Post on 27-Jan-2015
description
Examining the Role of Explicit Phonetic Instruction in Native-like and
Comprehensible Pronunciation Development: An Instructed SLA
Approach to L2 Phonology
Presenter: Sze-Chu Liu
Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu
Date: March 24, 2014
Citation
Saito, K. (2011). Examining the role of explicit phonetic instruction in native-like and comprehensible pronunciation development: An instructed SLA approach to L2 phonology. Language Awareness, 20(1), 45-59.
204/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Content
IntroductionLiterature ReviewMethodResultsConclusionCritiques and Suggestions
304/10/2023 Individual Presentation
INTRODUCTION
4
Introduction
Background
Related Works
The Gap
Purpose of the Study04/10/2023 5Individual Presentation
Background•‘the
degree to which the pronunciation of an utterance sounds differ from an expected pronunciation pattern’
Accentedness
•‘listeners’ estimation of difficulty in understanding an utterance’
Comprehensibility
(Derwing & Munro, 2005)
Second language speech
04/10/2023 6Individual Presentation
Related Works
7
(Levis, 2005; Setter & Jenkins, 2005)
Accentedness vs. Comprehensibility
Realistic goals should be set for L2 learners such as comprehensibility rather than accentedness.
Comprehensibility
Accentedness
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Related Works
8
The importance of explicit phonetic instruction has been extensively discussed in the field of experimental phonetics as well as second language education.
(Derwing, 2008)
An instructional treatment is explicit if ruleexplanation forms part of the instruction (deduction) or if learners are asked to attend to particular forms and try to find the rules themselves (induction).
(DeKeyser, 2003)
Explicit Phonic Instruction
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
The Gap
9
It still remains unclear the extent to which their instruction treatment impacted learners’ comprehensible pronunciation.
(Derwing, 2008; Derwing & Munro, 2005; Levis, 2005).
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Purpose of the Study
10
The current study investigates the relative effects of instruction via two different evaluation methods: accentedness and comprehensibility.
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
LITERATURE REVIEW
11
Explicit Pronunciation Teaching
(Derwing & Munro, 2005)
Students learning L2 pronunciation benefit from being explicitly taught phonological form to help them notice the difference between their own productions and those of proficient speakers in the L2 community.
04/10/2023 12Individual Presentation
Segmental-Based Instruction
13
(Ladefoged, 2003)
English segmental features
Articulator organs
Place of articulation
Manner of articulation
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Eight English-Specific Segmental Features
1404/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Explicit Phonetic Instruction
15
Perception Production Feedback
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Perception Activities
16
•Clear account of formal properties of English-specific sounds one by one in a sequence
Identification
•Japanese sounds which might be confused with English sounds and asked to discriminate the target English sounds from the closest Japanese counterparts
Discrimination
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Production activities and feedback techniques
17
•segmental-level reading task
•word-level reading task
•sentence-level reading task
Production activities
•produce more output
•notice their errors
•self-repair errors in phonetic forms
Corrective Feedback
(Derwing, Munro, & Thomson, 2004)
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
(Ellis, Basturkmen, & Loewen, 2001)
Research Questions
Does explicit phonetic instruction significantly improve ESL students’ accentedness?
Does explicit phonetic instruction significantly improve ESL students’ comprehensibility?
1804/10/2023 Individual Presentation
METHOD
19
Participants (I)•20 adult NJs of
intermediate proficiency
•Aged 27.6 years old in average
•Time in the USA: mean = 2.3 months
•Had learned English for more than 10 years
ESL Students
2004/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Participants (II)•4 (1 male, 3 females)•Recruited from X
University (in the USA)•All had grown up in the
United States•Reported normal
hearing•Experienced instructors
of either phonetics or ESL classes at X University
•‘trained NE listeners’
NE listeners
2104/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Participants (II)•a non-native
speaking teacher (L1 Japanese)
•graduated from an MA program in linguistics in the USA with a concentration in TESOL
The instructor
2204/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Research Design
23
Experimental Group Control Group
Pre-testPre-test
Compare
Post-test Post-test
4-hourExplicit phonetic
instructionNone
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Instruction Setting
A laboratory setting 1 hour/week × 4 weeksInstruction presented both in Japanese
and English
2404/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Pre- and Post- Tests
25
Sentence-reading task
Picture-description task
(Derwing & Munro, 1997; Derwing et al., 1998;Munro, Derwing, & Morton, 2006)
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Contents of loaded sentences
2604/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Rating
Four trained NE listenerslisten to one data CD that contained 210
randomized stimulirate them on the basis of the 9-point scale
accentedness– from 1 = native-like to 9 = heavily accented
comprehensibility– from 1 = no effort to understand to 9 = very hard to
understand
2704/10/2023 Individual Presentation
RESULTS
28
Inter-rater reliability
Accentedness: r = .66Comprehensibility: r = .53
Adequate reliability
04/10/2023 29Individual Presentation
Results - Accentedness
•no significant differences•for
group
•for time
Sentence Reading
Task
•no significant differences•for
group
•for time
Picture Description
Task
3004/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Results – comprehensibility ratings – The Experimental Group
3104/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Summary of comprehensibility ratings – The Control Group
32
Wrong data!
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
ANOVA Results - Comprehensibility
•Significant differences for Group × Time interaction
•A simple main effect for Time was found significant for the experimental group.
•The control group did not show any significant gains.
Sentence Reading
Task
•no significant differences•for
group
•for time
Picture Description
Task3304/10/2023 Individual Presentation
CONCLUSION
34
Conclusion
The experiment confirmed that explicit instruction benefited NJs’ comprehensibility in the experimental group especially at the controlled speech level (sentence-reading).
It is important to make pedagogical suggestions for L2 classrooms and to inform future directions for instructed L2 phonology studies.
3504/10/2023 Individual Presentation
CRITIQUES AND SUGGESTIONS
36
Limited number of participants
Short Period of instruction
No summary for ANOVA
Increase the number of participants• at least 30Extend the instruction period• more than 12 weeksProvide the ANOVA summary• detail information
37
Critiques Suggestions
04/10/2023 Individual Presentation
Thank you for listening!