, discourse prominence and "front" vowels is done in the right visual field (Back vowels, however, are anchored in the left visual field, a mirror image of the typical IPA matrix display.) New information is generally anchored to the right on all protocols. Given information and emotional setting is usually established first in the left visual field.
         Most interesting--and novel study!  The research appears to provide further support for systematic exploitation of the visual field in HICP work--simply by having put the "chart" before the horse!

Rhythm and prominence: The place of effective haptic anchoring

Clip art: Clker

Clip art: Clker

I have been aware of the "Interactive Metronome" program, linked above, for several years. For a number of conditions it has been used very successfully. (The promo says that there are over 20,000 certified trainers!) It uses a combination of audio input of a rhythmic beep, along with hand clapping and feet tapping for steps, for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. I was asked if it fit within the HICP framework of haptic procedures. Yes and no.

On the one hand (no pun intended) it does involve movement and touch. In general, however, I am not a proponent of hand clapping and repetitious foot tapping for anything other than just getting the "feel" of the rhythm of speaking. I do not recommend tapping out or clapping out the syllables of a word or phrase, for example, as the primary technique for anchoring prominence (word or phrasal stress). One reason for that relates to the research reported earlier on the blog focusing on the nature of tactile and kinaesthetic memory. Tactile memory, relative to audio and video memory, for example, tends to be more easily "overwritten," or sensitive to cross-modal competition. In other words, another anchor or distraction in the same "vicinity" will, in effect, be more likely to "erase," downgrade or get confounded with the earlier one.

What that implies is that a pedagogical movement pattern (PMP) that attempts to anchor stressed syllables haptically in one area of the body and unstressed syllables in another, for instance, should be more effective than simple, repetitive clapping of hands or tapping of feet, which tries to anchor or write in both stressed and non-stressed on the same location. The rhythmic practice versions of four EHIEP protocols do that in using a regular rhythm "tempo," not all that different from a metronome. (I sometimes do use a metronome with learners who do not have much of a felt sense of rhythm--of any kind!) The body location combinations are: deltoid--elbow, hand touch--outside hip, index finger tap--to center palm or fingernails to center palm in various positions in the visual field. No excessive applause or foot stomping to "get" attention for prominence needed--or all that effective either!

Oral interpretation of literature for (haptic anchoring and) fluency

Clip art: Clker

In Lessac's 12-step system in The Use and Training of the Human Voice dramatic oral interpretation/ practice is a key benchmark, a critical bridge to fluency in everyday life or on stage. He uses passages from several genres (novels, drama, poetry, songs, etc.) As opposed to the generally lifeless, uninspiring dialogues found in student pronunciation textbooks, "real" literature expresses emotion--and life--in any number of "memorable" ways.

Likewise, by the time the learner is equipped to prepare a good piece of language using the EHIEP protocols in the order prescribed in the method (Prominence/stress, vowels, consonants, focus groups,  intonation, conversational rhythm, and fluency)--typically within about six weeks, the transition to and integration in spontaneous speech should be well underway. This article by Todd and Goodson summarizes how a similar process, based on the long tradition of "Readers Theatre," works with middle school students. It'll work with anybody . . . just requires a little dramatic, embodied extrapolation!