Use of L2 Pronunciation Techniques in and Outside Classes: Students’ Preferences

Ewa Kusz; Judyta Pawliszko

doi:10.18778/1731-7533.20.2.06

Authors

Ewa Kusz University of Rzeszów, Poland
Judyta Pawliszko Rzeszów University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.20.2.06

Keywords:

foreign language teaching, pronunciation teaching techniques, oreign language phonetics and phonology, e-learning

Abstract

The present study describes the level of effectiveness of both traditional and computer-assisted second language pronunciation techniques from the students’ perspectives. By traditional techniques we mean those activities which make use of phonetic alphabet, including transcription practice, detailed description of the articulatory systems, drills (e.g. minimal pair drills), reading aloud, tongue twisters, rhymes, etc. (Hismanoglu and Hismanoglu 2010: 985). On the other hand, computer-assisted techniques include activities based on listening and imitating tasks, which use technology, such as self-imitation practice, recordings of L2 learner’s, visual aids, and automatic speech recognition tools. The main aim of this study does not aim to classify L2 pronunciation methods by allocating them to previously mentioned categories but rather attempts to examine the intricate relationship between students’ knowledge, perceptions, attitudes and their most preferable practices which, in their opinion, result in improvement of their L2 pronunciation.
118 study subjects were asked to complete four main questions, within which tasks based on the Likert-scale items gathered data about the students’ most preferable L2 pronunciation teaching and learning techniques. The students were asked to create their own list, starting from the most useful to the least beneficial techniques. The last task was an open-ended question about other techniques than mentioned in the questionnaire.
The analysis of the obtained data involved a two-stage process: a) data segmentation; and b) techniques categorisation. The first step was to select pronunciation learning techniques in terms of their frequency and use and to adjust them to the research group. The second stage, techniques categorisation, was based on a careful analysis of the answers given by the students in the questionnaire. Following that, five categories were distinguished: (1) traditional and used only in the classroom, (2) traditional but also used in distance learning, (3) computer-assisted but used only in the classroom, (4) computer-assisted and also used in distance learning, (5) innovative: combining students’ needs and available online.
Highlighting the prominence of pronunciation in acquiring communicative competence, the authors propose their own, innovative suggestions for the future creation of teaching materials.

References

Baker, Amanda. 2014. Exploring Teachers' Knowledge of Second Language Pronunciation Techniques: Teacher Cognitions, Observed Classroom Practices, and Student Perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 136-163. [Accessed 20 October 2020]. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/43267952 https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.99
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.99

Boersma, P., Weenink, D. 2007. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.1.53, retrieved 8 September 2021 from http://www.praat.org/
Google Scholar

Brown, Douglas. 2007. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (3rd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Google Scholar

Carey, Michael. 2002. An L1-specific CALL pedagogy for the instruction of pronunciation with Korean learners of English. Macquarie: Macquarie University.
Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne, Brinton, Donna, Goodwin, Janet, and Griner, B. 2010. Teaching pronunciation : A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne, Brinton, Donna, and Goodwin, Janet. 1996. Teaching pronunciation: A Reference for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambriznaadge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne, and Goodwin, Janet. 1991. Teaching Pronunciation. In M. Celce-Murcia, (ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 136-153. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Google Scholar

Chen, C. F. 2007. Computer assisted language learning and teaching. [Accessed 15 October 2020] Available at: http://www.nkfust.edu.tw/˜emchen/CALL/
Google Scholar

Couper, G. 2003. The value of an explicit pronunciation syllabus in ESOL teaching. Prospect, 18(3), 53-70.
Google Scholar

De Meo, A., Vitale, M., Pettorino, M., Cutugno, F., and Origlia, A. 2013. Imitation/self-imitation in computer-assisted prosody training for Chinese learners of L2 Italian. In J. Levis, K. Levelle, (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, 90-100. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
Google Scholar

Derwing, Tracey, and Rossiter, Marian J. 2002. ESL learners' perceptions of their pronunciation needs and strategies. System, vol. 30, 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00012-X
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00012-X

Derwing, Tracey. 2003. What do ESL students say about their accents? Canadian Modern Language Review, vol. 59, 547-566. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.59.4.547
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.59.4.547

Derwing, Tracey M., Munro, Murray J., and Wiebe, Grace. 1998. Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning,48, 393–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00047
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00047

Ding, S., Liberatore, C., Sonsaat, S., Lučić, I., Silpachai, A., Zhao, G., Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., Levis, J., Gutierrez-Osuna, R. 2019. Golden speaker builder–An interactive tool for pronunciation training. Speech Communication, 115, 51-66.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2019.10.005

Ehsani, F., and Knodt, E. 1998. Speech technology in computer-aid learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning and Technology, 2, 45-60. Available at: http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article3/index.html.
Google Scholar

Felps, Daniel, Bortfeld, Heather, and Gutierrez-Osuna, Ricardo. 2009. Foreign accent conversion in computer assisted pronunciation training. Speech Communication, 51(10), 920-932. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588491
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2008.11.004

Gatbonton, Elizabeth, Tromfimovich, Pavel, and Magid, Michael. 2005. Learners' ethnic group affiliation and L2 pronunciation accuracy: A sociolinguistic investigation. TESOL Quarterly, vol. 39, 489-512. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588491
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588491

Hashemian, Mahmood, and Fadaei, Batool. 2011. A Comparative Study of Intuitive-imitative and Analytic-linguistic Approaches towards Teaching English Vowels to L2 Learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(5), 969-976. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.5.969-976
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.5.969-976

Hirst, D. 2000. ProZed: A multilingual prosody editor for speech synthesis. Proceedings of IEE Colloqium. State-of-the-Art in Speech Synthesis. London, March 2000 https://doi: 10.1049/ic:20000321 https://doi.org/10.1049/ic:20000321
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1049/ic:20000321

Hirst, D. 2012. ProZed: A speech prosody analysis-by-synthesis tool for linguists. SP-2012, 15-18.
Google Scholar

Hirst, D. 2015. ProZed: A Speech Prosody Editor for Linguists, Using Analysis-by-Synthesis. In K. Hirose, J. Tao, (eds.), Speech Prosody in Speech Synthesis: Modeling and generation of prosody for high quality and flexible speech synthesis. Prosody, Phonology and Phonetics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [Accessed 10 October 2020] https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45258-5_1
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45258-5_1

Hismanoglu, Murat. 2006. Current Perspectives on Pronunciation Learning and Teaching. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 2(1), 100-110.
Google Scholar

Hismanoglu, Murat, and Hismanoglu, Sibel. 2010. Language teachers’ preferences of pronunciation teaching techniques: traditional or modern? Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 983-989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.138
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.138

Kang, Okim. 2010. ESL learners' attitudes toward pronunciation instruction. In J. Levis, K. Levelle, (eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, 105-118. Ames: Iowa State University.
Google Scholar

Krzyżyński, Janusz. 1988. Folk linguistics and its influence on the attitudes and motivation of learners of English as a foreign language. Glottodidactica, 19, 107-113.
Google Scholar

Lee, S. T. 2008. Teaching pronunciation of English using computer assisted learning software: An active research study in an institute of technology in Taiwan. Australia: Australian Catholic University.
Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy, and Saito, Kazuya. 2010. Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265-302. https://doi:10.1017/S0272263109990520
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520

Scales, J., Wennerstrom, A., Richard, D., Wu, S. H. 2006. Language learners' perceptions of accent. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 715-738. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264305
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/40264305

Sobkowiak, Włodzimierz. 2002. English speech in Polish eyes: What university students think about English pronunciation teaching and learning. In E. Waniek-Klimczak, and J. P. Melia (eds.), Accents and speech in teaching English phonetics and phonology: EFL perspective, 177-196. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar

Schwartz, A., Markoff, J., and Jain, N. 1991. Intensive instruction for accent modification. [Accessed 15 October 2020].
Google Scholar

Timmis, Ivor. 2002. Native-speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. ELT Journal, 56, 240-249. https://doi:10.1093/elt/56.3.240
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.3.240

Waltens, B., and De Bot, K. 1984. Visual feedback of intonation II: Feedback delay and quality of feedback. Language and Speech, 27, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098402700106
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098402700106

Waniek-Klimczak, Ewa. 1997. Context for teaching English phonetics and phonology at Polish Universities and Colleges: a survey. In E. Waniek-Klimczak (ed.), Teaching English phonetics and phonology II: Accents ’97, 5-17. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Google Scholar

Waniek-Klimczak, Ewa, and Klimczak, Karol. 2005. Target in speech development: learners’ views. In K. Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, & J. Przedlacka (eds.), English pronunciation Models: A changing scene, 229-250. Bern: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar

Waniek-Klimczak, Ewa, Porzuczek, Arkadiusz, and Rojczyk, Andrzej. 2015. ‘Polglish’ in Polish Eyes: What English Studies Majors Think About Their Pronunciation in English. In E. Waniek-Klimczak, M. Pawlak (eds.), Teaching and Researching the Pronunciation of English. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11092-9_2
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11092-9