Hi everyone,

I just wanted to add a minor point to this discussion. Regarding item 5
'intonation doesn't really matter': on a practical note, it does matter for
people intending to take the IELTS exam. In the new pronunciation scale,
prosodic features are essential criteria for bands 7 to 9.

Steph

--- In iatefl_pronsig@..., jmtiziani@... wrote:
>
>
> Hello, everybody. Just a few ideas on the issue:
>  
> Jonathan said:
> 1. There's no agreement about what the significant features of intonation are,
or what purposes they serve.
>  
> I think there is a lot of agreement as to what the relevant features of
English intonation are and what purposes they serve, as evidenced in
Cruttenden's latest publications, as well as Tench's, Halliday's, and Well's.
Pitch changes have long been attested a discourse structuring function through
'chunking' and through 'pitch peaks and depressions', to signal how speech is
divided and delivered into more easily 'processable' units through the former
and to indicate 'beginnings' and 'cohesion' through the latter. Also, pitch
obtrusion indicates primary and secondary accents in intonation phrases, which
are an essential cue to information structuring and meaning as discourse
unfolds. Finally, changes in pitch direction and range will usually signal
aspects such as speech act (in interplay with the Mood system), status of the
information contained in each intonation phrase, as well as the speaker's
attitude and intentions. So I would naturally
> disagree with the first statement, though when questions of 'teachability'
are brought into the picture, my reply would no be so straightforward, i think.
>  
> 2. Intonation is unpredictable.
>
> Well, some of it may be unpredictable, since ultimately so much 'speaker'
choice is involved. But there is a confident level of predictability, for
example, through frequently found correlations between (a) intonational phrasing
and grammatical structures, (b) status of information and pitch patterns used in
English, (c) speech acts co-occurring with certain pitch configurations, (d)
transitions between discourse chunck being typically signalled through pitch
changes, etc., all of which adds up to the fact that a lot of it can be taught
both for language comprehension and for language production.
>  
> 3. Intonation is subject to massive variation in different varieties of
English.
>
> This is an area in which I feel at a disadvantage, being a non-native speaker
of English. I can only refer to what some specialists have said. Cruttenden does
not, in my view, recognise this as a problematic area where there actually is a
lot of variation, though Jenkins does, also in my view, mention the fact
the variation in the use of 'tones' in the world Englishes might make worthwile
to only focus on 'chunking' and 'nucleus placement', both of which seem to be
more straightforward and part of the outlined 'core'.
>  
> 4. Learners will pick it up, eventually, if they have enough exposure to
English.
>
> Exposure is an essential component, but guided exposure which asks students to
'notice' pitch patterns can greatly enhance their chances for correct imitaion.
I first introduce a few typically English pitch patterns, some abstract meanings
together with some illustration for 'local meanings, drilling, dictation adn
discrimination sessions, followed by corpus analysis and detection of patterns,
only to move on then to guided, semi-controlled, and freer practice.
>  
> 5. It doesn't really matter, and trying to teach it is a waste of time.
> Intonation DOES matter, but I think it will only be a waste of time if done
non-systematically, or isolated from listening and speaking. If learners are
trained at perceiving intonation patterns, they may be better equipped to cope
with listening and speaking tasks.
>
> 6. Most people, including most teachers, can't recognise intonation patterns -
they can't even distinguish between a fall and a rise.
> This applies to 'untrained' people, of course. if appropriate training is
provided at recognising a few English intonation patterns, and sufficient
opportunities for practice are catered for, I think enhanced intelligibility
will follow.
>
> 7. Trying to teach intonation only confuses learners and does more harm than
good.
> it may, if the instructor is not well aware of students' goals and does not
fully 'grasp' the forms and functions of English intonation from the tone group
level to larger chunks of discourse. I believe intonation CAN and SHOULD be
taught at all levels of proficiency, and it should be an obligatory component in
any EFL teacher's pronunciation profile that he/she should master the basic
intonation patterns and instructional methodology for the area. Intonation is
far from being a 'straightforward' and clearly 'sketched-out' area in English,
but agreement has been reached on many issues concerning its form and functions
in spoken discourse, and also many correlations have been found between certain
pitch patterns and their co-occurrence with grammar patterns, speech acts, text
structure, and even spoken genres...reason enough, in my opinion, to give it
more than just a try!
>  
> My answers of course are given from the point of view of a teacher trainer who
invests most of his time on the teaching of English intonational issues to
native speakers of Spanish in Argentina, but I cannot shake the feeling that
great things can be achieved with appropriate presentation, grading and practice
opportunities in practically every context.
>  
> José
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 3/6/09, pronsig_mod <pronsig_mod@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: pronsig_mod <pronsig_mod@...>
> Subject: [iatefl_pronsig] "There's no agreement..."
> To: iatefl_pronsig@...
> Date: Wednesday, 3 June, 2009, 12:15 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all!
> Thanks to Jonathan for a cool set of questions and to David for a great
response. I'm going to try to add my response to each question, but it might
take me a while! Everyone else chip in too please!
> So....
>
> Jonathan said:
> 1. There's no agreement about what the significant features of intonation are,
or what purposes they serve.
>
> David replied:
> I can't be sure about that, as I am only a becomming-phonetici an, but I can
tell you that after have being shown the studies about English, Catalan and
Spanish TOBI, my opinion is that intonation is essencial in most cases. What
about all the possibilities you have in English with question tags, for exemple?
I discovered some really interesting things about my own language that I had not
realised before!
>
> The problem is that intonation is really difficult of grasping as it touches
both Phonology and Phonetics... it can touch segments (phonemes) but at the same
time it is much more than that. In my culture we have a lot of gestures that go
with intonation, we can joke with it more than with changing sounds. ..
>
> My tuppence worth:
>
> I think there is a general agreement that it's bloody complex and so every
attempt to make it look simple will fall flat. One of the major problems is that
different researchers use very different definitions of "intonation" , and that
makes comparison between studies difficult.
> I don't really agree with any of the ELT definitions I've seen so far, so I'm
tempted to go with a broad philosophical definition like Bahtkin's (thus
including everything about how the expression sounds), rather than a tight
phonetic description of pitch change alone.
>
> My related question is "Should TESOL models of intonation be phonetic or
phonological? "
> i.e. Should they describe the contrasts that exist within English intonation
in an abstract sense?
> Or, Should they deal with what the learners will actually hear with the full
crazy range of variation in how those abstract contrasts are manifested in real
speech?
>
> Alex.
>