Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

37
Rethinking Fluency (Week 2) ORAL I V (HE281) Prof. Dr. Ron Martinez [email protected]

Transcript of Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Page 1: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Rethinking Fluency (Week 2)

ORAL I V(HE281)

Prof. Dr. Ron [email protected]

Page 2: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

SIT NEXT TO SOMEONE NEW

TODAY!

Page 3: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Summary from Week 1• It is important to define what ‘fluency’ in spoken language

means.• Fluency is not related to ‘native’-ness.• Fluency is (minimally) broken down into cognitive fluency,

utterance fluency, and perceived fluency. Each of these, in turn, may be influenced by a great number of variables.

• Fluency can be thought of as ‘readiness’, on different levels: mentally/emotionally prepared, knowing what to say and how to say it (‘prepared’ utterances), and having what to say ‘at the ready’ (i.e. automaticity).

Page 4: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

FORMULATION ARTICULATION

Cognitive Fluency

Utterance Fluency Perceived

Fluency

Page 5: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

COGNITIVE FLUENCY

UTTERANCEFLUENCY

PERCEIVED FLUENCY

Page 6: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Goals for the week

• Reconsider concepts of “intelligibility”• Look ahead to coming weeks...

Page 7: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Today’s agenda

• Introduction / Course overview• Introduction to course website• Discussion of issues around “fluency”• Your homework

Page 8: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

“Accent”: What do you think?

1. Take poll (online).2. Explain the answer you gave to your group.3. What is “perfect” pronunciation?4. Would you choose to sound like a native

speaker if you had that option? 5. Do you think “identity” has anything to do

with accent? In what way?

Page 9: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Rajadurai on ‘Intelligibility’1. According to Joanne Rajadurai, how is 'intelligibility' defined?

2. What are the related concepts, as advocated by Smith and Nelson (1985)?

3. How and why is 'intelligibility' researched?

4. What criticisms does Rajadurai raise of intelligibility studies?

5. What common misconceptions and myths are there around 'intelligibility', according to Rajadurai?

Page 10: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

A definition

Page 11: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

3 Components of Intelligibility according to Smith and Nelson (1985)

• Intelligibility• Comprehensibility• Interpretability

Page 12: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Where’s the problem?

• Watch the short video and decide where the intelligibility problem is: intelligibility, comprehensibility, or interpretability?

Page 13: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

How and why is intelligibility researched?

Page 14: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

How and why is intelligibility researched?

• Elicitation• “Even in studies that attempt to elicit ‘natural’ speech as

the stimulus material, the laboratory-like conditions under which the experiments are conducted negate such attempts. These techniques produce artificial and inauthentic data, and consequently place severe limitations on the findings of the research.” (p. 90)

• “With a few notable exceptions, the vast majority of studies seem to ignore the fact that speech is context-specific and highly dependent on the topic, participants, and situation.” (p. 90)

Page 15: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Other issues?

• “It is also fairly obvious that intelligibility is strongly influenced by the listener’s biases and preconceived ideas about speakers and accents.” (p. 90)

• Example: Rubin (1992)

Page 16: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

4 Groups: same lecture audio, different images

“CAUCASIAN” “ASIAN”

HUMANITIES (Group 1)

SCIENCE (Group 2)

HUMANITIES (Group 3)

SCIENCE (Group 4)

Page 17: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

SAME AUDIO!!!

Page 18: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

COGNITIVE FLUENCY

UTTERANCEFLUENCY

PERCEIVED FLUENCY

Page 19: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

“(I)ntelligibility may be as much in the mind of the listener as in the mouth of the speaker” (Morley, 1991: 499).

Page 20: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Jackie Chan1. How 'native-like' is Jackie Chan's English?

2. Would you say that Jackie Chan speaks fluent English? Why (not)?

3. To what extent is Jackie Chan's English 'intelligible'?

4. What about other associated elements (accentedness, comprehensibility, interpretability)?

5. All in all, was Jackie Chan's interview a successful one?

6. What variables (personal, interpersonal, contextual, etc.) may influence the extent to which Jackie Chan's interview can be perceived as successful?

Page 21: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 22: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Other misconceptions and myths

• Misconception 1: Only non-native speech is accented.• Misconception 2: Non-native speech lacks intelligibility.• Misconception 3: The non-native speaker is responsible

for communication problems.• Myth 1: The native variety should constitute the norm.• Myth 2: The native speaker is always the best judge of

what is intelligible.• Myth 3: The native speaker is always the best

representative of what is intelligible.

Page 23: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

About You

Page 24: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 25: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 26: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 27: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 28: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 29: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Yes/No Game

Page 30: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 31: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 32: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 33: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 34: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016
Page 35: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Pecha-Kucha

• Pay attention to the words and images, and take notes on the following questions:

• How much text is there on the slides?• What kind of images are used?• What about speaking style? Formal or

informal? Examples?

Page 36: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Your PKN (Wednesday, August 24th)

• You will create a PechaKucha presentation: 20 slides in PowerPoint.

• Remember: you can only speak for 20 seconds for each slides (just over 6 minutes). The transition from one slide to the next will be made automatically.

• You can “script” your PechaKucha, and may read from your script if you like. (But try not to stare at the paper.)

• You can choose any theme you want. (For example, ‘My Favorite Foods’, ‘My Family’, ‘My Dream Vacation’, ‘People I Don’t Love’, ‘Curitiba’, ‘Dogs’, ‘RPG’, ‘Best Binge Viewing Series’, etc.)

Page 37: Rethinking fluency (week 2) 2016

Homework

1. Take survey online about spoken vs. written language

2. Read Carter & McCarthy (2015) article on ‘spoken grammar’ (online), answer questions about the article (online), and bring your answers to class on Monday.

3. Continue working on PechaKucka presentations.