"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!"

Loss of faith in pronunciation teaching?

Library of Congress

According to this new study by Gervais at University of British Columbia, summarized by Science Direct,  use of analytic thinking, problem solving and "subtle experimental priming" such as taking questionnaires in hard to read fonts, has been shown to "decrease" (religious) faith. The study was based on " . . . a longstanding human psychology model of two distinct, but related cognitive systems to process information: an “intuitive” system that relies on mental shortcuts to yield fast and efficient responses, and a more “analytic” system that yields more deliberate, reasoned responses." I have known, intuitively, for some time that the EHIEP method is truly a "no brainer," producing "fast and efficient responses." Experiencing it is believing. Likewise, I have felt that too much analysis, linguistics and reasoning undermines belief in the efficacy of pronunciation work. Q.E.D. Keep the faith, eh!

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!

Vowel reduction and word stress: one word at a time

Clipart: Clker

Especially in pre-academic ESL/EFL instruction, the common strategy is to devote considerable instructional time to rules and patterns of word stress assignment, and attention to principles of vowel reduction. As noted in earlier posts, some of that emphasis is due to the fact that many acquire pronunciation through reading--not speaking and listening-- and need good strategies for figuring out word stress and vowel reduction, especially with technical terms. With the advent of good audio sources for pronunciation, at least some of the need for essentially "phonic" decoding has been lessened. Flege and Bohn's 1989 research inked above came to the striking conclusion that " . . .  L2 learners acquire [word] stress placement and vowel reduction in English on a word-by-word basis." In that study, the vowel quality of the vowels in the words that were being learned appeared to be impervious to alteration or enhancement once the word had been assigned meaning and use conditions. If that is indeed the case in general--and that has certainly been my experience in working with stress and vowel reduction in conversational language, especially with intermediate-level and above, then the key to developing accurate pronunciation at least at the segment-level seems to be experiencing and anchoring the felt sense of a word as a whole, not as simply a token of a pattern or process. Now the pattern of the stress assignment or vowel reduction involved may generate to other new words in some manner, but basically, those aspects of the word that are learned as part of the initial, overall configuration, which includes any number of factors in addition to those that are sound-related, are highly resistant to change later. In other words, the brain of the learner apparently grasps whatever pronunciation of the new word is immediately available or possible-- and then doesn't look back much or continue trying to approximate the L2 target much further, if at all. In a word, we do appear to learn the pronunciation of the language . . .  one word at a time.