Crash modules to help Persians speak more intelligible and comprehensible English, emphasizing either production or perception of either sounds or melodies

References

1. Hancock, M.
   (2003) English pronunciation in use, self study and classroom use (intermediate level). Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Piske, T.
   (2008) Phonetic awareness, phonetic sensitivity and the second language learner. InJ. Cenoz & N. Hornberger (eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd ed. (pp.155–166). Springer Science. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑30424‑3_146
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_146 [Google Scholar]
3. van Heuven, V.
   (2008) Making sense of strange sounds: (mutual) intelligibility of related language varieties. A review. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, 2(1–2), 39–62. 10.3366/E1753854809000305
   https://doi.org/10.3366/E1753854809000305 [Google Scholar]
4. van Heuven, V.
   (2022) Resolving the prosody paradox. InP. Arantes & A. Post da Silveira (eds.), Prosody and Bilingualism (pp.168–204). Letraria. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359025608
   [Google Scholar]
5. Yenkimaleki, M.
   (2017) Effect of prosody awareness training on the quality of consecutive interpreting between English and Farsi. LOT. https://www.lotpublications.nl/Documents/459_fulletext.pdf
   [Google Scholar]
6. Yenkimaleki, M., & van Heuven, V.
   (2018) The effect of teaching prosody awareness on interpreting performance: An experimental study of consecutive interpreting from English into Farsi. Perspectives. Studies in Translation, 26(1), 84–99. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1315824
   https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1315824 [Google Scholar]
7. Yenkimaleki, M., & van Heuven, V.
   (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, 1071, 48–57. 10.1016/j.specom.2019.01.006
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2019.01.006 [Google Scholar]
8. Yenkimaleki, M., & van Heuven, V.
   (2021) Effects of attention to segmental vs. suprasegmental features on the speech intelligibility and comprehensibility of EFL learners targeting perception or production-focused practice. System, 1001 (published online). 10.1016/j.system.2021.102557
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102557 [Google Scholar]
9. Yenkimaleki, M. & van Heuven, V.
   (2023) Relative contribution of explicit teaching of segmentals vs. prosody to the quality of consecutive interpreting by Farsi-to-English interpreting trainees. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 451–467. 10.1080/10494820.2020.1789673
   https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1789673 [Google Scholar]
10. Yenkimaleki, M., van Heuven, V., & Hosseini, M.
    (2023) The effect of providing feedback and feedforward in prosody instruction for developing listening comprehension skills by interpreter trainees. Foreign Language Annals (published online). 10.1111/flan.12725
    https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12725 [Google Scholar]