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-phonetician, 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?
Hi, everybody. Just a few of my ideas on the issue:
JOSÉ TIZIANI
EFL Teacher
Lecturer in English Phonetics
Mendoza, ARGENTINA
--- 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?
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?
Thanks very much, José, for this very persuasive and optimistic set of
responses!
I certainly agree that adequate teacher training in this field is
absolutely crucial.
To anyone who's uncertain about whether to comment: Don't feel that you
need to respond to all seven points -
a few words about just one of them will be very welcome!
Jonathan
jmtiziani@... pisze:
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
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.
>
I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams is an
important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody should be
measured. The definitions used in international exams and in the Common European
framework are incredibly vague - generally they just say that intonation must be
correct!
Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but intonation
seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of what counts as a
significant error. If intonation patterns are just about 'sounding like a
native' then surely we should drop them completely from tests that are supposed
to be measuring communicative competence.
Alex.
--- In iatefl_pronsig@..., "stephanie gilkes"
<stephaniegilkes@...> wrote:
>
> 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.
> >
>
Surely "communicative competence"
includes not conveying the wrong message-this inevitably means teaching some
basic elements of intonation.
Angela
Hi Steph,
I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams is an
important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody should
be measured. The definitions used in international exams and in the
Common European framework are incredibly vague - generally they just say
that intonation must be correct!
Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but
intonation seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of
what counts as a significant error. If intonation patterns are just
about 'sounding like a native' then surely we should drop them
completely from tests that are supposed to be measuring communicative
competence.
Alex.
--- In iatefl_pronsig@yahoogroups.co.uk,
"stephanie gilkes" <stephaniegilkes@...> wrote:
>
> 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@yahoogroups.co.uk,
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@yahoogroups.co.uk
> > 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.
> >
>
that's a very good point, the descriptors are quite vague and, at least by
default, they are native-speaker referenced. I can't quote them exactly (for
confidentiality reasons, although also due to a poor memory!), but the
description of prosody (in the higher bands) is mainly in terms of discourse
'chunking' and only talks about it being 'acceptable'. I'm sure you are right
that examiners would interpret 'acceptable' to mean 'the way native speakers do
it.'
Although fairly vague, the 'revised pronunciation scale' (2007) is a vast
improvement on the old scale, which was extremely vague. It's available here for
anyone who is interested: http://www.ielts.org/PDF/UOBDs_SpeakingFinal.pdf
Steph
--- In iatefl_pronsig@..., "pronsig_mod" <pronsig_mod@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Steph,
>
> I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams is an
important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody should be
measured. The definitions used in international exams and in the Common European
framework are incredibly vague - generally they just say that intonation must be
correct!
> Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but intonation
seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of what counts as a
significant error. If intonation patterns are just about 'sounding like a
native' then surely we should drop them completely from tests that are supposed
to be measuring communicative competence.
>
> Alex.
>
>
>
>
> --- In iatefl_pronsig@..., "stephanie gilkes" <stephaniegilkes@>
wrote:
> >
> > 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:
> > >
> > >
Hi Steph, Alex et al. I read the IELTS rubric, and it does seem pretty detailed and likely to be useful to scoring test takers. However, i noticed that there was no mention of prosody or suprasegmental features. I liked the part about "L1 accent has minimal effect on intelligibility." This alludes to native-like pronunciation, and we can infer, prosody.
Well, i must get back to my sylable-adding and phonetically challenged Japanese university students. Today is presentation day...
Cheers, c.
--- On Fri, 19/6/09, stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...> wrote:
From: stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...> Subject: [iatefl_pronsig] Re: "There's no agreement..." To:
iatefl_pronsig@... Date: Friday, 19 June, 2009, 12:28 PM
Hi Alex,
that's a very good point, the descriptors are quite vague and, at least by default, they are native-speaker referenced. I can't quote them exactly (for confidentiality reasons, although also due to a poor memory!), but the description of prosody (in the higher bands) is mainly in terms of discourse 'chunking' and only talks about it being 'acceptable' . I'm sure you are right that examiners would interpret 'acceptable' to mean 'the way native speakers do it.'
Although fairly vague, the 'revised pronunciation scale' (2007) is a vast improvement on the old scale, which was extremely vague. It's available here for anyone who is interested: http://www.ielts. org/PDF/UOBDs_ SpeakingFinal. pdf
Steph
--- In iatefl_pronsig@ yahoogroups. co.uk, "pronsig_mod" <pronsig_mod@ ...> wrote:
>
> Hi Steph,
>
> I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams is an important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody should be measured. The definitions used in international exams and in the Common European framework are incredibly vague - generally they just say that intonation must be correct!
> Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but intonation seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of what counts as a significant error. If intonation patterns are just about 'sounding like a native' then surely we should drop them completely from tests that are supposed to be measuring communicative competence.
>
> Alex.
>
>
>
>
> --- In iatefl_pronsig@ yahoogroups. co.uk, "stephanie gilkes" <stephaniegilkes@ > wrote:
> >
> > 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@ yahoogroups. co.uk, jmtiziani@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
New Email names for you!
Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
Hurry before someone else does!
Nearing the end of 2 months of oral
entrance examining into the school, evaluation is very much in the forefront
of my thoughts at the moment. I'm not familiar with the IELTS
scale (we use a specialist Aeronautic English Scale or the Common European
Framework here) but on scales everywhere for pronunciation I find there
is a real practical problem with evaluating people on "intelligibility"
as denoted in a scale. After all, my colleagues who may not be as
versed as I with pronunciation matters, all find it very easy to "understand"
even a very strong French accent because they are living in France, are
familiarised with a multitude of different levels of pronunciation and
some have been here over 30 years. They could even understand the more
pronuciation challenged sibling of Inspecteur Clouseau!!! So
based on the IELTS scale they might put someone who has problems with vowel
length, pronunciation of dipthongs, intonation, misplaced word stress in
the top box because "they can understand them" and who am I to
challenge that? Examiners follow a scale. Does research
exist into levels of pronunciation features in terms of what may
be easiest to work on first to what would be hardest to correct? Is
this relevant and should it be included in scales or is this too difficult
with internationally used documents? Your thoughts please.
Anna
Anna Bernard
EFL Lecturer
Ecole Nationale de L'Aviation Civile
7, avenue Edouard Belin
BP 4005
31055 Toulouse CEDEX
Tel: 00 33 5 62 17 41 15
"Chris P. Bluetree"
<japaneasynow@...> Envoyé par : iatefl_pronsig@...
19/06/2009 05:39
Veuillez répondre à
iatefl_pronsig@...
A
iatefl_pronsig@...
cc
Objet
Re: [iatefl_pronsig] Re: "There's
no agreement..."
Hi Steph, Alex et al.
I read the IELTS rubric, and it does seem pretty detailed and likely to
be useful to scoring test takers. However, i noticed that there was no
mention of prosody or suprasegmental features. I liked the part about "L1
accent has minimal effect on intelligibility." This alludes to native-like
pronunciation, and we can infer, prosody.
Well, i must get back to my sylable-adding and phonetically challenged
Japanese university students. Today is presentation day...
Cheers,
c.
--- On Fri, 19/6/09, stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...>
wrote:
From: stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...>
Subject: [iatefl_pronsig] Re: "There's no agreement..."
To: iatefl_pronsig@...
Date: Friday, 19 June, 2009, 12:28 PM
Hi Alex,
that's a very good point, the descriptors are quite vague and, at least
by default, they are native-speaker referenced. I can't quote them exactly
(for confidentiality reasons, although also due to a poor memory!), but
the description of prosody (in the higher bands) is mainly in terms of
discourse 'chunking' and only talks about it being 'acceptable' . I'm sure
you are right that examiners would interpret 'acceptable' to mean 'the
way native speakers do it.'
Although fairly vague, the 'revised pronunciation scale' (2007) is a vast
improvement on the old scale, which was extremely vague. It's available
here for anyone who is interested: http://www.ielts.
org/PDF/UOBDs_ SpeakingFinal. pdf
Steph
--- In iatefl_pronsig@
yahoogroups. co.uk, "pronsig_mod"
<pronsig_mod@ ...> wrote:
>
> Hi Steph,
>
> I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams
is an important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody
should be measured. The definitions used in international exams and in
the Common European framework are incredibly vague - generally they just
say that intonation must be correct!
> Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but
intonation seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of what
counts as a significant error. If intonation patterns are just about 'sounding
like a native' then surely we should drop them completely from tests that
are supposed to be measuring communicative competence.
>
> Alex.
>
>
>
>
> --- In iatefl_pronsig@
yahoogroups. co.uk, "stephanie gilkes"
<stephaniegilkes@ > wrote:
> >
> > 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@
yahoogroups. co.uk, jmtiziani@ wrote:
> > >
> > >
New
Email names for you!
Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
Hurry before someone else does!
This is, I believe, a really pressing issue in TESOL pronunciation.
Intelligibility, comprehensibility, native speaker competence... none of these
have clear definitions, and none really seem to be meaningful or useful in
practice. As Anna points out, who is listening is just as important as who is
speaking.
Concerning an international syllabus for pronunciation...
For segmentals, it might be possible if we considered categories as a system
rather than a list of sounds. That is, of course, what phonology is, but when it
gets to course books it tends to be presented as lists of sounds. ....
For suprasegmentals, I think there is a need to categorize according to
complexity of situation - i.e. the intonation of citation forms, read speech and
simple transactions is simple and predictable; the intonation of multi-person
phatic communication is far more complex. I believe that it is possible to
define and categorize between these but it's a large area of work and little
ground has been covered so far. (And actually an area I'm really keen to get
stuck into!).
... an aside...
I was teaching some of the tougher modal verbs today (to an upper int oral
communication group) and used the song "You could be happy" by Snow Patrol. The
students were fairly consistent in their inability to hear negatives. They were
listening for a /t/ sound, yet in native speech /t,d,s,z,n,/ etc. are frequently
dropped. (forgive the lack of script) "you wern happy" is a clear example. A
ubiquitous one is BrE "can / can't", where the vowel change is the indicator,
rather than the /t/.
Given that students are told from the beginning that "not" is used to make
negatives in English, any suggestions for helping my students with the "What the
*%*$?!" feeling when confronted with the way that native speakers speak (and
sing)?!
Alex.
--- In iatefl_pronsig@..., BERNARD Anna <anna.bernard@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone
>
> Long time no write...
>
> Nearing the end of 2 months of oral entrance examining into the school,
> evaluation is very much in the forefront of my thoughts at the moment. I'm
> not familiar with the IELTS scale (we use a specialist Aeronautic English
> Scale or the Common European Framework here) but on scales everywhere for
> pronunciation I find there is a real practical problem with evaluating
> people on "intelligibility" as denoted in a scale. After all, my
> colleagues who may not be as versed as I with pronunciation matters, all
> find it very easy to "understand" even a very strong French accent because
> they are living in France, are familiarised with a multitude of different
> levels of pronunciation and some have been here over 30 years. They could
> even understand the more pronuciation challenged sibling of Inspecteur
> Clouseau!!! So based on the IELTS scale they might put someone who has
> problems with vowel length, pronunciation of dipthongs, intonation,
> misplaced word stress in the top box because "they can understand them"
> and who am I to challenge that? Examiners follow a scale. Does
> research exist into levels of pronunciation features in terms of what may
> be easiest to work on first to what would be hardest to correct? Is this
> relevant and should it be included in scales or is this too difficult with
> internationally used documents? Your thoughts please.
>
> Anna
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Anna Bernard
> EFL Lecturer
> Ecole Nationale de L'Aviation Civile
> 7, avenue Edouard Belin
> BP 4005
> 31055 Toulouse CEDEX
> Tel: 00 33 5 62 17 41 15
>
>
>
>
> "Chris P. Bluetree" <japaneasynow@...>
> Envoyé par : iatefl_pronsig@...
> 19/06/2009 05:39
> Veuillez répondre à
> iatefl_pronsig@...
>
>
> A
> iatefl_pronsig@...
> cc
>
> Objet
> Re: [iatefl_pronsig] Re: "There's no agreement..."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Steph, Alex et al.
> I read the IELTS rubric, and it does seem pretty detailed and likely to be
> useful to scoring test takers. However, i noticed that there was no
> mention of prosody or suprasegmental features. I liked the part about "L1
> accent has minimal effect on intelligibility." This alludes to native-like
> pronunciation, and we can infer, prosody.
>
> Well, i must get back to my sylable-adding and phonetically challenged
> Japanese university students. Today is presentation day...
>
> Cheers,
> c.
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 19/6/09, stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...>
> wrote:
>
> From: stephanie gilkes <stephaniegilkes@...>
> Subject: [iatefl_pronsig] Re: "There's no agreement..."
> To: iatefl_pronsig@...
> Date: Friday, 19 June, 2009, 12:28 PM
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> that's a very good point, the descriptors are quite vague and, at least by
> default, they are native-speaker referenced. I can't quote them exactly
> (for confidentiality reasons, although also due to a poor memory!), but
> the description of prosody (in the higher bands) is mainly in terms of
> discourse 'chunking' and only talks about it being 'acceptable' . I'm sure
> you are right that examiners would interpret 'acceptable' to mean 'the way
> native speakers do it.'
>
> Although fairly vague, the 'revised pronunciation scale' (2007) is a vast
> improvement on the old scale, which was extremely vague. It's available
> here for anyone who is interested: http://www.ielts. org/PDF/UOBDs_
> SpeakingFinal. pdf
>
> Steph
>
> --- In iatefl_pronsig@ yahoogroups. co.uk, "pronsig_mod" <pronsig_mod@
> ...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Steph,
> >
> > I think the fact that prosodic features are 'tested' in oral exams is an
> important point. The problem is deciding which aspects of prosody should
> be measured. The definitions used in international exams and in the Common
> European framework are incredibly vague - generally they just say that
> intonation must be correct!
> > Oral examiners are experienced teachers and are given training, but
> intonation seems to be judged subjectively with little indication of what
> counts as a significant error. If intonation patterns are just about
> 'sounding like a native' then surely we should drop them completely from
> tests that are supposed to be measuring communicative competence.
> >
> > Alex.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In iatefl_pronsig@ yahoogroups. co.uk, "stephanie gilkes"
> <stephaniegilkes@ > wrote:
> > >
> > > 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@ yahoogroups. co.uk, jmtiziani@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
>
>
> New Email names for you!
> Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
> Hurry before someone else does!
>
Here is a big one for many students, and something to keep in mind if they are
going to the US. If you listen carefully to the way in rapid speech Americans
typically differentiate between stressed/emphasized 'can' and 'can't' it's
mostly the timing and a glottal of some sorts that adds to that timing. I've had
students here in Japan who couldn't understand when Americans were saying, I
can't go OR I can go. When the 'can' of 'I can go' gets no stress, you could say
it's simply c'n but when it gets prominence its a full blown nasal [kae:n]. But
they couldn't distinguish can from can't and that is dangerous. Helpful is that
at least some of the times, there is also a 'yes' or 'no' going with the reply.
But remember, Japanese and a lot of other languages don't use 'yes' or 'no' in
quite the same way.
E.g.,
A: (if it were in Japanese): You mean you can't go?
B: Yes, I can't go.
So we see still yet again multiple factors affecting intelligibility and
comprehension. My cat seems to understand me better when I say yes or no than my
students--perhaps it's the emotional bond?
Offline 
Send Email
