Volume 17, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1598-7647
  • E-ISSN: 2451-909X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The present study investigates the effect of explicit teaching of segmentals and suprasegmentals in developing speaking skills for Farsi-English interpreter trainees. Three groups of student interpreters were formed. All were native speakers of Farsi who studied English translation and interpreting at the BA level at the University of Applied Sciences in Tehran, Iran. Participants were assigned to groups at random, but with equal division between genders (7 female and 7 male students in each group). No significant differences in English language skills (TOEFL scores) could be established between the groups prior to the experiment. Participants took a pretest of speaking skills before starting the program. The control group listened to authentic audio tracks in English and discussed their contents, watched authentic English movies, and discussed issues in the movies in pairs in the classroom. The first experimental group spent part of the time on theoretical explanation of, and practical exercises with, English suprasegmentals. The second experimental group spent part of the time on theoretical explanation of, and practical exercises with, English segmentals. The total instruction time was the same for all three groups, i.e. 12 hours. Students then took a posttest in speaking skills. The results show that the explicit teaching of suprasegmentals significantly improved the students’ speaking skills more than that of the other groups. These results have pedagogical implications for curriculum designers, interpreting programs for training future interpreters, material producers and all who are involved in language study and pedagogy.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Adams-Goertel, R.
    (2013) Prosodic elements to improve pronunciation in English language learners: A short report. Applied Research on English Language, 2, 117–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aquil, R.
    (2012) Listening to English connected speech: A problem and solutions. Arab World English Journal, 3, 329–364.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey, K.
    (1999) Speaking: A critical skill and a challenge. Calico Journal, 16(3), 277–293.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bissiri, M. P., & Pfitzinger, H. R.
    (2009) Italian speakers learn lexical stress of German morphologically complex words. Speech Communication, 51, 933–947. 10.1016/j.specom.2009.03.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2009.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, G., & Yule, G.
    (1983) Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cebrian, J., & Carlet, A.
    (2014) Second-language learners’ identification of target-language phonemes: a short-term phonetic training study. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 70(4), 474–499. 10.3138/cmlr.2318
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2318 [Google Scholar]
  7. Celce-Murcia, M.; Brinton, D. M.; Goodwin, J. M. & Griner, B.
    (2010) Teaching Pronunciation: A Course Book and Reference Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J.
    (2009) Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles in communication. Language Teaching, 42, 476–490. doi:  10.1017/S026144480800551X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480800551X [Google Scholar]
  9. Derwing, T. M., Diepenbroek, L. G. & Foote, J. A.
    (2012) How well do general-skills ESL textbooks address pronunciation?TESL Canada Journal, 30, 22–44. 10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1124
    https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1124 [Google Scholar]
  10. Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G.
    (1998) Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48 (3), 393–410. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00047
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00047 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ferris, D., & Tagg, T.
    (1998) Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 289–318. 10.2307/3587585
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587585 [Google Scholar]
  12. Gómez Lacabex, E., & del Puerto, F. G.
    (2014) Two phonetic-training procedures for young learners: Investigating instructional effects on perceptual awareness. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 70(4), 500–531. doi:  10.3138/cmlr.2324
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.2324 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gussenhoven, C.
    (2015) Suprasegmentals. InJ. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 2nd edition, Volume23. Oxford: Elsevier, 714–721. 10.1016/B978‑0‑08‑097086‑8.52024‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.52024-8 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hall, M.
    (2007) Phonological characteristics of Farsi speakers of English and L1 Australian English speakers’ perception of proficiency. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Linguistics, Curtin University.
  15. Hardison, D. M.
    (2004) Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning & Technology, 8, 34–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. He, X., Heuven, V. J. van & Gussenhoven, C.
    (2012) The selection of intonation contours by Chinese L2 speakers of Dutch: Orthographic closure vs. prosodic knowledge. Second Language Research, 28, 283–318. 10.1177/0267658312439668
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312439668 [Google Scholar]
  17. Heuven, V. J. van
    (2017) Prosody and sentence type in Dutch. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 22, 3–29. 10.5117/NEDTAA2017.1.HEUV
    https://doi.org/10.5117/NEDTAA2017.1.HEUV [Google Scholar]
  18. (2008) Making sense of strange sounds: (mutual) intelligibility of related language varieties. A review. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing2, 39–62. 10.3366/E1753854809000305
    https://doi.org/10.3366/E1753854809000305 [Google Scholar]
  19. Heuven, V. J. van
    (1994) Introducing prosodic phonetics. InC. Odé & V. J. van Heuven (Eds.), Experimental studies of Indonesian prosody. Semaian9. Leiden: Vakgroep Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië, Leiden University, 1–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hirose, K.
    (2004) Accent type recognition of Japanese using perceived mora pitch values and its use for pronunciation training system. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Tonal Aspects of Languages (TAL), Beijing, 77–80. Retrieved fromwww.isca-speech.org/archive/tal2004/papers/tal4_077.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hirschfeld, U. & Trouvain, J.
    (2007) Teaching prosody in German as foreign language. InJ. Trouvain & U. Gut (Eds.), Non-native prosody. Phonetic description and teaching practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 171–189.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Levelt, W.
    (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Mauranen, A.
    (2006) Spoken discourse, academics and global English: A corpus perspective. InR. Huges (Ed.), Spoken English, TESOL and applied linguistics (pp.143–158). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230584587_7
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584587_7 [Google Scholar]
  24. Missaglia, F.
    (1999) Contrastive prosody in SLA – An empirical study with adult Italian learners of German. Proceedings of the 14th Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1, 551–554.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Nagano, K., & Ozawa, K.
    (1990) English speech training using voice conversion. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 90), Kobe, 1169–1172.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Nicolosi, L., Harryman, E., & Keresheck, J.
    (1989) Terminology of communication disorders. Baltimore, MD: William & Wilkins. 10.1097/00003446‑198904000‑00015
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198904000-00015 [Google Scholar]
  27. Nooteboom, S. G.
    (1997) “The Prosody of Speech: Melody and Rhythm.” InThe Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, edited byW. J. Hardcastle and J. Laver, 640–673. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nooteboom, S. G. & Doodeman, G. J. N.
    (1984) Speech quality and the gating paradigm. InM. P. R. van den Broecke & A. Cohen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Dordrecht: Foris, 481–485. 10.1515/9783110884685‑074
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884685-074 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pike, K. L.
    (1945) The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Saito, K.; Trofimovich, P. & Isaacs, T.
    (2016) Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37, 217–240. doi:  10.1017/S0142716414000502
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716414000502 [Google Scholar]
  31. Samareh, Y.
    (1986) Phonology of Farsi language. Tehran: Markaz e Nashre Daneshgahi.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Shademan, S.
    (2002) Epenthetic vowel harmony in Farsi. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of California Los Angeles.
  33. Su, C.-Y. & Tseng, C.-Y.
    (2015) A phonetics-based computer aided prosody training system for L2 English learning. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow. Retrieved fromhttps://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS2015/Papers/ICPHS0536.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sundström, A.
    (1998) Automatic prosody modification as a means for foreign language pronunciation training. Proceedings of an ISCA Workshop on Speech Technology in Language Learning (STILL 98), Marholmen, 49–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Turk, A. E., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S.
    (2007) Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. Journal of Phonetics, 35(4), 445–472. 10.1016/j.wocn.2006.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2006.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ur, P.
    (1996) A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Ueno, N.
    (1998) Teaching English pronunciation to Japanese English majors: A comparison of a suprasegmental-oriented and a segmental-oriented teaching approach. JACET Bulletin, 29, 207–225.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, H., Zhu, L., Li, X. & Heuven, V. J. van
    (2011) Relative importance of tone and segments for the intelligibility of Mandarin and Cantonese. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, 2090–2093.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Windfuhr, G.
    (1979) Persian grammar: History and state of its study. The Hague, Paris and New York: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110800425
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110800425 [Google Scholar]
  40. Yates, K.
    (2003) Teaching linguistic mimicry to improve second language pronunciation (Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton).
  41. Yenkimaleki, M.
    (2016) Why prosody awareness training is necessary for training future interpreters. Journal of Education and human development, 5, 256–261. 10.15640/jehd.v5n1a26
    https://doi.org/10.15640/jehd.v5n1a26 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2017) Effect of prosody awareness training on the quality of consecutive interpreting between English and Farsi. LOT: Utrecht.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Yenkimaleki, M. & Heuven, V. J. van
    (2013) Prosodic feature awareness training in interpreting: An experimental study. InL. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez & I. Candel Torres (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Education, Research and Innovation, November 18–20, 2013, Seville, 4179–4188.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. (2016a) Effect of explicit teaching of prosodic features on the development of listening comprehension by Farsi-English interpreter trainees: An experimental study. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 4, 32–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. (2016b) The effect of prosody teaching on developing word recognition skills for interpreter trainees: An experimental study. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 7, 1101–1107. 10.24297/jal.v7i1.5158
    https://doi.org/10.24297/jal.v7i1.5158 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2016c) Prosody teaching matters in developing speaking skills for Farsi-English interpreter trainees: An experimental study. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 4, 82–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. (2016d) Effect of prosody awareness training on the performance of consecutive interpretation from Farsi into English: An experimental study. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2018) The effect of teaching prosody teaching on interpreting performance: An experimental study of consecutive interpreting from English into Farsi. Perspectives: Studies in translatology, 26, 84–99. doi:  10.1080/0907676X.2017.1315824
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1315824 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2019) The relative contribution of computer assisted prosody training vs. instructor-based prosody teaching in developing speaking skills by interpreter trainees: an experimental study. Speech Communication, 107, 48–57. 10.1016/j.specom.2019.01.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2019.01.006 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error