Background to the Current Research
Pronunciation instruction is a captivating area of language study, both for practitioners and researchers Personal experiences as a foreign language learner reveal the unique nature of pronunciation, which carries an intensely personal quality absent in writing Incorrect pronunciation can significantly impact learner motivation, often more so than errors in writing or grammar, as it is closely tied to self-perception While cultural contexts may influence reactions to different types of errors, the act of speaking connects deeply with the self Without proper pronunciation instruction, learners may master reading, writing, listening, and speaking yet struggle to be understood, leading to unsatisfactory outcomes Therefore, it is crucial to tailor pronunciation instruction to the specific needs of learners, considering factors such as age and motivation.
With over twenty years of experience in pronunciation instruction since 1996, I have encountered a variety of teaching contexts that often lacked clear guidance on effective methods During several teacher observations, it became evident that while pronunciation instruction was deemed important by the teacher trainer, the specific approach taken was often considered secondary, as long as some elements were included.
J Hodgetts, Pronunciation Instruction in English for Academic Purposes,
Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56116-1_1
Since 2012, I have taught a summer pre-sessional English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course at a university in Northern England, focusing on pronunciation instruction In the summer of 2018, with approval from the course leader and participants, I initiated a mixed methods research project to evaluate the effectiveness of pronunciation instruction within this ten-week program The EAP pre-sessional course aims to prepare non-native English speakers for the academic skills necessary for undergraduate and postgraduate studies at the university.
Effective speaking and listening skills are essential for engaging in seminar discussions, delivering concise presentations, and comprehending lectures and peer conversations My objective was to identify the goals of pronunciation instruction and explore how teachers facilitate the achievement of these objectives.
EAP pre-sessional courses are categorized into two main types: general English provision and subject-specific content While University A's course primarily focuses on general academic English, it does incorporate elements of subject-specific learning through an extended essay and a student presentation related to the learners' chosen destination course Notably, the majority of participants in this EAP course are Chinese L1 speakers.
This research investigates the visibility and clarity of course goals for course leaders, teachers, and students, with a particular emphasis on suprasegmental instruction and its objectives, such as achieving native-like production or intelligibility It also examines the types of instruction and assessment provided, referencing various studies on optimizing intelligibility-focused suprasegmental instruction (Baker, 2011; Baker & Burri, 2016; Hattie, 2009; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Levis, 2018) While learner attitudes towards the target of instruction and perceived course success are secondary focuses, they are explored to enrich the understanding of the instructional process Throughout the course, I engaged in participant observation as both a researcher and teacher, documenting guidance from the course leader and conducting action research through video recordings and reflections on instructional challenges and successes This dual role provided deeper insights into optimizing suprasegmental instruction Detailed context and participant information can be found in the Methodology Chapter (Chap 4).
Numerous studies highlight that pronunciation instruction is frequently overlooked in language education (Baker & Burri, 2016; Baker & Murphy, 2011; Derwing & Munro, 2015; Foote, Holtby, & Derwing).
Despite the significant evidence that suprasegmental instruction can enhance learners' intelligibility, particularly in short courses (Derwing et al., 1997; 1998; Derwing & Rossiter, 2003; Hahn, 2004), this area has historically received insufficient attention in pronunciation research (Deng et al., 2009) Recent studies have begun to address this gap (Baker, 2011; Baker & Burri, 2016; Foote et al., 2011; Foote & McDonough, 2017; Gordon & Darcy, 2016; Sonsaat, 2017), yet there remains a notable lack of research on the application of suprasegmental instruction within the English for Academic Purposes (EAP) sector, with Baker & Burri (2016) being a significant exception Additionally, pronunciation assessment continues to be an overlooked area in the broader context of pronunciation research (Piccardo, 2016).
Pre-sessional access courses in the UK are widely offered by universities, typically during the summer months, with some institutions also providing courses in the autumn These programs are designed to prepare students for university-level study, making them a common and valuable resource for incoming students.
Current research in the UK aims to enhance suprasegmental instruction focused on intelligibility, while also exploring pronunciation assessment and learner attitudes towards instruction Despite the growing prevalence of pronunciation research in recent years, a gap often exists between research findings and practical application, meaning that recommended practices may not be effectively integrated into teaching methods (Piccardo, 2016, p 12; Setter).
Teachers may be aware of some research recommendations in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) instruction, but it is unrealistic to expect them to keep up with all new developments Various pressures, attitudes, beliefs, obstacles, and inertias can significantly influence instructional methods Understanding how these factors affect the setting of instructional goals and the delivery of pronunciation instruction is crucial for effectively integrating intelligibility-driven suprasegmental teaching in time-sensitive courses This book aims to contribute to this understanding and enhance EAP instruction.
The research primarily targets suprasegmentals instruction and intelligibility-driven goals within a pre-sessional EAP course, yet its findings may also be relevant to other English Language Teaching (ELT) contexts, including the ESL sector However, the distinct objectives of ESL courses may limit the applicability of certain aspects of the research For instance, ESL courses often emphasize achieving native-like pronunciation to facilitate learners' integration into their new host country, which may differ from the goals of EAP learners While some EAP students may choose to remain in their university city post-course, the integration goals of ESL learners highlight the diverse motivations and desired outcomes across different educational contexts.
The UK visa regulations present a unique challenge, making exceptions more common than the norm Despite these regulatory differences, the research findings offer valuable insights that can be beneficial across ESL, EFL, and ESP sectors.
General Objectives
This book provides an overview of pronunciation instruction within an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) context, focusing on the goals of intelligibility in teaching at University A It examines the summative assessment of pronunciation, investigating the transparency of intelligibility-based assessment for teacher markers The study explores the alignment between teacher instructional goals and institutional objectives, identifying areas of divergence and the reasons behind them Additionally, it highlights learner attitudes, specifically their confidence, perceptions of instructional effectiveness, and preferences regarding native versus non-native language models in classroom activities Despite being limited to one pre-sessional course in the UK, the findings offer valuable insights into the collaboration between institutions and teachers in delivering pronunciation instruction The recommendations for optimizing intelligibility-based suprasegmental instruction could benefit institutions, instructors, and learners in EAP settings, as well as practitioners in other language learning contexts.
Introduction
Since 2012, I have been an instructor in a university summer pre-sessional access course focused on English for Academic Purposes (EAP) for adult learners at University A in Northern England, which includes some pronunciation instruction In the summer of 2018, with permission from the course leader and participants, I initiated the practical phase of my mixed methods research examining the delivery of pronunciation instruction during the ten-week pre-sessional course (Hodgetts, 2019) This EAP course aims to equip non-native English speakers with the necessary skills for successful undergraduate or postgraduate studies at the university, similar to programs offered at various UK institutions.
Effective speaking and listening skills are essential for participating in seminars, delivering concise presentations, and comprehending lectures and peer discussions My objective was to identify the goals of pronunciation instruction and explore how educators facilitate the achievement of these objectives.
EAP pre-sessional courses are categorized into two main types: general English provision and subject-specific content While University A's course includes some subject-specific elements, such as an extended essay and a student presentation related to the learners' chosen fields, it primarily focuses on general academic English Notably, most participants in the EAP course are Chinese L1 speakers.
This research investigates the visibility and clarity of course goals for leaders, teachers, and students, with a particular emphasis on suprasegmental instruction It examines whether the focus is on achieving native-like pronunciation or intelligibility, and evaluates the types of instruction and assessment provided, referencing studies that suggest ways to enhance intelligibility-focused suprasegmental teaching (Baker, 2011; Baker & Burri, 2016; Hattie, 2009; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Levis, 2018) While learner attitudes are not the main focus, the study also explores students' perceptions of the instructional targets and their assessment of the course's effectiveness Throughout the course, I acted as both researcher and teacher, conducting participant observation and action research, which included video recordings of my lessons and documentation of my instructional challenges and successes This dual role provided valuable insights into optimizing suprasegmental instruction Further details about the research context and participants are available in the Methodology Chapter (Chap 4).
Numerous studies highlight that pronunciation instruction is frequently overlooked in language education (Baker & Burri, 2016; Baker & Murphy, 2011; Derwing & Munro, 2015; Foote, Holtby, & Derwing) This neglect underscores the need for a focused approach to enhance pronunciation skills among learners.
Despite the surprising neglect of suprasegmental instruction in pronunciation research, evidence suggests it significantly enhances learners' intelligibility, even with brief instruction (Derwing et al., 1997, 1998; Derwing & Rossiter, 2003; Hahn, 2004) Historically, this area has not received adequate attention (Deng et al., 2009), although recent studies indicate a shift towards addressing this gap (Baker, 2011; Baker & Burri, 2016; Foote et al., 2011; Foote & McDonough, 2017; Gordon & Darcy, 2016; Sonsaat, 2017) Nonetheless, research on the application of suprasegmental instruction within the English for Academic Purposes (EAP) sector remains limited, with Baker & Burri (2016) being a notable exception Additionally, pronunciation assessment has been identified as an underexplored aspect of pronunciation research (Piccardo, 2016).
University pre-sessional access courses in the UK are widely offered, with many universities conducting these programs during the summer and some even in the autumn These courses are designed to help students prepare for their academic studies, making them a popular choice among prospective university attendees.
Recent research in the UK aims to enhance suprasegmental instruction focused on intelligibility, contributing valuable insights into pronunciation assessment and learner attitudes Despite a rise in pronunciation research, there remains a gap between theoretical findings and practical application, as recommended practices are not always integrated into teaching methods (Piccardo, 2016, p 12; Setter).
In the field of English for Academic Purposes (EAP), it is unrealistic to expect teachers to be fully aware of all recent research developments, even if they are familiar with some recommendations Various pressures, attitudes, beliefs, and obstacles can significantly influence instructional methods Understanding how these factors interact to shape pronunciation instruction is crucial for effectively integrating intelligibility-driven suprasegmental teaching into time-sensitive courses This book aims to contribute to the knowledge needed to navigate these challenges in EAP instruction.
The research primarily targets suprasegmentals instruction and intelligibility goals within a pre-sessional English for Academic Purposes (EAP) course, but its findings may also be relevant to other English Language Teaching (ELT) contexts, including the ESL sector However, due to the distinct objectives of ESL courses, certain aspects may not translate effectively For instance, ESL programs often prioritize native-like pronunciation to facilitate learners' integration into their new host country, reflecting the unique aspirations of ESL students who seek to establish themselves in a new permanent environment In contrast, while EAP learners may choose to stay in their university city after completing their courses, the integration goals differ significantly between these two educational contexts.
The UK visa regulations present a unique challenge, making exceptions more common than the norm Despite these stringent rules, the research findings remain relevant and applicable across various sectors, including ESL, EFL, and ESP.
This book offers an overview of pronunciation instruction within an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) context, focusing on the integration of suprasegmental instruction aimed at enhancing intelligibility at University A It investigates the alignment between instructional and assessment goals related to intelligibility, examining how teachers' objectives correspond with institutional aims and identifying any discrepancies The study also explores learner attitudes, emphasizing confidence, perceived effectiveness of instruction, and preferences for both native and non-native language models in classroom activities Despite being limited to a single pre-sessional course in the UK, the research reveals significant insights into the collaborative efforts of institutions and educators in delivering effective pronunciation instruction The findings and recommendations for optimizing intelligibility-based suprasegmental instruction could benefit institutions, instructors, and learners in EAP contexts, as well as practitioners in various language learning environments.
The book consists of six chapters, beginning with an introductory chapter that outlines the research background, general objectives, and an overview of the book's contents Chapters 2 and 3 delve into the relevant literature, while Chapter 4 details the methodology, tools, and instruments used in the study Chapter 5 presents the results and their analyses, concluding with a discussion of the findings Finally, Chapter 6 wraps up the book with a conclusion and offers tentative recommendations for future practice and research.
Chapter 2 provides a broad overview of pronunciation instruction, divided into four sections: the historical background of various instructional methodologies, the influence of emotional and psychological factors on teaching, the techniques employed in pronunciation instruction, and critiques of native speaker-based instruction In contrast, Chapter 3 delves into the relevant literature, defining suprasegmentals and their role in communication among L1 English speakers, while exploring the debate over nativeness versus intelligibility It discusses key concepts such as intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness, highlighting Jenkins’ (2000) lingua franca core and its critiques The literature review emphasizes the significance of suprasegmental instruction for enhancing the intelligibility of English L2 users and concludes with an examination of English testing, alongside research focused on Chinese learners and EAP contexts, given that most learners at University A are Chinese and the study's context is EAP.
Chapter 4, the Methodology Chapter, details the research context and presents the Research Questions, along with a research timetable It outlines the methods and instruments utilized, highlights the pilot study that inspired the current research, and justifies the choice of a mixed methods approach The chapter also includes a description of the participants and a stakeholder analysis, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the study's design and implementation.
The First Focus on Speaking
Before the mid-nineteenth century, the grammar translation approach dominated language teaching, emphasizing written language and grammatical forms with minimal focus on speaking (Richards & Rodgers, 2001) However, societal changes in the latter half of the century, including increased travel, a growing middle class, and the expansion of universities and state education, shifted attention from classical languages like Latin and Greek to European languages such as French and German (Lorch, 2016, p 175) Early pioneers like Prendergast, Marcel, and Gouin began promoting alternative methods inspired by observations of children's first language acquisition.
Prendergast’s Mastery System, designed for adult learners, prioritized accurate pronunciation in the early stages of foreign language acquisition, emphasizing sentence repetition over grammatical structure (Lorch, 2016) This innovative approach treated vocabulary as part of contextual sentences, marking a departure from traditional methods By focusing on the imitation of sentences, learning became an intuitive process rather than a logical one, highlighting the importance of utterances over grammar (Howatt, 1984; Lorch, 2016) While some critics deemed Prendergast's work insignificant (Richards & Rodgers, 2001), recent evaluations recognize its popularity and influence on linguists like Francois Gouin and Henry Sweet (Atherton, 2010; Lorch, 2016) Notably, Prendergast's insights into children's language learning, particularly their use of contextual cues and memorized phrases, have made a lasting impact (Howatt, 1984; Richards & Rodgers, 2001).
Marcel’s Rational Method, similar to Prendergast's approach, was grounded in observations of children's first language acquisition, emphasizing that receptive skills should be prioritized over productive skills for learners (Howatt, 1984) He identified 20 key truths in language methodology, notably that understanding the meaning of utterances occurs before mastering the symbols and words used for communication (Howatt, 1984, p 153) While Marcel supported both analytic methods, which involve examples and practice, and synthetic methods, focusing on imitation and intuitive learning, he highlighted the importance of a structured approach to language learning.
The initial emphasis on speaking is considered particularly suitable and effective for certain learner contexts, especially for children This approach involves repeating expressions and utilizing images to enhance understanding, complemented by teacher gestures and actions (Howatt, 1984).
Marcel's method emphasizes reading language texts prior to hearing them, which has been critiqued (Howatt, 1984, p 154) However, a significant aspect of this approach is the focus on imitation as a vital component of learning, where learners listen to utterances before attempting to produce them This perspective aligns with Vygotsky's later work (1962, 1978) and represents an important evolution in the inductive methodologies developed by late nineteenth-century writers.
Gouin's publications, particularly The Series, introduced an inductive method centered on repetition, which involves breaking down actions into smaller components to enhance language acquisition (Howatt, 1984) For instance, Gouin illustrates this by detailing the action of "the child washes his hands and face," which is further segmented into "he takes up the soap" and "he dips the soap in water." This approach emphasizes verbs and aims to facilitate the unconscious learning of vocabulary through varied word choices Unlike Marcel, the method begins with students imitating the teacher's recitations Despite some drawbacks, such as potential lack of motivation due to the monotonous nature of the sentences (Howatt, 1984), Gouin's method gained popularity in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with supporters like Handschin (1912) lauding its psychological and pedagogical effectiveness Gouin's focus on sequencing spoken language and contextualizing new items marked a significant shift from traditional grammar-translation methods The shared belief among linguistic pioneers in prioritizing oral production over written language further underscores the innovative nature of Gouin's approach to language learning (Brown).
The principles established by Gouin and his contemporaries led to the development of the direct method in language instruction, emphasizing communication solely in the target language and prioritizing oral introduction of key concepts This approach highlighted the significance of both speaking and listening comprehension, along with correct pronunciation However, the practical application of these early linguistic ideas was restricted until the reform movement emerged at the end of the nineteenth century.
Audiolingualism: The Beginnings of an Analytical Approach
The Theoretical Underpinnings of Audiolingualism
Behaviourist psychology, particularly the contributions of B F Skinner, played a crucial role in shaping the principles and objectives of audiolingualism Skinner (1957) proposed that human behaviour can be modified through responses, emphasizing that learning occurs via operant conditioning, where correct responses are rewarded and incorrect ones are not A key aspect of this theory is the importance of positive reinforcement in encouraging accurate language production Ultimately, Skinner's framework suggests that language acquisition is based on habit formation, involving three fundamental components: stimulus, response, and reinforcement.
In the context of language learning, the stimulus is linguistic input, and learner responses are reinforced through positive reinforcement, such as praise or encouraging non-verbal communication (Saville-Troike, 2006) Skinner posited that language acquisition occurs through a reinforcement system, where correct usage is rewarded, and errors are corrected to promote accurate production From a behaviorist perspective, tolerating errors would be akin to rewarding inaccuracies, thereby impeding student progress (Larsen-Freeman, 2000) Consequently, the accurate production of sounds is emphasized, aligning with the belief in sequential learning and the importance of phonology Influenced by Bloomfieldian structural linguistics, behaviorists argue that mastering individual phonemes is essential before advancing to other language elements, advocating for early pronunciation instruction to prevent the reinforcement of mistakes (Stockwell & Bowen, 1965).
The Impact of Contrastive Analysis
The concept that language learning stems from acquiring speech habits spurred extensive research in contrastive analysis, which in turn supported audiolingualism Primarily associated with Lado (1957), contrastive analysis significantly influences pronunciation instruction by suggesting that the similarity between a learner's first language (L1) and the target language affects learning effectiveness Essentially, sounds that closely resemble those in the L1 are easier to acquire, while those that differ significantly or are absent in the L1 pose greater challenges Mastery of the target language's sound system is crucial (Fries, 1945), and early proponents of contrastive analysis aligned with behaviorist principles, emphasizing habit formation through stimulus, response, and reinforcement to enhance language learning (Saville-Troike, 2006, p 35).
Contrastive analysis focuses on the interference of the first language (L1) in learning a target language, aiming to enhance positive transfer of similar sounds while reducing negative transfer of differing sounds (Carroll, 1968) For instance, Italian speakers may struggle with the English /i/ and /I/ sounds, as these are not distinct phonemes in Italian, while Polish and French speakers often find the /θ/ sound challenging due to its absence in their L1 Proponents of contrastive analysis assert that it can predict grammatical and phonological errors by examining differences between the L1 and the target language However, this strong claim has faced criticism, as learner errors do not always align with the predicted challenges, suggesting that psycholinguistic factors may play a significant role in error production (Richards, 1971) Consequently, the effectiveness of contrastive analysis as a predictor of student errors remains a topic of debate Additionally, the approach of functional typology and the concept of markedness is also pertinent in pronunciation instruction.
2.3 Audiolingualism: The Beginnings of an Analytical Approach 15 linguistic items, the concepts of unmarked and marked are used to describe those which are more frequently distributed (unmarked) and those less frequently distributed (marked) Functional typology categorizes aspects of different languages in order to discover the more marked/unmarked aspects and to compare different languages in order to identify those aspects which may be more readily trans- ferrable, and conversely, those marked aspects that may be more difficult to transfer. These aspects could include phonology, as well as vocabulary, syntax and discourse. Eckman’s markedness differential hypothesis (1977) attempts to predict the features that will be easier to transfer between an L1 and an L2, asserting that those features that are unmarked in the L1 will be more readily transferred and that marked L2 features will be more challenging In terms of phonology, the syllabic structure of the particular language will have a marked and unmarked sequence Although there are similarities between contrastive analysis and functional typology, particularly in terms of the predictions of transferability, Saville-Troike (2006) points out that func- tional typology “goes beyond the surface level constraints of CA to more abstract patterns, principles and constraints” (p 57) In particular, the concept of markedness in Eckman’s hypothesis means that transfer does not always occur uniformly in both directions.
The Critique of Behaviourism, Audiolingualism,
and Contrastive Analysis, and New Directions Sparked by Universal Grammar and Mentalism
The credibility of audiolingualism was seriously undermined by a number of critics (e.g., Rivers,1964) and particularly by Chomsky’s critique of behaviourist theory
In 1959, a critical analysis of the behaviorist foundations of audiolingualism prompted a shift away from segmental instruction and encouraged a reassessment of the role of teaching in the classroom This reevaluation of pronunciation instruction was further developed in the subsequent work of Krashen and Terrell in 1983.
Chomsky's critique of the behaviourist theory of language acquisition emphasizes the distinction between linguistic competence, or a speaker's knowledge of language, and linguistic performance, or their actual use of language He argues that second language acquisition theories should prioritize linguistic competence, as children can learn language without significant reinforcement for correct usage This leads to the logical problem of language learning, also known as the poverty of the stimulus argument, suggesting that children possess an innate ability to acquire language Chomsky posits that children have an inherent understanding of universal grammar, which encompasses the common features and structural limitations of all languages Thus, while linguistic input is essential for language acquisition, it is the innate universal grammar that enables children to learn effectively.
2006, p 46) However, the linguistic principles and parameters that children have must be activated and parameters set to enable acquisition to take place (Aitchison, 2003).
Chomsky's theory of language acquisition (1965), initially centered on native language development in children, has significantly influenced second language acquisition by challenging the audiolingualism approach This perspective shifts the understanding of language learning away from habit formation, thereby questioning the effectiveness of error correction and minimal pair drilling commonly emphasized in audiolingual methods.
The concept of interlanguage, introduced by Selinker (1972), challenges the assumptions of behaviorism and contrastive analysis by highlighting a unique developmental stage that language learners experience while acquiring a second language (L2) During this creative interlanguage phase, learners are influenced by both their first language (L1) and the L2, leading to distinct language development (Cook, 2008, pp 13–15) Notably, in the context of pronunciation instruction, it is crucial to recognize that certain aspects of language may stagnate during this transition If these aspects remain undeveloped into adulthood, they risk becoming fossilized, preventing further progress toward achieving fluency in the L2 (Saville-Troike, 2006, pp 41–42).
The shift from behaviorism to mentalism has transformed our understanding of language acquisition, emphasizing the learner as an active participant rather than a passive recipient This evolution led to the decline of contrastive analysis and the rise of error analysis, which focuses on the stages of language acquisition instead of merely identifying errors Error analysis, associated with Corder (1967), views learner mistakes as beneficial, reflecting their experimentation with new language rules Corder posits that learners experience a transitional competence phase before achieving full proficiency in a second language (L2).
Error analysis primarily aims to systematically examine the evolution of learners' language and to classify the various types of errors they make, such as phonological errors This analysis is typically conducted through longitudinal studies involving second language (L2) learners (Ellis, 1994) A key distinction in error analysis is between learner errors, which are systematic, and learner mistakes, which are often random.
2.3 Audiolingualism: The Beginnings of an Analytical Approach 17 result of gaps in knowledge of the L2 and the latter being slips or memory lapses For the purposes of error analysis, mistakes are not the focus of study (Corder,1967) The identification of whether errors are interlingual (caused by interference) or intralin- gual (i.e., originating within the language) and establishing the seriousness of errors depending on the effect they have on intelligibility or social norms are the major goals of error analysis (Ellis,1994) The assumption of the seriousness of an error in terms of intelligibility is obviously of great importance for pronunciation instruction because if the pronunciation error does not interfere with communication, it follows that it is of little importance.
Error analysis has been valuable in understanding second language acquisition, but it faces several criticisms The classification of errors into categories such as morphological, syntactic, and phonological is often challenging and lacks definitive clarity Additionally, distinguishing whether the omission of tense inflections by Chinese L1 speakers is due to L1 interference or universal developmental processes is complex Moreover, focusing solely on errors is counterproductive, as it provides little insight into which language elements have been successfully acquired Lastly, error analysis may not capture all developmental issues, as some learners may avoid making errors by steering clear of complex structures.
Despite valid criticisms, error analysis offers valuable insights by focusing on practical English use rather than merely comparing L1 and L2 on a surface level, as seen in contrastive analysis Its longitudinal research approach allows for the observation of key stages in linguistic, phonological, and discourse development over time, enabling researchers to identify specific features that present challenges for learners at various proficiency levels (Bigelow & Enser-Kananen, 2015).
Flege (1995) and Best (1995) contribute significantly to the understanding of speech perception in second language (L2) learning Flege's speech learning model classifies new sounds encountered by L2 learners into three categories: new, similar, and the same The model highlights that similar sounds, which closely resemble those in the learner's native language, pose the greatest challenge This is because learners may misidentify these similar sounds as their own L1 sounds, leading to difficulties in perception Unlike contrastive analysis, which treats all new sounds equally, Flege's model emphasizes that it is the similar sounds that can create significant hurdles for learners.
Best's perceptual assimilation analysis (1995; Best & Tyler, 2007) suggests that learners' challenges in acquiring new sounds in a second language (L2) are influenced by the phonological similarities and differences in articulation, not only between their first language (L1) and the target language but also among the sounds within the target language itself This indicates that contrastive analysis, which compares L1 and L2 sounds to identify potential difficulties for learners, is inadequate as it overlooks the internal differences and similarities present in the L2 phonological system.
The debate surrounding universal grammar raises the question of whether language acquisition continues into adulthood If adults lack the innate capacity for language learning, then pronunciation instruction for them may differ significantly from that for children Chomsky's theory posits that our ability to learn a first language stems from an inherent language acquisition device, a notion supported by biological studies indicating a decline in brain plasticity after puberty (Lenneberg, 1967) However, Krashen and Terrell (1983) contend that this decline begins as early as age five, challenging the timeline of language acquisition capability.
Research indicates that atrophy in language acquisition is a gradual process that extends into adulthood While there is no clear agreement on when the innate ability for second language (L2) learning diminishes, many scholars concur that children have a distinct advantage over adults, especially in English as a Second Language (ESL) contexts This advantage is notably pronounced in pronunciation, as highlighted by various researchers and linguists.
While children have an inherent advantage in acquiring a second language, it is crucial not to overlook the importance of pronunciation instruction for adult learners Research indicates that targeted pronunciation instruction can significantly enhance language proficiency for adults (Brazil, 1997; Derwing et al.).
Research indicates that adult learners can achieve native-like proficiency in speech and pronunciation, as supported by studies from Bialystok (1997), Derwing et al (1997), Marinova-Todd, Marshall, & Snow (2000), Neufield (2001), and Ricard (2003).
1986) This specific issue will be addressed further in the context of suprasegmental instruction in Chap.3of the book.
Sociocultural Theory and Scaffolding
The sociocultural theory developed by Vygotsky emphasizes the crucial role of social interaction in second language acquisition, proposing that external social activities, rather than internal psychological factors, drive language learning (Vygotsky, 1962, 1978; Johnson, 2006) Central to this theory is the concept of social mediation, where symbolic tools, especially language, facilitate the transformation of a learner's mental processes into higher-order functions (Lightbown & Spada, 2013) Through this mediated learning process, learners not only acquire language skills but also enhance their understanding of their cognitive abilities and thought processes (Saville-Troike, 2006).
Sociocultural theory highlights the zone of proximal development, which refers to the potential growth learners can achieve with external support (Vygotsky, 1978) Certain cognitive functions exceed a learner's current abilities and require collaborative interaction before they can be performed independently, facilitating language acquisition (Saville-Troike, 2006, pp 111–112) This collaborative support, known as scaffolding, emphasizes that learners actively participate in a two-way interaction rather than being passive recipients Both first language (L1) and second language (L2) can play significant roles in this process, suggesting that classroom interactions should include peers alongside the teacher Additionally, symbolic mediation extends beyond verbal communication, allowing for non-verbal interactions and engagement with texts (Saville-Troike, 2006, p 113) Recent studies in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) have focused on fostering dialogic interaction to enhance student participation and academic discourse, with research exploring optimal classroom conditions to support this interaction (Engin, 2017) For instance, teachers can encourage deeper engagement by using referential questions instead of polar questions.
Critics of sociocultural theory argue that some learners can achieve proficiency in a second language (L2) independently, without interaction, while others may interact in an L2 environment without actually learning the language (Saville-Troike, 2006) However, Saville-Troike counters that any form of learning, such as studying online, constitutes some level of interaction Additionally, while a first language (L1) speaker might survive in an L2 country by communicating basic needs, this communication is often limited to specific contexts and relies heavily on contextual clues, preventing the expression of more abstract ideas and concepts.
The significance of scaffolding in pronunciation instruction is enhanced by considering broader social aspects of the learner's context, as highlighted by Johnson (2006) Cultural context and teacher cognition are crucial, as they reveal educators' beliefs and attitudes toward pronunciation teaching (Baker & Murphy, 2011) Additionally, macrosocial factors, such as the status of the learner's first language (L1) and second language (L2), impact learner motivation, especially in ESL contexts where integration into L2 society can drive success Schumann’s acculturation model (1978) identifies factors contributing to social distance between learners and their L2 targets The social dimension is particularly vital in ESL and EAP programs within L2 countries, emphasizing the benefits of using the target language outside the classroom to enhance fluency (Derwing, Thompson & Munro, 2006) Furthermore, learner characteristics like age, sex, and ethnicity play a significant role in shaping instructional approaches and the second language acquisition process.
The Natural Approach
Chomsky's critique of behaviorism significantly impacted audiolingualism and spurred the development of new language teaching methods, notably Krashen and Terrell's Natural Approach (1983) This approach emphasizes acquiring a second language naturally, challenging the effectiveness of drilling and repetitive exercises for learning a language's sound system It posits that learners should not be pressured to produce language until they are ready, prioritizing the absorption of the language's sound system through extensive listening exposure Unlike audiolingualism, which focuses on incremental sound learning, the Natural Approach encourages a more organic assimilation of language without demanding specific production in the early stages of instruction.
The broad coincidence of the natural approach with the work of Purcell and Suter
Research by Purcell and Suter (1980) suggested that pronunciation instruction had minimal impact on language learners, attributing progress to factors beyond the instructor's control, such as the learner's native language and natural imitation abilities However, this conclusion has been challenged by later studies (Derwing et al., 1997; Derwing & Rossiter, 2003; Hahn, 2004), which criticized the original research for focusing on accent rather than intelligibility and for methodological issues, including reliance on native speaker standards and raters (Pennington, 1998, p 327).
The effectiveness of the Natural Approach has been questioned due to insufficient teacher training (Piccardo, 2016) Additionally, Derwing and Munro (2015) highlighted issues with participant sampling that undermined reliability As a result, there is a growing consensus that the findings of Purcell and Suter (1980) are outdated, and that pronunciation instruction can indeed be advantageous (Derwing & Munro, 2015).
Communicative Approaches
The Broad Nature of Communicative Approaches
The communicative approach to language teaching, rooted in Chomsky's theories, encompasses a variety of methodologies aimed at enhancing student communication (Harmer, 2003) Richards and Rogers (2001) highlight the general use of this term to describe teaching strategies that prioritize communication The inclusion of task-based learning adds complexity to its definition (Littlewood, 2011) Central to the communicative approach are meaningful activities that promote fluency and encourage student interaction through pair and group work (Littlewood, 1981) Widdowson (1972, 1978) emphasizes the importance of signification and communicative value in teaching pronunciation, criticizing repetitive drills that lack meaning He illustrates this with the example of learners substituting phrases without engaging in genuine communication (Widdowson, 1972) Furthermore, the context of communication significantly influences pronunciation, underscoring the need for discourse-focused teaching as advocated by scholars like Brazil (1997) and Lewis (1993, 2002).
Since its introduction in 1978, communicative approaches have increasingly incorporated chunking and the analysis of discourse features that influence suprasegmental aspects of language While Harmer (2003) notes the eclectic nature of these approaches, suggesting that discourse-based activities may not be universally applicable, it is evident that most practitioners of the communicative approach integrate some form of discourse elements in their methods.
Authenticity is essential in communicative language learning, as highlighted by Richards and Rodgers (2001) For effective language acquisition, tasks must be both meaningful and authentic, which excludes traditional listen-and-repeat audiolingual exercises from a communicative syllabus Instead, listening tasks should be genuine and connected to real-world communicative purposes, ensuring that related activities enhance the overall learning experience.
According to Richards and Rodgers (2001, p 172), effective communicative approaches emphasize the integration of various communication skills and encourage students to learn through trial and error This approach suggests that pronunciation tasks should be combined with other skills, such as reading or listening Additionally, viewing learning as a creative process fosters an environment where students are encouraged to take risks in communication and develop their independence as learners.
Criticisms of the Communicative Approach
One significant criticism of communicative approaches in language teaching is their lack of contextual consideration Bax (2003) argues that the prevailing discourse promotes the communicative approach as the superior method, irrespective of the teaching context This belief can be harmful, as it often dismisses other effective teaching methods that may be more suitable for specific situations Additionally, Pennycook highlights the importance of recognizing diverse pedagogical strategies in language education.
Methods of language learning are influenced by specific sociocultural and sociopolitical contexts, making the notion of a single best approach problematic (1989) This is particularly evident in various teaching environments around the world, where cultural differences may render communicative methodologies less effective (Prabhu, 1990) Research by Ho and Wong (2003) highlights the incompatibility between communicative techniques and the prevailing beliefs in several East Asian countries, including China, where similar studies have expressed concerns about their effectiveness.
Concerns have been raised about students from certain countries being hesitant to participate in group work, suggesting that some communicative techniques may not be effective universally (Ellis, 1996; Wang, 2007; Yu, 2001) However, it is essential that instructional activities promote genuine communication, with flexibility in their implementation based on the teaching context (Littlewood, 2011) An eclectic approach, incorporating various teaching techniques, may be necessary in specific contexts (Ho & Wong, 2003) While Littlewood (2011) supports a communicative approach, he emphasizes the importance of adapting teaching methods to meet communicative goals effectively Additionally, there is a concern that communicative tasks selected by teachers may not adequately challenge students' English proficiency levels Critiques of communicative methods indicate that, in practice, many classrooms prioritize grammatical accuracy and form over fluency and functional language use (Nunan, 1987; Thornbury).
1996) This seems inconsistent with the general principles of the communicative approach.
The communicative approach in language learning presents a division regarding the emphasis on linguistic forms The strong form posits that communication experiences drive learning, while the weak form supports the use of analytical strategies that incorporate both grammar and functions (Littlewood, 2011, p 545) This distinction influences the focus and importance placed on pronunciation By balancing attention between form and function, educators can create more opportunities for effective instruction.
The task-based approach to instruction, while generally classified as communicative, presents a range of interpretations regarding its definition and application Littlewood (2004) highlights the varying definitions of "task," with some researchers advocating for a broader understanding that does not necessarily emphasize communicative purpose (Williams & Burden, 1997) Estaire and Zanon (1994) distinguish between communication tasks, which prioritize meaning, and enabling tasks, which focus on linguistic aspects such as grammar and pronunciation Incorporating enabling tasks into task-based instruction allows for attention to pronunciation during lessons Conversely, some scholars, like Willis (1996), contend that tasks should always serve a communicative goal, suggesting that pronunciation instruction will typically occur within a communicative framework, thus reducing the likelihood of focusing on specific linguistic forms.
A more recent development that falls within the umbrella of communicative approaches is the introduction of the DOGME approach to language instruction.
The DOGME approach, introduced by Thornbury (2000) and expanded by Meddings and Thornbury (2009), aims to promote authentic communication by utilizing a materials-free classroom where all resources come from students This method emphasizes a comfortable, stress-free learning environment, devoid of traditional materials like audio files or CD players Learning is seen as a process shaped by interactive dialogue between teacher and learner, with the teacher acting as a facilitator who provides scaffolding to help students identify and use emergent language Central to DOGME is the focus on conversation, which naturally leads to an emphasis on pronunciation as part of the learning experience.
In the DOGME classroom, teachers can provide scaffolding to address problematic areas during discussions, highlighting successful features while emphasizing the importance of suprasegmental over segmental aspects of language Although the DOGME approach fosters reflective learning, independence, and a relaxed communication environment, it presents challenges, particularly for student groups unfamiliar with communicative methods, such as Chinese learners The absence of traditional materials, like audio equipment, limits exposure to diverse speaker models, complicating the focus on specific phonological areas Despite these limitations, a flexible interpretation of DOGME allows for some material use, especially in exam-oriented courses Thornbury (2000) emphasizes the significance of meaningful interaction and scaffolding in pronunciation instruction, as the conversational dynamics of the classroom enhance intelligibility and support the development of effective communication strategies among students.