1887
Volume 167, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper investigates the efficacy of articulatory training and acoustic feedback on Persian L2 learners’ production of English segmental (/ɒ/). A sample of 30 Persian ESL learners was recruited- 10 learners were randomly assigned to the experimental group 1, 10 to the experimental group 2, and 10 to the control group. Over a five-week period, the experimental group 1 received training on the manner of articulation of the segment, the experimental group 2 received acoustic-articulatory training and was exposed to CALL software for receiving feedback, and the control group was only exposed to auditory input. The groups were given a pretest, an immediate posttest, and a generalization test. The results of the study showed a significant improvement in the performance of the participants in both the posttest and the generalization test in the experimental group 2. These findings suggest the inefficiency of the mere knowledge of the manner of articulation of the segment and lend support to the feasibility of using acoustic features of sounds and computer-based, learner-centred programs for second language segmental acquisition.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.167.2.04rah
2017-02-06
2019-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ansarin, A.A
    (2004, September). An acoustic analysis of Modern Persian vowels. Paper presented at the 9th Conference on Speech and Computer , St. Petersburg, Russia.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bassetti, B
    (2008) Orthographic input and second language phonology. In T. Piske & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Input matters in SLA (pp.191–206). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beeson, P.M. , & Robey, R.R
    (2006) Evaluating single-subject treatment research: Lessons learned from the aphasia literature. Neuropsychology Review, 16(4), 161–169. doi: 10.1007/s11065‑006‑9013‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-006-9013-7 [Google Scholar]
  4. Best, C.T
    (1995) A direct cross-realist view of cross-language speech perception. In W. Strang (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Theoretical and methodological issues (pp.233–277). Baltimore, MD: York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Best, C.T. , & Tyler, M.D
    (2007) Nonnative and second language speech perception. commonalities and complementarities. In M.J. Munro & O. -S. Bohn (Eds.), Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp.13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.17.07bes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.17.07bes [Google Scholar]
  6. Derwing, T. , & Munro, M
    (2005) Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 379–397. doi: 10.2307/3588486
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588486 [Google Scholar]
  7. Deterding, D
    (1997) The formants of monophthong vowels in standard Southern British English pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 27, 47–55. doi: 10.1017/S0025100300005417
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300005417 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2006) The North Wind versus a Wolf: short texts for the description and measurement of English pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 36(2), 187–196. doi: 10.1017/S0025100306002544
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100306002544 [Google Scholar]
  9. Engwall, O
    (2012) Analysis of and feedback on phonetic features in pronunciation training with a virtual teacher. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(1), 37–64. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2011.582845
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.582845 [Google Scholar]
  10. Engwall, O. , & Bälter, O
    (2007) Pronunciation feedback from real and virtual language teachers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 235–262. doi: 10.1080/09588220701489507
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220701489507 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ertmer, D.J. , & Maki, J.E
    (2000) A comparison of speech training methods with deaf adolescents: Spectrographic versus noninstrumental instruction. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1509–1523. doi: 10.1044/jslhr.4306.1509
    https://doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4306.1509 [Google Scholar]
  12. Escudero, P. , & Boersma, P
    (2004) Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(4), 551–585. doi: 10.1017/S0272263104040021
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104040021 [Google Scholar]
  13. Eskenazi, M
    (2009) An overview of spoken language technology for education. Speech Communication, 51, 832–844. doi: 10.1016/j.specom.2009.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2009.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  14. Flege, J.E
    (1995) Second language speech learning theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp.233–277). Timonium, MD: York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Flege, J.E. , Takagi, N. , & Mann, V
    (1996) Lexical familiarity and English‐language experience affect Japanese adults’ perception of/ɹ/and/l. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99(2), 1161–1173. doi: 10.1121/1.414884
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.414884 [Google Scholar]
  16. Frankel, J. , Wester, M. , & King, S
    (2007) Articulatory feature recognition using dynamic Bayesian networks. Computer, Speech and Language, 21, 620–620. doi: 10.1016/j.csl.2007.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2007.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  17. Golonka, E.M. , Bowles, A.R. , Frank, V.M. , Richardson, D.L. , & Freynik, S
    (2014) Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2012.700315
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hunter, G. , & Kebede, H
    (2012) Formant frequencies of British English vowels produced by native speakers of Farsi. Proceedings of the Acoustics 2012 Conference , 23–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Iverson, P. , & Kuhl, P
    (1995) Mapping the perceptual magnet effect for speech using signal detection theory and multidimensional scaling. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(1), 553–562. doi: 10.1121/1.412280
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.412280 [Google Scholar]
  20. Iverson, P. , Kuhl, P.K. , Akahane-Yamada, R. , Diesch, E. , Tohkura, Y. , Kettermann A. , & Siebert, C
    (2003) A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87, B47–B57. doi: 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00198‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00198-1 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kartushina, N. , & Frauenfelder, U.H
    (2013) On the role of L1 speech production in L2 perception: Evidence from Spanish learners of French. Proceedings of the Interspeech 2013, 2118–2122.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2014) On the effects of L2 perception and of individual differences in L1 production on L2 pronunciation. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–17. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01246
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01246 [Google Scholar]
  23. Kennedy, S. , & Trofimovich, P
    (2010) Language awareness and second language pronunciation: A classroom study. Language Awareness, 19(3), 171–185. doi: 10.1080/09658416.2010.486439
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.486439 [Google Scholar]
  24. Ladefoged, P. , & Johnson, K
    (2011) A course in phonetics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lambacher, S.G
    (1996) Using electronic visual feedback to teach English segmentals. The Language Teacher, 20, 22–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Levis, J
    (2005) Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 367–377. doi: 10.2307/3588485
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588485 [Google Scholar]
  27. Major, R.C
    (2008) Transfer in second language phonology. In J.G. Hansen Edwards & M.L. Zampini (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp.63–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.36.05maj
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.36.05maj [Google Scholar]
  28. Mora, J.C. , Rochdi, Y. , & Kivistö-de Souza, H
    (2014) Mimicking accented speech as L2 phonological awareness. Language Awareness, 23(1-2), 57–75. doi: 10.1080/09658416.2013.863898
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.863898 [Google Scholar]
  29. Neri, A. , Mich, O. , Gerosa, M. , & Giuliani, D
    (2008) The effectiveness of computer assisted pronunciation training for foreign language learning by children. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 393–408. doi: 10.1080/09588220802447651
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802447651 [Google Scholar]
  30. Ouni, S
    (2013) Tongue control and its implication in pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(5), 439–453. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2012.761637
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.761637 [Google Scholar]
  31. Patten, I. , & Edmonds, L.A
    (2013) Effect of training Japanese L1 speakers in the production of American English / r/ using spectrographic visual feedback. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(3), 241–259. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2013.839570
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.839570 [Google Scholar]
  32. Quintana-Lara, M
    (2012) Effect of Acoustic Spectrographic Instruction on production of English /i/ and /I/ by Spanish pre-service English teachers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(3), 207–227. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2012.724424
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.724424 [Google Scholar]
  33. 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. doi: 10.1080/09658416.2010.540326
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.540326 [Google Scholar]
  34. Setter, J. , & Jenkins, J
    (2005) Pronunciation. Language Teaching, 38, 1–17. doi: 10.1017/S026144480500251X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480500251X [Google Scholar]
  35. Strik, H. , Truong, K. , de Wet, F. , & Cucchiarini, C
    (2009) Comparing different approaches for automatic pronunciation error detection. Speech Communication, 51, 845–852. doi: 10.1016/j.specom.2009.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2009.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  36. Sturm, J.L
    (2013) Explicit phonetics instruction in L2 French: A global analysis of Improvement. System, 41, 654–662. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2013.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  37. Venkatagiri, H.S. , & Levis, J.M
    (2007) Phonological awareness and speech comprehensibility: An exploratory study. Language Awareness, 16(4), 263–277. doi: 10.2167/la417.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/ la417.0 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, X. , & Munro, M.J
    (2004) Computer-based training for learning English vowel contrasts. System, 32, 539–552. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.09.011 [Google Scholar]
  39. Wells, J.C
    (1962) A study of the formants of the pure vowels of British English. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of London. Retrieved from www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/formants/index.htm
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.167.2.04rah
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