More than a touch less stress in pronunciation teaching!

Maybe the biggest problem with pronunciation teaching (other than time, training and "bokoos" of counter-productive techniques) is  . . . well . . .  stress, one of the most, if nor THE most consistently reported factors affecting instruction from both teachers and students. Likewise, approaches to "de-stressing" the classroom almost always entail doing something with body, such as in "mindfulness," which is essentially, consciously focusing on something other than the brain in achieving relaxation and various kinds of attention. 

A just recently published study by Lu and ten other researchers at MIT, Somatosensory cortical signature of facial nociception and vibrotactile touch–induced analgesia, "touches on" the potentially powerful role of touch in mediating the effect of stress. (Let me translate that!) Touching, the face in this instance--by mice, moderates the impact of stress, touch-mediated analgesia. 

Now granted, generalizing from a study done on mice to the potential role of touch in pronunciation teaching is a bit of a stretch. Not so much actually. All pronunciation work involves touch, albeit generally without conscious, systematic attention, for example, clapping hands to holding objects used to

• embody phonological concepts, such as rubber bands with vowel lengthening 
• fingers touching the larynx for vowel voicing 
• focusing learners attention of touch between articulators in the mouth

Haptic pronunciation teaching in its latest iteration, The KINETIK Method, involves extensive use of gesture-plus-touch in all phases of the system. Research has long established the stress reducing nature of body movement and breathing, in general, but the contribution of touch, either in conjunction with gesture or in isolation, has not been researched in this field. In haptic work we have know for decades that touch contributes substantially to the process but it has been almost impossible to set up or successively carry out a study to exploring just to what extent that is the case. 

This study makes a fundamental contribution to our understanding of the underlying "wiring" between touch and emotion and stress. In particular, it confirms the importance of use of touch with gesture in anchoring rhythm and stress in instruction. For more on that see these recent blog posts: 

• This one on touch and link to sounds
• This one on the PTSD parallel .  . . 
• Your standard KINETIK course

As we always say: Keep in touch!!!

Source:

SCIENCE ADVANCES 16 Nov 2022, Vol 8, Issue 46
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abn6530

Out of sight!. . . Speechless! . . .Hands on teaching of the "grammar" of phonology and pronunciation

The study, “Feeling Phonology: The Conventionalization of Phonology in Protactile Communities in the United States" by Edwards of Saint Louis University and Brentari of the University of Chicago, could be something a game changer for us in haptic pronunciation teaching. (It will be published in Language shortly, but, we'll assume that the tantalizing neuroscience summary is correct for the time being!)  From the summary: 

In order to uncover the emergence of new grammatical structure in protactile language, pairs of DeafBlind research participants were asked to describe three objects to one another: a lollipop, a jack (the kind children use to play the game ‘jacks’) and a complex wooden toy with movable arms, magnets, and magnetized pieces.  . . . They found that the early stages of the conventionalization of protactile phonology involve assigning specific grammatical roles to the hands (and arms) of Signer 1 (the conveyer of information) and Signer 2 (the receiver of information). It is the clear and consistent articulatory forms used by each of the four hands that launches the grammar in this case and allows for the rapid exchange of information.

Let me try to translate: Signer 1, using only touch, is passing on a "description" of each object to Signer 2. The four hands involved quickly assume their respective "grammatical functions" in conveying the critical information about the objects. That level of detail is not unpacked in the summary, but we can assume that that is referring to functions such as agent, object, action (verb-like), conjunction (joining), descriptor (adjectival, adverbial), etc. 

In effect, in haptic pronunciation, where the hands of the instructor, for example, moving through the visual field with speech synchronized gesture, depict the embodied nature of a phrase or word, such as "I'm speechless!" --which is simultaneously mirrored by the student in receiving that information, the functionality of the hands and arms of each in the interaction is quite analogous. 

For example, one hand/arm may trace out the path of an intonation contour, whereas the other hand serves as the "landing point" for the other hand ono the stressed element in the phrase. Given the general structure of English grammar, that landing point is also generally the place where the sound system and new information intersect. (New information tends to be near the end of a phrase or sentence.) 

Although sight and sound are involved, the fundamental "vehicle" for the engagement is the movement of the hands and arms, culminating in the hands touching in various ways on the stressed syllable in the phrase or word--mirrored and modulated also by the mirror neurons in the brain of the both participants. Each part of the process or mechanism has its own basic function or purpose in conveying the information. Add to that the notion that every pedagogical gesture used can be performed at differing speeds or pitches or volume, and the roles of the instructor's hands and arms, and those of the students, can take on a wide range of subtle meanings and responsibilities. 

Cannot wait to "lay my hands on" that article!

Keep in touch!

(New) v5.0 Haptic Pronunciation Teaching as "Metanique": any text, story, class or time

If you are new to haptic pronunciation, here is a quick history. (If not, drop down to after the bullets!) To understand the importance of this new development, Haptic as Metanique, a little background is helpful:

• 1970's - I was trained in pronunciation teaching, especially from a speech pathology, highly tactile and kinesthetic perspective
• 1980s - Extensive work in accent enhancement involving both kinesthetic and psychological models
• 1990s - Large class teaching of pronunciation in Japan and research on uses of gesture in ;pronunciation teaching
• 2000 ~ 2020 - Development of haptic pronunciation teaching, inspired in part by work in psychotherapy for PTSD, especially use of the visual field and touch.
• 2020 - v5.0 Haptic pronunciation teaching as "metanique" (a system of procedures where attention to pronunciation can be mapped on to any meaning or narrative-based classroom teaching text or technique. 

Haptic (Pronunciation Teaching as) Metanique is, in effect, a series of complementary overlays to any L2 instruction that can be applied in any class any time that any learners (all ages and contexts) are engaged in meaningful texts or interpersonal communication practice. 

We use the Butterfly above as our symbol of metanique, in general, a gesture complex that, in a sense, floats above or lands on any word, phrase, clause of sentence, embodying it. The Butterfly pedagogical movement pattern has been central to the haptic system from the outset. (See a demonstration of early butterfly and other PMPs.) and others from v1.0. Here is an example of how  metaniques, in this case the Butterfly and the intonation PMP, Touchinamis, might be applied to presentation of a model dialogue to embody lexical items (words), the rhythm patterning or the intonation contours:

X is Y /and Z, / but A, / who is from B, / is very much C, / to be sure. 

ooO        oO       oO              oooO                 ooooO                 ooO  (using Butterfly)

--/           -/          -/ \               ---/ \                  ----\                     --/ \   (using Touchinamis)

The concept is that anything that is the focus of instruction, where it is embedded in a vivid context or narrative, where some complementary attention to form would fit in relatively seamlessly without disrupting comprehension or production, can be "metaniqued!"

For more on metaniquing and v5.0, join us at the upcoming webinar in November (or possibly the webinar upcoming on 10/2 -- if you hurry and register at info@actonhaptic,com!

Fixing your eyes on better pronunciation--or before it!

ClipArt by

Early on in the development of haptic pronunciation teaching, we began by borrowing a number of techniques from Observed Experiential Integration therapy, developed by Rick Bradshaw and colleagues about 20 years ago. OEI has proved to be particularly effective in the treatment of PTSD.  In OEI one of the basic techniques is the use of eye tracking, that is therapists carefully control the eye movements of patients, in some cases stopping at places in the visual field to "massage" points through various loops and depth of field tracking.

Clker.com

We discovered that attempting to control students' eye movement, having them follow with their eyes the track of the gestures across the visual field being used to anchor sounds during pronunciation work, that although memory for sounds seemed better, the holding of attention for such extended lengths of time could be really counterproductive. In some cases, students even became slightly dizzy or disoriented after only a few minutes. (And, in retrospect, we were WAY out of our league . . . )

Consequently, attention shifted to visual focus on only the terminal point in the gestural movement where the stressed syllable of the word or phrase was located, where the hands touched. We have been using that protocol for about a decade.

Now comes a fascinating study by Badde et al., "Oculomotor freezing reflects tactile temporal expectation and aids tactile perception" summarized by ScienceDaily.com, that helps refine our understanding of the relationship between eye movement and touch in focusing attention. In essence, what the research demonstrated was that by stopping or holding eye movement just prior to a when subject was to touch a targeted object, the intensity of the tactile sensation was significantly enhanced. Or, the converse: random eye movement prior to touch tended to diffuse or undermine the impact of touch. That helps explain something . . .

The rationale for haptic pronunciation teaching is, essentially, that the strategic use of touch both successfully manages gesture and focuses much more effectively the placement of stressed syllables in words accompanying the gesture in gesture synchronized speech. In almost all cases, the eyes focus in on the hand about to be touched--just prior to what we term the: TAG (touch-activated ganglia) where touch literally "brings together" or assembles the sound, body movement, vocal resonance and iwth graphic visual schema and meaning of the word or phoneme, itself.

In other words, the momentary freezing of eye movement an instant before the touch event should greatly intensify the resulting impact and later recall produced by the pedagogical strategy. We knew it worked, just didn't really understand why. Now we do.

Put your current pronunciation system on hold for bit . . . and get (at least a bit) haptic!

Original source:
Stephanie Badde, Caroline F. Myers, Shlomit Yuval-Greenberg, Marisa Carrasco. Oculomotor freezing reflects tactile temporal expectation and aids tactile perception. Nature Communications, 2020; 11 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-17160-1

Recipe for curing (Chinese) distaste for pronunciation teaching

Have trouble selling your students on pronunciation, developing an 'appetite" for it? Research by Madzharov, Self-Control and Touch: When Does Direct Versus Indirect Touch Increase Hedonic Evaluations and Consumption of Food, summarized by Science Direct, suggests that you may just need to give at least the more self-controlled among them a "hands-on" taste of it to get them to buy in. To quote the abstract:

"The present paper presents four studies that explore how sampling and eating food by touching it directly with hands affects hedonic evaluations and consumption volume."

What they found, however, was that for only the high self-control, disciplined consumers that they perceived the food to be better tasting and they were disposed to eat more of it. For the other subjects (like me maybe!), adding touch did not appear to contribute or enhance either taste or appetite for the food samples in the study. Why that should be the case, was not clear, other than the possibility that in the less self-controlled consumers, the executive control centers of the brain were offline already in terms of the direct, unfettered attraction of FOOD!

A few years ago, had a visiting scholar from China here with us for a year. It took almost the entire time for her to get me to understand how to get Chinese students to buy in to (haptic) pronunciation teaching, specifically, but, in general, more integrated, communicative pronunciation work. My "mistake" had been trying to convince relatively high-control consumers of pronunciation teaching in this case, to first be more like me, less high-control and more experiential as learners.

It has always been a problem for some, not just the Chinese students, to buy into highly gesture-based instruction. But touch was another thing entirely. Most any student can "get it", how touch can enhance learning and memory-- and be coaxed into trying some of the gestural, kinaethetic techniques. Probably for several reasons, one being that the functions of touch in the haptic system are to (1) carefully control gesture use, and (2) intensify the connection between the gesture and lexical or phonological target, the word or sound process. Also, it was  (3) much easier to present the general, popular research on the contribution of touch to experience and learning, and (4) the concept of somehow getting a learner to work in their least dominant modality, a basic construct in hypnosis, for example, can be the most effective or powerful.

The assumption here is that the metacognitively self-controlled are less likely to be influenced by immediate feelings or impressions, but once that "barrier" is bridged, as touch does so effectively, the relatively novel sensual experience for them has greater impact. Think: men and the power of perfume . . .

In other words focusing initially on the touch that concluded every gesture made a difference. Have been doing that ever since. Students are much more receptive to trying the gestural techniques once they feel that they have sufficient understanding . . . and then once they have tried it, focusing more on touch than on gesture . .  they are "hooked" . . . being more able and amenable to sense the power of embodiment in learning pronunciation from then on.

If you have a taste for pronunciation work with Chinese students, what is your recipe?

Keep in touch . . .

Original Source:

Author links open overlay panel

Madzharov, A. Self-Control and Touch: When Does Direct Versus Indirect Touch Increase Hedonic Evaluations and Consumption of Food Journal of Retailing Volume 95, Issue 4, December 2019, Pages 170-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2019.10.009

What mouse circadian memory should remind us of (in recalling pronunciation or anything learned earlier)

Mystery partially solved. In doing research on homework efficiency and compliance in pronunciation teaching, something I had never taken all that seriously: If given an option, almost all students seem to prefer to do pronunciation practice/homework after supper, or later, rather than in the morning, before class. (Is that the case with your students as well?) Maybe it is a matter of priorities, save the least important for last; wait until you are incapable of doing much of anything else. (Earlier, when "homework" was mostly mindless drill, that probably made sense.) In fact, for no empirical reason really, other than the possibility of more immediate follow up, we have for years suggested learners do just that . . . schedule pronunciation work later in the day. There is, of course, overwhelming evidence that a good night's sleep does wonders for learning consolidation and memory.

Now an extraordinary study by Hasegawa et al., reported in ScienceDaily, demonstrating that mice,

Clker.com

at least (and by extension probably all us caffeine-addicted academics), have periods in the day when they are not as good at remembering things as others. Specifically, that period (for mice) just before or around the time they would usually wake up. No surprise there, eh! But what is a surprise is that the contrast is so striking during that brief interval: their memory, especially for recent training, is almost . . . nonexistent. Later, it is "back." Why so? The researchers end the piece wondering why mice--and us probably--would have evolved with that temporary "black hole" in our functional system.

I can tell them. When I first wake up the last thing I want to think about is the training or encounters of yesterday. Give my subconscious a little more time to process that while I attend to my more immediate concerns of survival, for example.

There is also lots of research focusing on learning efficiency of school-age students during different parts of the day, especially those who really don't get going until about noon. Why not the same consideration for when language learning students practice and the types of practice required? Good question.

Back to the mice. Their "task" involved touching a level to get food. During their brief, selective memory-free zone, in exploring what is in front of them, they would touch the level longer, in effect feeling it out, figuring out what it is. If given the task later they touched it immediately and with authority. Haptic pronunciation work involves extensive use of touch in virtually all activities. Our working hypothesis, based on decades of research on tactile memory, is that touch is the link both to integration of the other senses and vividness or strength of recall of phonological element in focus. We have, however, always observed great variability in learners' reports of their experience of that touch, in terms of intensity and impact.

It is about "time" we investigated that further!


Full citation:
University of Tokyo. (2019, December 18). Forgetfulness might depend on time of day. ScienceDaily. Retrieved January 5, 2020 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/12/191218090152.htm

The feeling before it happens: Anticipated touch and executive function--in (haptic) pronunciation teaching

Tigger warning*: This post is (about) touching!

Another in our continuing, but much "anticipated", series of reasons why haptic pronunciation teaching works or not, based on studies that at first glance (or just before) may appear to be totally unrelated to pronunciation work.

Fascinating piece of research by Weiss, Meltzoff, and Marshall of  University of Washington's Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences, and Temple University entitled, Neural measures of anticipatory bodily attention in children: Relations with executive function", summarized by ScienceDaily.com. In that study they looked at what goes on in the (child's) brain prior to an anticipated touch of something. What they observed (from the ScienceDaily.com summary) is that: 

"Inside the brain, the act of anticipating is an exercise in focus, a neural preparation that conveys important visual, auditory or tactile information about what's to come  . . . in children's brains when they anticipate a touch to the hand, [this process] . . . relates this brain activity to the executive functions the child demonstrates on other mental tasks. [in other words] The ability to anticipate, researchers found, also indicates an ability to focus."

Why is that important? It suggests that those areas of the brain responsible for "executive" functions, such as attention, focus and planning, engage much earlier in the process of perception than is generally understood. For the child or adult who does not have the general, multi-sensory ability to focus effectively, the consequences can be far reaching.

In haptic pronunciation work, for example, we have encountered what appeared to be a whole range of random effects that can occur in the visual, auditory, tactile and conceptual worlds of the learner that may interfere with paying quality attention to pronunciation and memory. In some sense we have had it backwards.

What the study implies is that executive function mediates all sensory experience as we must efficiently anticipate what is to come--to the extent that any individual "simply" may or may not be able to attend long enough or deeply enough to "get" enough of the target of instruction. The brain is set up to avoid unnecessary surprise at all costs. The better and more accurate the anticipation, of course, the better.

If the conclusions of the study are on the right track, that the "problem" is as much or more in executive function, then how can that (executive functioning) be enhanced systematically, as opposed to just attempting to limit random "input" and distraction surrounding the learner? We'll return to that question in subsequent blog posts but  one obvious answer is through development of highly disciplined practice regimens and careful, principled planning.

Sound rather like something of a return to more method- or instructor-centered instruction, as opposed to this passing era of overemphasis on learner autonomy and personal responsibility for managing learning? That's right. One of the great "cop outs" of contemporary instruction has been to pass off blame for failure on the learner, her genes and her motivation. That will soon be over, thankfully.

I can't wait . . .



Citation:
University of Washington. (2018, December 12). Attention, please! Anticipation of touch takes focus, executive skills. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 21, 2018 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181212093302.htm.

*Used on this blog to alert readers to the fact that the post contains reference to feelings and possibly "paper tigers" (cf., Tigger of Winnie the Pooh)

Beyond gesture: when visual-auditory-kinesthetic is not enough in pronunciation teaching!

Haptic engagement (adding touch to gesture) in pronunciation teaching began in 2005, in response to a number of potential problem(s) of using "simple" gesture in the classroom:

• Inconsistency of results! 
• Sometimes gesture seems to work well in learning and recalling pronunciation:
• As a motivator or generator of enthusiasm and releasing inhibitions, it can be terrific . . . sometimes!
• But sometimes not, depending on a number of factors. Research on efficacy of general gesture use in teaching has been consistently inconclusive, at best. Part of the reason for that, of course, is that the phonological distinctions, themselves, may be perceptually relatively ambiguous as well, such as that between [i], as in "seat" and [I] as in "sit" in English for learners of many other L1s.
• Some individuals and cultures are more "gesticular" than others.
•  Some of us are just better performers and more comfortable with having others mirror our movement in public. We found the teachers in Costa Rica to be some of most naturally "haptic" in that regard!
• Some of us are just not wired for it. In a few cases, such as the ambidextrous or highly visually eidetic (have photographic visual memory) may find this kind of teaching unsettling, to put it mildly. (But with careful control and use of pre-recorded video models, most can successfully work with the haptic system.)  
• Teacher training
• It has turned out, not surprisingly, to be exceedingly difficult to train teachers to use a common set of pedagogical gestures, especially when training is done online and not f2f. Our haptic pronunciation training here on campus has been very successful, but it goes on for 12 weeks, 2 or 3 hours per week. (But see note and links at the bottom for a new option next month!)

The intuitive "solution" turned out to be relatively straightforward:

• Anchor gesture with touch on stressed syllables or prominent words in phrases and sentences.
• Create instructional videos (of me, for the most part) that did the teaching, instead of requiring individual teachers to do it themselves, at least initially. 

The underlying reason or research justification for why that approach "worked" only emerged gradually . . . and recently, in fact! A new study by Fairhurst, M., Travers, E., Hayward, V. and Deroy, O. of Ludwig Maximilians-Universitat-Munchen, Confidence is higher in touch than in vision in cases of perceptual ambiguity, provides a striking piece of the puzzle.

In the experiment, subjects basically had to judge the relative length of two sticks. When the difference was more obvious, they relied solely on vision. When the difference was visually very close or ambiguous, however, they turned to touch to determine which was longer--even though the actual difference in length was actually insignificant. In other words, with touch their judgments were significantly more confident. In effect, "Seeing, as the expression goes, may be believing, but feeling is truth."

The main effect addresses the problem of movement and gesture being potentially difficult to locate consistently in the visual field of the learner and instructor. Although a pattern itself may look "the same" when performed at different locations in front of the learner, it may well not be recognized or remembered as such. (That has always been our experience.)  Unless you apply the magic . . . touch!

Touch as linked to gestural patterns such as those for  tense vowels with off-glides, where the touch occurs on the stressed vowel in a word or phrase, not only consolidates the voice and hand/arm movement and helps identify more consistent locations for the pedagogical gestures, but also gives learners confidence in finding them in the first place. That is especially the case where two sounds or patterns are both conceptually and phonologically in very close proximity, such as the space/distinction between [iy] and [ey] in English in this demonstration video from haptic pronunciation training, version 2.0. 

Now I realize this may all be a bit hard to "grasp" at first, but after you have had just a "touch" of haptic work, it makes perfect sense!

Need to know more and be trained in Haptic Pronunciation Training? Go here and then sign up here!

Source:
Confidence is higher in touch than in vision in cases of perceptual ambiguity, Scientific Reports, volume 8, Article number: 15604 (2018)

Out of touch and "pointless" gesture use in (pronunciation) teaching

Two recently published, interesting papers illustrate potential problems and pleasures with gesture use in (pronunciation) teaching. The author(s) both, unfortunately, implicate or misrepresent haptic pronunciation training.

Note: In Haptic Pronunciation Training-English (HaPT-Eng) there is NO interpersonal touch, whatsoever. A learner's hands may touch either each other or the learner holds something, such as a ball or pencil that functions as an extension of the hand. Touch typically serves to control and standardize gesture--and integrate the senses--while amplifying the focus on stressed syllables in words or phrases.

This from Chan (2018): Embodied Pronunciation Learning: Research and Practice in special issue of the CATESOL journal on research-based pronunciation teaching:

"In discussing the use of tactile communication or haptic interventions, they (Hişmanoglu and Hişmanoglu, 2008) advise language teachers to be careful. They cite a number of researchers who distinguish high-contact, touch-oriented societies (e.g., Filipino, Latin American, Turkish) from societies that are low contact and not touch oriented (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean); the former may perceive the teacher’s haptic behavior (emphasis mine)as normal while the latter may perceive it as abnormal and uncomfortable. They also point out that in Islamic cultures, touching between people (emphasis mine) of the same gender is approved, but touching between genders is not allowed. Thus, while integrating embodied pronunciation methods into instruction, teachers need to remain constantly aware of the individuals, the classroom dynamics, and the attitudes students express toward these activities."

What Chan means by the "teacher's haptic behavior" is not defined. (She most probably means simply touching--tactile, not "haptic" in the technical sense as in robotics, for example, or as we use it in HaPT-Eng, that is: gesture synchronized with speech and anchored with intra-personal touch that provides feedback to the learner.) For example, to emphasize word stress in HaPT-Eng, in a technique called the "Rhythm Fight Club", the teacher/learner may squeeze a ball on a stressed syllable, as the arm punches forward, as in boxing. .

Again: There is absolutely no "interpersonal touch" or tactile or haptic communication, body-to-body, utilized in  HaPT-Eng . . . it certainly could be, of course--acknowledging the precautions noted by Chan. 

Clker.com

A second study, Shadowing for pronunciation development: Haptic-shadowing and IPA-shadowing, by Hamada, has a related problem with the definition of "haptic". In the nice study, subjects "shadowed" a model, that is attempted to repeat what they heard (while view a script), simultaneously, along with the model. (It is a great technique, one use extensively in the field.) The IPA group had been trained in some "light" phonetic analysis of the texts, before attempting the shadowing. The "haptic" group were trained in what was said (inaccurately) to be the Rhythm Fight Club. There was a slight main effect, nonetheless, the haptic group being a bit more comprehensible.

The version of the RFC used was not haptic; it was only kinesthetic (there was no touch involved), just using the punching gesture, itself, to anchor/emphasize designated stressed syllables in the model sentences. The kinesthetic (touchless) version of the RFC has been used in other studies with even less success! It was not designed to be used without something for the hand to squeeze on the stressed element of the word or sentence, making it haptic. In that form, the gesture use can easily become erratic and out of control--best case! One of the main--and fully justified--reasons for avoidance of gesture work by many practitioners, as well as the central focus of HaPT-Eng: controlled, systematic use of gesture in anchoring prominence in language instruction.  

But a slight tweak of the title of the Hamada piece from "haptic" to "kinesthetic", of course, would do the trick.

The good news: using just kinesthetic gesture (movement w/o touch anchoring), the main effect was discernable. The moderately "bad" news: it was not haptic--which (I am absolutely convinced) would have made the study much more significant--let alone more memorable, touching and moving . . .

Keep in touch! v5.0 of HaPT-Eng will be available later this summer!

Touching pronunciation teaching: a haptic Pas de trois

Wikipedia.org

For you ballet buffs this should "touch home" . . . The traditional "Pas de trois" in ballet typically involves 3 dancers who move through 5 phases: Introduction, 3 variations, each done by at least one dancer, and then a coda of some kind with all dancing.

A recent article by Lamothe in the UK Guardian, Let's touch: why physical connection between human beings matters, reminded us of some the earliest work we did in haptic pronunciation teaching that involved students working together in pairs, "conducted" by the instructor, in effect "touching" each other on focus words or stressed syllables in various ways, on various body parts.

In today's highly "touch sensitive" milieu, any kind of interpersonal touching is potentially problematic, especially "cross-gender" or "cross-power plane", but there still is an important place for it, as Lamothe argues persuasively. Maybe even in pronunciation teaching!

Here is one example from haptic pronunciation teaching. Everything in the method can be done using intra-personal and interpersonal touch, but this one is relatively easy to "see" without a video to demonstrate the interpersonal version of it:

• Students stand face to face about a foot apart. Instructor demonstrates a word or phrase, tapping her right shoulder (with left hand) on stressed syllables and left elbow (with right hand) on unstressed syllables--the "Butterfly technique". 

As teacher and students then repeat the word or phrase together,

• One student will lightly tap the other on the outside of the her right shoulder on stressed syllables (using her left hand).

• The other student will lightly tap the outside of the other student's left elbow on unstressed syllables (using her right hand). 

Note: Depending on the socio-cultural context, and depending on what the general attire of the class is, having all students use some kind of hand "disinfectant" may be in order! Likewise, pairing of students obviously requires knowing well both them individually and the interpersonal dynamics of the class. Consider competition among pairs or teams using the same technique. 

If you do have the class and context for it, try a bit of it, for instance on a few short idioms. It takes a little getting used to, but the impact of touch in this relatively simple exercise format--and the close paralinguistic "communication"-- can be very dramatic and . . . touching.

Keep in touch!

Pronunciation teaching not your cup of tea? It may be your metaphor or M-Cat!

Clipart:

Neuroscientist, Glaser, of King's College, as reported in the Guardian, may just have the "answer": adjust your metaphors! For example, if your students are not as friendly or malleable as they should be, have them all hold a cup of warm tea for a bit. (Caveat emptor: The following is serious fun!) In one study:

"Those holding hot drinks were also more likely to be generous, and less likely to display behaviour thought of as selfish. This is due to the strong linguistic and metaphorical links created in the brain by repeatedly using the words ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ to describe personalities."

"This is due . . . " Wow. That is a bit of a stretch, of course, but he is getting warm . . . Pretty strong claim there, that it is the specific use of such adjectives alone that generates the visceral, affective response. Without digging too deeply into the evidence (which he doesn't, in fact), just hold your warm latte in both hands and read on. 

I've reported earlier on the blog similar research "linking" the metaphorical and somatic/tactile link between words such as "rough" or "coarse", for example, and how the brain seems to interpret those in a way very similar to when one actually touches a surface possessing that tactile quality.

Similar studies connect language and olfaction (smell/aroma therapy), e.g. That argument stinks! Likewise, beginning with work such as Metaphors we live by,  Lakoff and Johnson (2003), and continuing more recently in language teaching, e.g.,  Holme (2004) Mind, Metaphor and Language Teaching, in a very real sense, anything in the classroom is in principle, amenable to intentional (metaphorical) design and adjustment.

In the past, asking students to hold something random to affect their perception of something else was seen as pretty far out--objectionable to the point of unconscious manipulation. But today, with both research on the impact of placibos and pop-neuroscience that encourages a wide range of conscious adjustment of perception, it is a different "ball game"! (I make extensive use of balls in pronunciation teaching.) But first we need to ferret out all the classroom behaviors that are potentially working against us!

What we might term "meta-cup-a-tea" (M-Cat), that is the sensation evoked by touch or physical contact and presence is a variable in all instruction, including pronunciation. In general pronunciation instruction M-Cat may rarely be attended to consciously, but in haptic pronunciation instruction (HaPT) it can be critical, since it can divert awareness away from pronunciation-focused touch-based techniques. (For more on that see this!) In L2 work, however, cultural "misinterpretation" of in-class touching can of course go almost anyplace imaginable.

So let's just look at a few traditional pronunciation teaching "tactile experiences" (other than what goes on in the mouth or what is involved in HaPT) for their potential "Meta-cup-a-tea" contribution (or lack of contribution) to instruction. Listed below are some of my students' best M-Cats. On the face of it many of these are done to reinforce or correlate with a targeted sound or pattern. In practice, it is not at all clear what if any connectedness is realized, nonetheless. In many cases the "contact" or pressure can be counterproductive, interfering or distracting attention--but still fun:

Clker.com

• blowing air on tissue paper or hands: X is mostly hot air, germ dispersing 
• touching the face: X is untrained; has not taken course in public speaking
• clapping or tapping hands: X is attention-deprived
• stretching rubber bands: X is all thumbs, overextended
• snapping fingers: X impulsive, too much math, phonetics or syntax
• overly precise hand writing: X is scary or boring or compulsive
• hands holding things that are not warm: X is cold, unfeeling
• spinning pencils: X is neurotic, not from this culture, not a native speaker!
• fingers on smart phones, especially when multi-tasking: X is "situ-phrenic"
• hands excessively on books, notebooks: X is bookish, introvert, anachronist, dead-tree-ite
• hands excessively on body parts: X has pronounced problem
• hand or marker moving on iPad or white/smart board: X is hip, maybe even creative
• going through practice cards: X is a dealer
• caressing keyboard or mouse: X is geek-ish, L2-a-phobe, possibly closet rat
• glutes on chair: X is sedentary, butt stable
• sitting on chair in language lab: X is antisocial, isolationist
• full body on bed: X is seriously sedentary, probable "sound-nambulant"
• earphones on/in ears: X is audio-phont, "ear-y" at best
• chewing, eating, drinking: X is hypoglycemic or language hungry
• continually wiping finger prints off iPhone screen: dys-Appled, but possibly good follower
• head scratching: lice, itching to learn, excessive meta-cognition in process

Got any more good M-Cats? Post'em and I'll add them to the list.

Haptic (10-year pronunciation teaching) birthday party!

v1.0

v4.0

We are planning a couple of parties next month, celebrating 10 years of haptic pronunciation teaching. If you are a haptician in the Vancouver or Kamloops areas of British Columbia, please join us. (More specifics on that soon!) Should you not be (either in the area or a haptician by practice) you'll still be invited to join us "virtually" in celebrating! That will include:

• New video released describing the history and development of  Essential Haptic-integrated English Pronunciation (EHIEP).
• Birthday webinar/party  (We'll post a series of "success stories" before that happens. If you have one you'd like to contribute, please pass that on to me.)
• Release of new student self-study course.
• Recognition of "shrewdnesses, pandemoniums and zeals" of hapticians worldwide! (Each local group needs to choose its respective collective noun, based on which best describes their collective "personality", of course.) 



v3.0



v2.0

• We are also working on setting up a new professional organization or "shrewdness" of Hapticians or reviving the earlier International Association of Haptic-integrated Pronunciation Teaching Researchers and Instructors (IAHPTRI) from a few years ago. (If you belonged back then, we'll be in touch.) 

It has been an amazing "haptic" decade. It all began with the discovery that kinaesthetic, gesture work in pronunciation teaching could be considerably enhanced with just a "touch of touch!"

Keep in touch!

Bill

Why your avatar (could/will) make a better pronunciation teacher than your are!

Clker.com

Since the emergence of Second Life in 2003, I have been fascinated with the prospect of avatars teaching language. At the time, for technical reasons, I could not get my avatars to respond quickly enough with good audio to do much and gave up. (From recent reviews, it appears that most of those issues, including monitoring of offensive content, have been resolved and I may give it another look.)

A 2016 study of avatars teaching math to kids by Cook, Friedman, Duggan, Cui and Popescu provides an interesting perspective. The focus of the study was to attempt to isolate the effect of gesture, independent of facial expression, body motion and other features of the presenter's persona. As the researchers note, one of the problems with identifying the impact of gesture (from the abstract) is that it is "known to co-vary with other non-verbal behaviors, including eye gaze and prosody along with face, lip, and body movements . . . "

The avatars presented a fixed background such that only the hand movement varied. (The voice used and various graphic figures remained constant.) The effect was "pronounced". The subjects who viewed the gesturing avatar not only learned the concepts more successfully but also were later able to apply the material better. (That is not really surprising since a number of studies have established that students just learn better when teachers gesture more.) But avatars bring something more to the party--or less!

In principle, how much of pronunciation could an avatar teach (either with or without gesture assist)? Probably most of it. (And I predict that that day is not far off.) One reason for that, mentioned above by Cook et al. is the fact that gesture tends to co-vary with other "non-verbal behaviors" such as . . . prosody? (Prosody is nonverbal? Really?)The basis of effective gesture use in instruction often depends critically on the learners' attention being "locked" on the cuing or anchoring motion; the gesture in tern is also strongly associated with a sound or process.

As reported in several previous posts, loss of attention or distraction is a most important variable in haptic (gesture plus touch) pronunciation teaching as well. The video models that we use now are for the most part black and white, with black background and no subtitles on screen, designed to focus learner attention on the movement and positioning basically of my hands, not the model's face or body. Addition of color, extraneous movement, or additional graphics will always pull at least some learners away from the focus of the lesson embodied in the pedagogical gestures. (Research on competition between visual, auditory and kinaesthetic or haptic, has demonstrated consistently that visual displays almost always trump the others, even in combination.)

For gesture-based pronunciation or other kinds of instruction for that matter, interactive "thinking" and responding Avatars offer real promise. The technology has been around for over a decade, in fact. Advantages of avatars include:

• Individualized, more affordable computer-based instruction 
• Systematic application of gesture in instruction, especially providing consistent placement of gesture in the visual field.
• More effective attention management, neutralizing potential visual distractions
• Emotionally "comfortable" instruction for a wider range learner personalities
• Avoids unconscious transmission of:
• Instructor "bad day" images and attitudes
• Typical "hyperactive" pronunciation teacher behavior
• Overreactions, positive or negative, to student miscues or "victories"
• Instructor bias toward "teacher pets" or gaze avoidance in eye contact patterning during instruction

 Time to reactivate my Avatar. Will upload a demo later this summer.  

 Cook, S. W., Friedman, H. S., Duggan, K. A., Cui, J. and Popescu, V. (2016), Hand Gesture and Mathematics Learning: Lessons From an Avatar. Cognitive Science. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12344