1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation
  4. Volume 9, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 9, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2215-1931
  • E-ISSN: 2215-194X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In order to investigate the characteristics and effects of peer feedback targeting second language (L2) pronunciation, the present study recruited 32 Mandarin-speaking learners of English who received five pronunciation instructional sessions through an instant messaging application on their smart phones. The phonological targets, types, and formats of peer feedback as well as its effects on their pronunciation (i.e., comprehensibility and accentedness) were examined. Results revealed that the participants mainly targeted segmental errors rather than suprasegmental errors and that they tended to provide more feedback on vowels rather than on consonants. Their feedback, delivered mainly in writing, was found to be effective in improving learners’ comprehensibility, but not their accentedness. The findings demonstrate the potential of peer feedback complementary to teacher feedback in instructed L2 pronunciation and highlight the importance of training in optimizing the effectiveness of peer feedback.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
2023-08-25
2024-12-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akiyama, Y.
    (2017) Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System, 641, 58–73. 10.1016/j.system.2016.12.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.007 [Google Scholar]
  2. Al-Busaidi, S., & Al-Saqqaf, A. H.
    (2015) English spelling errors made by Arabic-speaking students. English Language Teaching, 8(7), 181–199. 10.5539/elt.v8n7p181
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n7p181 [Google Scholar]
  3. Berggren, J.
    (2015) Learning from giving feedback: A study of secondary-level students. ELT Journal, 69(1), 58–70. 10.1093/elt/ccu036
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu036 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203771587
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 [Google Scholar]
  5. Coté, R. A.
    (2014) Peer feedback in anonymous peer review in an EFL writing class in Spain. GiST Education and Learning Research Journal, 91, 67–87. 10.26817/16925777.144
     https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.144 [Google Scholar]
  6. Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J.
    (1997) Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 1–16. 10.1017/S0272263197001010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001010 [Google Scholar]
  7. (2005) Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379–397. 10.2307/3588486
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3588486 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2009) Comprehensibility as a factor in listener interaction preferences: Implications for the workplace. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(2), 181–202. 10.3138/cmlr.66.2.181
     https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.66.2.181 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2013) The development of L2 oral language skills in two L1 groups: A 7-year study. Language Learning, 63(2), 163–185. 10.1111/lang.12000
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12000 [Google Scholar]
  10. Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H.
    (2003) Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50–80. CitetononCRdoi:10.18999/FORIDS.23.35
     https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.18999/FORIDS.23.35 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dunlap, J. C., & Grabinger, S.
    (2003) Preparing students for lifelong learning: A review of instructional features and teaching methodologies. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 16(2), 6–25. 10.1111/j.1937‑8327.2003.tb00276.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.2003.tb00276.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Evers, K., & Chen, S.
    (2020) Effects of an automatic speech recognition system with peer feedback on pronunciation instruction for adults. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–21. 10.1080/09588221.2020.1839504
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839504 [Google Scholar]
  13. Foster, P., & Ohta, A. S.
    (2005) Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 402–430. 10.1093/applin/ami014
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami014 [Google Scholar]
  14. Fujii, A., Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A.
    (2016) Peer interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. InM. Sato & S. Ballinger. (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp.63–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.45.03fuj
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45.03fuj [Google Scholar]
  15. Kim, D., Rueckert, D., Kim, D. -J., & Seo, D.
    (2013) Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 52–73. llt.msu.edu/issues/october2013/kimetal.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kukulska-Hulme, A.
    (2020) Mobile-assisted language learning. InC. A. Chapelle. (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp.743–750). Wiley. 10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0768.pub2
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0768.pub2 [Google Scholar]
  17. Larson-Hall, J.
    (2016) A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS and R (2nd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315775661
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315775661 [Google Scholar]
  18. Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R.
    (2016a) The effects of corrective feedback on instructed L2 speech perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(1), 35–64. 10.1017/S0272263115000194
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000194 [Google Scholar]
  19. (2016b) Effects of different types of corrective feedback on receptive skills in a second language: A speech perception training study. Language Learning, 66(4), 809–833. 10.1111/lang.12167
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12167 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee, J., Jang, J., & Plonsky, L.
    (2015) The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 345–366. 10.1093/applin/amu040
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu040 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lin, G. Y.
    (2018) Anonymous versus identified peer assessment via a Facebook-based learning application: Effects on quality of peer feedback, perceived learning, perceived fairness, and attitude toward the system. Computers & Education, 1161, 81–92. 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.010 [Google Scholar]
  22. Lu, R., & Bol, L.
    (2007) A comparison of anonymous versus identifiable e-peer review on college student writing performance and the extent of critical feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(2), 100–115. www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/6.2.2.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W.
    (2009) To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43. 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Luo, B.
    (2016) Evaluating a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) technique for efficient classroom instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3). 451–476. 10.1080/09588221.2014.963123
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.963123 [Google Scholar]
  25. MacMahon, M. K. C.
    (1991) The woman behind ‘Arthur’. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 21(1), 29–31. 10.1017/S0025100300005983
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300005983 [Google Scholar]
  26. Martin, I. A., & Sippel, L.
    (2021a) Is giving better than receiving?: The effects of peer and teacher feedback on L2 pronunciation skills. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 7(1), 62–88. 10.1075/jslp.20001.mar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.20001.mar [Google Scholar]
  27. (2021b) Providing vs. receiving peer feedback: Learners’ beliefs and experiences. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. 10.1177/13621688211024365
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211024365 [Google Scholar]
  28. Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M.
    (1995) Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45(1), 73–97. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00963.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00963.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Ohta, A. S.
    (2001) Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Routledge. 10.4324/9781410604712
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604712 [Google Scholar]
  30. Piske, T., MacKay, I. R. A., & Flege, J. E.
    (2001) Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics, 29(2), 191–215. 10.1006/jpho.2001.0134
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2001.0134 [Google Scholar]
  31. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L.
    (2014) How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. 10.1111/lang.12079
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079 [Google Scholar]
  32. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Ranta, L., & Lyster, R.
    (2018) Form-focused instruction. InP. Garrett & J. Cots. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (pp.40–56). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315676494
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676494 [Google Scholar]
  34. Roach, P.
    (2004) British English: Received pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 34(2), 239–245. 10.1017/S0025100304001768
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100304001768 [Google Scholar]
  35. Rouhi, A., & Azizian, E.
    (2013) Peer review: Is giving corrective feedback better than receiving it in L2 writing?Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 931, 1349–1354. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.042
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.042 [Google Scholar]
  36. 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. 10.1080/09658416.2010.540326
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2010.540326 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2013) The acquisitional value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning: Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners. Language Learning, 63(3), 499–529. 10.1111/lang.12015
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12015 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2021a) Effects of corrective feedback on second language pronunciation development. InH. Nassaji & E. Kartchava. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp.407–428). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108589789.020
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.020 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2021b) What characterizes comprehensible and native-like pronunciation among English-as-a-second-language speakers? Meta-analyses of phonological, rater, and instructional factors. TESOL Quarterly, 55(3), 866–900. 10.1002/tesq.3027
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3027 [Google Scholar]
  40. Saito, K., & Lyster, R.
    (2012) Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00639.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00639.x [Google Scholar]
  41. Saito, K., & Wu, X.
    (2014) Communicative focus on form and second language suprasegmental learning: Teaching Cantonese learners to perceive Mandarin tones. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(4), 647–680. 10.1017/S0272263114000114
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263114000114 [Google Scholar]
  42. Saito, K., Sun, H., & Tierney, A.
    (2019) Explicit and implicit aptitude effects on second language speech learning: Scrutinizing segmental and suprasegmental sensitivity and performance via behavioural and neurophysiological measures. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(5), 1123–1140. 10.1017/S1366728918000895
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000895 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sato, M.
    (2013) Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2013.12035.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x [Google Scholar]
  44. (2017) Oral peer corrective feedback: Multiple theoretical perspectives. InH. Nassaji & E. Kartchava. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp.19–34). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315621432‑3
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621432-3 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sato, M., & Ballinger, S.
    (2016) Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lllt.45
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45 [Google Scholar]
  46. Sato, M., & Lyster, R.
    (2012) Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–626. 10.1017/S0272263112000356
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000356 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sharbawi, S.
    (2012) Revisiting the vowels of Brunei English. World Englishes, 31(2), 177–197. 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2011.01725.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2011.01725.x [Google Scholar]
  48. Sippel, L.
    (2019) The impact of peer corrective feedback on vocabulary development. Foreign Language Annals, 52(3), 595–611. 10.1111/flan.12416
     https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12416 [Google Scholar]
  49. Sippel, L., & Jackson, C. N.
    (2015) Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 688–705. 10.1111/flan.12164
     https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12164 [Google Scholar]
  50. Sippel, L., & Martin, I. A.
    (2022) Immediate and long-term improvement in lexical stress perception: The role of teacher and peer feedback. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Advance online publication. 10.1515/iral‑2021‑0175
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0175 [Google Scholar]
  51. Thomson, R. I., & Derwing, T. M.
    (2015) The effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 326–344. 10.1093/applin/amu076
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu076 [Google Scholar]
  52. Toth, P. D.
    (2008) Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning, 58(2), 237–283. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2008.00441.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00441.x [Google Scholar]
  53. Trofimovich, P., & Baker, W.
    (2006) Learning second language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 1–30. 10.1017/S0272263106060013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060013 [Google Scholar]
  54. Villamil, O. S., & De Guerrero, M. C. M.
    (1996) Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities, mediating strategies, and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 51–75. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(96)90015‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90015-6 [Google Scholar]
  55. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1978) Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. 10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4 [Google Scholar]
  56. Wu, Y.
    (2019) Review of Chinese English learners’ prosodic acquisition. English Language Teaching, 12(8), 89–94. 10.5539/elt.v12n8p89
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n8p89 [Google Scholar]
  57. Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z.
    (2006) A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200. 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  58. Yu, S., & Hu, G.
    (2017) Understanding university students’ peer feedback practices in EFL writing: Insights from a case study. Assessing Writing, 331, 25–35. 10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhang, R., & Yuan, Z. M.
    (2020) Examining the effects of explicit pronunciation instruction on the development of L2 pronunciation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(4), 905–918. 10.1017/S0272263120000121
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000121 [Google Scholar]
  60. Zhu, Q., & Carless, D.
    (2018) Dialogue within peer feedback processes: Clarification and negotiation of meaning. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(4), 883–897. 10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
Loading
The characteristics and effects of peer feedback on second language pronunciation
Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 9, 47 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.22034.hua
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): L2 pronunciation instruction; mobile-assisted language learning; peer feedback

Most Cited

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