See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/231950373

State-of-the-Art Review Article

Article in Language Teaching · December 2004

DOI: 10.1017/S026144480500251X

CITATIONS READS

45 2,856

2 authors:

Jane Setter Jennifer Jenkins

University of Reading University of Southampton
43 PUBLICATIONS 330 CITATIONS 83 PUBLICATIONS 6,608 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Linguistic diversity on the international campus View project

ELF and dis/empowerment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jennifer Jenkins on 02 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

State-of-the-Art Review Article
Pronunciation

Jane Setter University of Reading, UK

Jennifer Jenkins King’s College London, UK
[email protected], [email protected]

evidently it ought to be an important aspect within

This article is organised in five main sections. It begins
a teaching and learning context which is communi-
by outlining the scope of pronunciation teaching and the
catively oriented (see Grotjahn’s 1998 review of
role of pronunciation in our personal and social lives. The
pronunciation teaching). Whatever the pedagogic
second section surveys the background to pronunciation
orientation, however, pronunciation is universally
teaching from its origins in the early twentieth century to
considered to be a ‘difficult’ aspect of an L2 to teach
the present day, and includes a discussion of pronunciation
and learn – and possibly the most difficult, for various
models and of the role of the first language (L1) in the
reasons which will emerge below.
acquisition of second language (L2) pronunciation. Then
We would like to state that this article focuses
a third section explores recent research into a range of
unashamedly on English pronunciation, as this is the
aspects involved in the process: the effects of L1 and L2
authors’ area of expertise. This should not be taken
similarities and differences; the role of intelligibility, accent
to mean, however, that work on the pronunciation
attitudes, identity and motivation; the part played by
of other languages has either not been undertaken,
listening; and the place of pronunciation within discourse.
or is less important.
This section concludes with a discussion of a number of
controversies that have arisen from recent pronunciation
research and of research into the potential for using 1.2 The role of pronunciation
computer-based technology in pronunciation teaching. The Whether or not pronunciation is accorded a major
fourth section explores a range of socio-political issues that role in the L2 classroom, it plays a major role in our
affect pronunciation teaching when the L2 is learnt as an personal and social lives. On the one hand, at the
international rather than a foreign language, and the fifth affective level it is through the way we speak, and
section moves on to consider the implications of all this for above all, by means of our accent, that we project
teaching. our regional, social and ethnic identities. The latter
are deeply-rooted, often from a very early age, and
may prove subconsciously resistant to change even
1. Introduction if on the surface, as language learners, we profess
the desire to acquire a nativelike accent in our L2.
1.1 The scope of pronunciation teaching On the other hand, our pronunciation is also a
Pronunciation involves the production and percep- major factor in our intelligibility to our listeners. The
tion of segmentals (sounds), both alone and in the
stream of speech, where they undergo a number Jane Setter is a Lecturer in Phonetics at the University
of modifications and interact with suprasegmental of Reading in the School of Linguistics and Applied
(prosodic) features, particularly stress and intonation. Language Studies, where she is Director of the English
Although all these aspects of pronunciation could Pronunciation Research Unit. She is co-editor of Daniel
be expected to appear on second language (L2) Jones’ English pronouncing dictionary (2003,
curricula, there are differences in the degree of Cambridge) with Peter Roach and James Hartman. Jane
importance attached to pronunciation teaching in is Joint Coordinator of IATEFL’s Pronunciation Special
different parts of the world. For example, for the past Interest Group.
three decades, pronunciation in English Language Jennifer Jenkins is a Senior Lecturer in the Department
Teaching (ELT) has tended to be marginalised in of Educational and Professional Studies at King’s College
the UK and US, but to be regarded as critical in London, where she is also Programme Director of the MA
many parts of mainland Europe such as Austria and in English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics.
Russia. On the other hand, if somewhat curiously, She has published widely on pronunciation in language
pronunciation is widely accorded far more im- teaching, most notably The phonology of English as
portance in the UK as far as the teaching of an international language (2000, Oxford University
foreign languages other than English is concerned. Press) and has also written an undergraduate coursebook,
One might well wonder why differences in attitude World Englishes (2003, Routledge).
towards pronunciation teaching exist, when quite
Lang. Teach. 38, 1–17. doi:10.1017/S026144480500251X Printed in the United Kingdom

c 2005 Cambridge University Press 1
Pronunciation ■
pragmatics literature consistently emphasises the role municative role of pronunciation (see, for example,
of the interpretation of meaning in context in Morley (ed.), 1994; Wennerstrom, 2001; and the
communication breakdown (see e.g., Thomas 1995). discussion of pronunciation within a communicative-
However, when a pronunciation feature impedes the discourse paradigm in Section 3.5 below).
intelligibility of a word, the likelihood – particularly
in the case of a non-native listener, who tends to
focus on the acoustic signal rather than use contextual 2.2 Pronunciation models in research
cues to resolve ambiguity – is that communication and teaching
will fail even before pragmatic factors enter the Pronunciation is a matter which needs to be addressed
equation (cf. Jenkins, 2000: 80–83). Pronunciation, in the teaching of all languages, as clearly there is little
then, plays a vital role in successful communication point in learning a (living) language if one does not
both productively and receptively. One of the main mean to communicate with other speakers of that
problems for L2 learners, however, is that pronunci- language. However, the main body of literature in
ation tends to operate at a subconscious level, par- this area is on teaching English pronunciation. This
ticularly with regard to suprasegmental features, and is probably unsurprising given the status of English
so is often not easily amenable to manipulation. world-wide. This article focuses on teaching and
research in the area of English pronunciation, but
2. The background many of the issues and concerns which are raised here
can be applied to pronunciation in other languages.
2.1 Origins of interest in phonology/ When English pronunciation teaching takes place
phonetics and pronunciation teaching in institutions all over the world, the models adopted
Pronunciation has a long and distinguished history in are generally derived from what are referred to here
second language teaching. For, as Seidlhofer (2001: as older varieties of English (OVEs), these being
56) points out, it “stood at the very beginning for the most part British and American English.
of language teaching methodology as a principled, These accents are comprehensively described in pro-
theoretically-founded discipline, originating with the nouncing dictionaries (see Roach et al., 2003; Upton
late-nineteenth-century Reform Movement”. The et al., 2001; Wells, 2000) and books on English
Reform Movement brought together phoneticians phonetics and phonology (see, e.g., Roach, 2000;
interested in the teaching of pronunciation from a Kreidler, 2004) – although some more recently
number of European countries and resulted in the conceived texts do include other Englishes (see, e.g.
establishment of pronunciation as a major concern Collins & Mees, 2003; Deterding & Poedjosoedarmo,
of second language instruction lasting well into the 1998; McMahon, 2002) – and materials are copious
second half of the twentieth century, even in the and readily available. Countries such as Japan, Taiwan,
teaching of English (see Collins and Mees, 1999; the Philippines and those in South America tend to
Howatt, 2004). Their collaboration also led to the use American English as a model, whereas British
founding of the International Phonetic Association English is found in former colonies and protectorates,
and the development of the International Phonetic such as Hong Kong, India and certain African
Alphabet (IPA), capable of representing the full countries, and also in Europe.
inventory of sounds of all known languages. The This approach to the selection of a model is
pervasiveness of the IPA in pronunciation teaching intuitive rather than empirical, and can be based
and research is attested by the fact that, over a hundred on sociocultural or market-driven choices. OVEs are
years later, it is still the universally acknowledged regarded as ‘proper English’, and any local variety is
system of phonetic transcription. simply not good enough. An example of this way of
Although pronunciation teaching suffered a thinking can be seen in the case of India; although
setback with the advent of Communicative Language Indian English is a recognised nativised variety of
Teaching in the later twentieth century, especially in English (NVE), many Indian speakers of English
the teaching of English, the basic principles of the aspire towards Received Pronunciation (RP), rather
Reform Movement, such as the prioritising of the than treating Indian English as a valid model in its
spoken language over the written, were never alto- own right (see section 3.3).
gether lost. And in more recent years, pronunciation For British English, the main and, it must be said,
specialists have devised ways of incorporating the exhaustively comprehensive reference is Gimson’s
teaching of pronunciation within a communicative pronunciation of English (2001, Arnold), edited by
framework, by moving away from the drilling of Cruttenden, currently in its 6th edition and regularly
discrete language items to communicative activities updated. Although some writers believe the term
in which pronunciation contributes to the meaning to be outdated (see, for example, Roach, 2000: 3),
in context. This in turn has led to a much greater Cruttenden continues to use RP for the prestige
interest in the teaching of suprasegmental aspects accent of English, noting that this term is “the result
of pronunciation than existed in the earlier years, of a social judgement rather than an official decision as
itself underpinned by copious research into the com- to what is ‘correct’ or ‘wrong’” (2001: 79). He goes
2
■ Pronunciation
on to say, however, that innovation in RP “tends Low et al. (2000) and Tajima et al. (1997). Similarly,
to be stigmatised” (2001: 79), and it must be said native speakers (NSs) are very often the listeners in
that deviation from RP norms among announcers on tests of intelligibility (see, for example, Anderson-
the BBC can still cause consternation among some Hsieh et al., 1992; Tajima et al., 1997), although
British (and overseas) listeners, to the extent of letters studies which look at the opposite do exist, for
of complaint appearing in the British press. While the example Derwing & Munro (2001), Derwing et al.
term RP can bring to mind a radio announcer from (2002), which look at how intelligible NSs are to
the early 20th Century, Cruttenden gives examples NNSs. It is, of course, necessary to have a point
of changes and recent innovations in RP, and also of reference for such studies, but in future it may
mentions features of ‘Estuary English’ as having an be the case that comparisons are made between
influence, such as vocalisation of ‘dark l’ in e.g. milk, accents/varieties of English which do not involve
and use of a glottal stop to replace a /t/ before an OVEs at all. If intelligibility between NSs and NNSs
accented vowel or a pause in e.g. not always. It should is a source of data for researchers, intelligibility in
be noted that ‘Estuary English’ does not describe any English between NNS groups would seem to provide
one single accent of British English, but is rather an endless possibilities for research, and could lead to the
umbrella term covering many accents spoken in the development of teaching materials which are geared
south-east of England which share some features of towards particular English communication situ-
pronunciation, such as those mentioned above (see ations – between Hong Kong and Japanese speakers of
Przedlacka, 1999). For American English, Kreidler English, perhaps. The scope for study, then, is almost
(1989) provides a clear description, although it does infinite.
not provide detail at the level of Cruttenden (2001),
and is rather more akin to Roach (2000).
In the classroom, the teacher is certainly the main 2.3 The role of L1 – transfer
influence on learners. Classes taking place in mono- and interlanguage
lingual situations will generally have a non-native It was once thought that a straightforward com-
speaker (NNS) teacher, and that teacher’s pronun- parison of the features of a learner’s L1 with L2,
ciation will act as a model for students. Some a target language, would uncover all the mysteries
countries, such as Hong Kong, operate schemes to of what was difficult in L2, and also what should
employ teachers from OVE backgrounds in order be straightforward. This method of comparison,
to provide an OVE model. The strong form of the known as Contrastive Analysis, has some validity for
argument for use of models based on OVEs goes pronunciation, where the total inventory of sounds
something like this: surely speakers need to have available to a speaker in L1 is sure to have a bearing.
a common pronunciation in order to be able to But it is not enough to do a simple comparison of
understand one another? Monolingual teaching which sounds constitute phonemes in each language
situations which involve a NNS teacher would seem and whether or not they occur in both to predict
to lead to chaos rather than mutual intelligibility. what a learner will or will not be able to pronounce.
However, writers on the subject in recent years can The syllable is a unit of immense importance in L1,
be seen to take a more flexible approach. Roach and the positions in which sounds occur in syllables
(1994), for example, in an address to tertiary teachers must be taken into account; although the Contrastive
in Singapore, a community of speakers with a re- Analysis Hypothesis may have addressed it, this is
cognised NVE, suggests that students will need to often not picked up by teachers when considering
learn a variety which is more intelligible to other pronunciation difficulties. Many Chinese languages,
speakers of English as well as using the local variety, for example, allow only a vowel or a nasal consonant
but does not recommend strict adherence to an OVE at the end of a syllable, and so the non-nasal single
model. Taylor (1991), stressing that intelligibility is consonants and consonant clusters which can occur
interactional in nature, suggests “teaching to a trans- at the end of English syllables in words such as please,
cription rather than a particular model” (Taylor, crisps and films present a difficulty for learners, even if
1991: 433), where the transcription represents any the sound(s) appear in syllable initial position in their
viable accent, and acts as a guide to the necessary language(s).
contrasts. Barrera-Pardo & López-Soto (2003) are In a development of the notion that a contrastive
more concerned with a mismatch between the model analysis will not account for all learner differences
learners are exposed to in the real world and that and difficulties, Corder (1971) and Selinker (1972)
which is the focus of instruction, insisting that, if a proposed that L2 be regarded as a distinct system,
model has to be adopted, it should at the very least an interlanguage. This, together with the idea of L1
reflect that which is closest to the “real language” interference on L2 – where features of the L1 play a
the learners are going to hear outside the classroom part on the successful acquisition of elements of the
(Barrera-Pardo & López-Soto, 2003: 2839). L2 – has given rise to many studies of interlanguage
In research, NNS English is usually compared with phonology and the role of L1 in pronunciation. In
OVEs, such as in Setter (2003), Pickering (2002), 1987, Tarone lamented the dearth of studies into the
3
Pronunciation ■
phonology of interlanguage (Tarone, 1987: 70) – a 3. Recent research into L2
reflection, perhaps, of the lack of materials specifically pronunciation acquisition
geared towards pronunciation teaching at that stage –
but this has been rectified in recent years. The New 3.1 L1 and L2: similarities and differences
Sounds conferences, organised by Allan James of the From a research point of view, there has been quite a
University of Klagenfurt and Jonathan Leather of lot of interest in the acquisition of L1 consonants
the University of Amsterdam, attract researchers into among English speaking children, but little, by
interlanguage from all over the world (see for example comparison, on vowels. The earliest consonant
Leather & James, 1997; James & Leather, 2002). sounds that English L1 children tend to acquire are
New theories in how interlanguages work are being the plosives, nasals and fricatives /p b t d k g m n
developed all the time. h s/ and also approximants /j/ and /w/, with the
Major, for example, has developed what he calls the approximants described as liquids, /l r/, the remaining
Ontogeny Model (see, for example, Major, 1987a, fricatives /f v T D z S Z/ and affricates /Ù dZ/ being
1987b, 1997, 2002), in which he argues for “an acquired later, together with consonant clusters.
interrelationship of interference and developmental Syllables tend to be CV to start with, and partially
factors” in L2 phonological acquisition (Major, or fully reduplicated – for example, mama or babi – and
1987a: 102). Major shows how interference is more slowly take on adult characteristics, with patterns such
prevalent in initial stages of phonological acquisition, as voicing of consonants in syllable initial position
where a learner copes by using a similar L1 phoneme, and devoicing of those in syllable final position (so
but this interference slowly decreases over time, to dog would sound like dock and cat like gat), and
be overtaken by developmental factors as learning simplification of consonant clusters (play might sound
takes place. These developmental processes are more like pay and stop like dop), being common. Intonation
akin to native speaker L1 phonological acquisition patterns are, interestingly, distinguishable between
processes as the learner becomes more proficient (and very small babies from different L1 backgrounds. So,
presumably has sufficient NS input). what, if any, similarities are there between L1 and L2
Looking at interlanguage from the aspect of phonological acquisition?
parameter setting, a notion used in the framework Carlisle (2001: 2) tells us that the CV syllable is
of generative phonological acquisition, Archibald recognised as an “absolute universal in the languages
examines the acquisition of what he calls “new know- of the world”, and so it is logical that a child will
ledge” (2002: 11). His findings suggest that learners start with syllables such as mama or babi. From the
are actually able to “alter their L1 representations on perspective of complex syllable onsets and codas,
the basis of the L2 input” (Archibald, 2002: 20); that or consonant clusters at the beginning or end of
is, parameters which are set for L1 can be altered a syllable, those which adhere to the Sonority
if learning of L2 processes take place, rather than a Sequencing Principle (SSP) (Clements, 1990) are
speaker setting up a whole new set of parameters for preferred, with the hierarchy as follows: vowels are
the phonology of L2. This is clearly a necessity if most sonorant, followed by glides (for English, /j w/),
learners are to break out of the phonology of their liquids (/l r/), nasals (/m n N/), fricatives (/f v T D s z S Z
L1 and pronounce L2 with any accuracy. h/), and finally plosives (/p b t d k g/). Voiced sounds
Flege, a prolific writer on the subject of inter- are considered to be more sonorant than voiceless
language phonology, is most well known for his ones. This means that a syllable beginning pl- (e.g.
work on the effect of age on the acquisition of play) is more preferred to one which begins st- (e.g.
segments, most specifically vowels, in an L2. For some stop), and may explain why NS children retain the
recent co-authored studies, see Tsukada et al., 2003 first sound in play but the second in stop; if Universal
and Aoyama et al., 2003. Flege (1995) developed Grammar is activated, st- is dispreferred. English
the Speech Learning Model (SLM), which “leads allows a large number of complex syllables, with up to
to the expectation that subtle differences will exist three consonants allowed in initial position and four
between vowels produced by early bilinguals and in final position; s-clusters (clusters beginning with
L2 monolinguals” (Flege, 2002: 132). Flege asserts /s/) in particular do not adhere to the SSP. In fact,
that sounds in the L1 and L2 systems of a bilingual these clusters, called “reversals”, are considered to be
speaker share what he calls a “common phonological a serious departure from the SSP (Carlisle, 2001: 5).
space” (Flege, 2002: 132), and it is suggested that So, how does this relate to L1 and L2 acquisition?
they will likely influence and interact with each Carlisle’s (2001) survey of studies on interlanguage
other. This sits well with Archibald’s position (see and syllable structure universals comes to the con-
above). Probably unsurprisingly, Flege’s studies show clusion that L1 transfer is, in fact, a stronger in-
that early bilinguals are judged to have more L2- fluence on the pronunciation of an L2 than the
like vowels than late bilinguals, but still “can not be preference for CV syllables, from which one can
expected to perform like ‘perfect’ bilinguals” (Flege, deduce that patterns of phonological acquisition of
2002: 140), i.e., have a production which is identical L2 are far removed from those of L1 due to the
to a NS of the target L2. incontrovertible effect of L1 phonology. However,
4
■ Pronunciation
where the L2 phonology is dissimilar to that of L1, Tyler (1995), Benrabah (1997), Anderson-Hsieh et al.
it is not impossible that a sequence of acquisition (1992), Grosjean & Gee (1987), Munro & Derwing
similar to that of L1 takes place – if it ever does. (1995a, 1995b, 1998), Major et al. (2002), Bürki-
Major’s Ontogeny Model (see above) gives us an in- Cohen et al. (2001), to name but a few. The impact
dication that this can happen under suitable learning of this research has been to show that it is, in
circumstances; see Major (1999) specifically on con- fact, deviance in the pronunciation of supraseg-
sonant clusters, and also Hansen (2001) for a dis- mentals which causes the most difficulty for NSs
cussion of linguistic constraints, including sonority, listeners.
on the acquisition of various final consonant com- A relatively new approach to the intelligibility of
binations among Chinese speakers of English. Peng & pronunciation concerns interaction between NNSs.
Setter (2000) find a systematic alternation in the Here, by definition, the premise cannot be that the
deletion of alveolar plosives in consonant clusters in second language is being learned for communication
English spoken in Hong Kong which is not unlike with its NSs or that intelligibility for and of a NS
patterns found in L1 English speakers. listener is paramount. Nor can it be assumed that
Another matter which features in L1 acquisition pronunciation deviance will have the same effect
is the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH), originally in NNS-NNS interaction as it does in NS-NNS
put forward by Lenneberg (1967). Lenneberg’s initial communication. So far the research in this area has
suggestion was that, pre-puberty, it is easier to learn investigated only English, and here the findings are
a language, but following puberty the brain “behaves that segmentals have a far greater role in English as
as if it had become set in its ways” (Lenneberg, 1967: an International Language than they do in English as
158), and language learning is much more difficult. a Foreign Language (see Section 4 below for further
This was attributed to hemispheric specialisation for discussion).
language functions, which was thought to have taken
place by puberty, and is a popular excuse for why it
is difficult for L1 English speakers to learn foreign 3.3 Research into attitude, motivation
languages at school. See also Celce-Murcia et al. and identity
(1996: 15–16). Although the strong form has been While much of the research into pronunciation fo-
discredited for a number of years, the CPH might cuses on linguistic factors, there is a growing interest
explain Flege’s findings (see above) that those who in socio-psychological influences: the role played by
learn an L2 at an earlier age have a more native- identity, attitudes and motivation in learners’ selec-
like pronunciation. Flege, however, in an early paper, tion of pronunciation models and goals, and in their
finds the CPH counter-productive for research into ultimate achievement in relation to their choices.
L2 phonology, and concludes that it cannot and Pronunciation seems to be particularly bound up
should not account for the differences between adult- with identity. Our accents are an expression of who
child performance, as many other factors play a part we are or aspire to be, of how we want to be seen
(Flege, 1987: 174). Hiding behind the CPH, says by others, of the social communities with which we
Flege, means that important questions that need to be identify or seek membership, and of whom we admire
asked about individual L2 learners may not be asked. or ostracise. At the same time, and sometimes in spite
In Flege et al. (1999), both the pronunciation and of the latter, our accents are also likely to indicate a
grammatical structures among Korean L2 speakers strong, if for some people a subconscious, attachment
of English are examined, and correlated with their to our mother tongue, which Daniels (1997: 82)
age of arrival (AOA) in the United States. It is describes as “a sort of umbilical cord which ties
found that pronunciation is indeed more native-like us to our mother”. He argues that “whenever we
as participants’ AOAs decreased; this is attributed to speak an L2 we cut that cord, perhaps unconsciously
the possible influence of brain maturation, but is more afraid of not being able to find it and tie it up
likely, say Flege et al., due to “changes in how the L1 again when we revert to L1” and observes that
and L2 phonological systems interact as the L1 system “a possible way of avoiding the cut is to continue
develops” (1999: 101). Again, this echoes Major’s using the sounds, the rhythms and the intonation of
Ontogeny Model (above). our mother tongue while pretending to speak L2”.
Acquiring an L2 accent, then, may be felt by learners
whether consciously or subconsciously to involve the
3.2 Research into intelligibility development of a new ego and as such, be resisted
As mentioned in section 2.2 above, much of because of individual and/or social pressures.
the research into intelligibility has involved testing Pronunciation attitudes play an important part
whether NNSs are intelligible to NSs, the (rather in determining learning choices and outcomes.
arrogant?) premise being, one assumes, that NNSs are Cenoz and Garcia Lecumberri (1999) show how the
learning English principally in order to communicate perceived difficulty of some NS English accents cause
with NSs. Research of this kind includes work by learners to develop less favourable attitudes towards
Tajima et al. (1997), Magen (1998), Nelson (1992), these accents. Jarvella et al. (2001) demonstrate that
5
Pronunciation ■
Danish learners of English are able to distinguish r addition of non-core items to the learner’s receptive
between different NS English accents and that they repertoire
rate them differently in terms of attractiveness, with r addition of a range of NS English accents to the
English-English accents generally being rated as most learner’s receptive repertoire.
attractive and American-English as least. Dalton-
Puffer et al. (1997) also find that English-English (in Those learners who wish to preserve their L1
this case RP) is the most highly evaluated accent by identity in their L2 but be understood by and under-
Austrian learners, with near-RP their second choice, stand other NNSs will probably choose as their goal
and American-English (GA) their third choice, while the first three stages. On the other hand, those who
the two non-native (Austrian) accents are evaluated want also to be able to understand NSs’ pronunciation
as having very low status. Of the latter two, the one will probably aim for all five stages. Whatever their
rated as by far the least attractive is the accent most decision, however, there is no requirement for
often heard in Austria and that spoken by the subjects learners to lose their L1 accent and, by implication,
themselves. Smit and Dalton (2000) likewise find that their L1 identity.
Austrian learners prefer to aim for an NS accent, This all calls into question the traditional dis-
while Smit (2002) adds a further dimension to the tinction between the instrumental and integrative
complex equation, that of linguistic insecurity. Her motivation of Schumann’s acculturation model (see
findings may help account for learners’ aspiration Schumann 1986). Dörnyei and Csizér (2002: 453),
for an NS accent and yet their failure to acquire for example, argue that “World English is turning
one: their feelings of inadequacy pronunciation-wise. into an increasingly international language and it is
Common to the majority of the accent attitude therefore rapidly losing its national cultural base while
research, then, is the subjects’ professed desire to becoming associated with a global culture”. This,
acquire a prestige NS accent rather than a local or they believe, “undermines the traditional definition
internationally acceptable accent, even though such of integrativeness as it is not clear any more who the
is rarely the learning outcome. ‘L2 speakers’ or the members of the L2 community
Pronunciation, it seems, is a more sensitive area are”. For L2 English pronunciation (and the same will
of language than the other linguistic levels because undoubtedly be true of any subsequent international
of the way in which it encroaches on identity and languages that supersede English), motivation is
elicits strong attitudes. This in turn may go some no longer a straightforward concept involving the
way to explain why, despite a professed desire to learner’s orientation to the accent of the language’s
sound ‘nativelike’, the aspiration is rarely achieved by native speaker community. Instead, as Dörnyei and
L2 learners. The socio-psychological research (as well Csizér imply, it has been complicated by a host of
as the sociolinguistic research in relation to inter- factors relating to the new international context of
national languages: see Section 4 below) indicates communication. Much more research is needed to
that pronunciation teachers would do well to replace clarify the situation and, in particular, the factors
the notion of absolute ‘correctness’ with one of influencing the ambivalent pronunciation attitudes of
appropriateness (see Seidlhofer, 2001: 57–60). In this learners of international languages, which Bamgbos.e
respect, the prevailing concept of ‘accent reduction’, (1998: 7) describes in respect of English accents as “a
with its tendency to treat L2 learners as though they love-hate relationship”, in the sense that “one does
are subjects for speech pathology and to encourage not wish to sound like a native speaker but still finds
them to lose all traces of their L1 accent, is being the accent fascinating”.
questioned by those working on the acquisition of
international languages, most notably English as an
International Language (EIL). The concept of ‘accent 3.4 Research into listening
addition’, that is, the adding of L2 pronunciation fea- Listening is, to some extent, the flip-side of pro-
tures to learners’ repertoires in accordance with their nunciation. The extent to which one affects the other
needs and preferences is, instead, being promoted as cannot be underestimated; one needs to be able to
one more in keeping with current theories of bi- hear a phonemic contrast before one can successfully
lingualism (additive rather than subtractive) and produce it, for example.
of learner autonomy. Jenkins (2000: 209–210), Field advocates a “signal-based approach” (2003:
for example, proposes five stages of pronunciation 332) to listening which involves using bottom-up
learning, each one involving the addition to learners’ processing in listening activities, rather than assuming
repertoires if they so desire: enough information can be gained from context.
Drawing learners’ attention to possible problems such
r addition of EIL core items (see Section 4) pro- as cross-boundary segmentation, the identification of
ductively and receptively weak forms and assimilation in NS speech, Field
r addition of a range of NNS English accents to the addresses an area which is very often neglected in
learner’s receptive repertoire either listening or pronunciation teaching. Learners,
r addition of accommodation skills particularly in initial stages, find sounds more
6
■ Pronunciation
concrete than higher level units (like phrases or or create a bias where the listener and speaker
sentences), and tend to be persuaded by their own are both from the same L1 background. Clearly,
first parse of an utterance, which can result in mis- there needs to be more work in the classroom on
communication at the global level, and so this developing strategies for listening to Englishes other
approach seems to be highly sensible. Wilson (2003) than those one might be most likely to come across,
also advocates a bottom-up approach, and suggests although the practicalities of doing so might be
some practical, student-centred activities to improve problematic.
listening. In an experiment to find which speaking rates
Cauldwell (2002b) looks at suprasegmental aspects were preferred by NNS listeners, Derwing &
of listening. He introduces something he calls the Munro (2001) use Mandarin and “mixed” groups
“word-crusher”, a double-prominence tone unit in of L2 English speakers to rate the speed of spoken
which words between the first and last stressed items narratives on a scale ranging from “too fast” to
are “crushed”, or temporally pushed together. In this “too slow”. English speech produced by NS and
paper, Cauldwell sees English as messy, and suggests Mandarin NNS was presented in its original format,
activities in which students can practice the blurring and also in computer modified temporal formats,
of words in the word-crusher. By understanding how including an adjustment to the Mean Mandarin rate
this works in English, processes of connected speech and Mean English rate. They found that slowing
can be better modelled by the learner, and therefore down the speech did not generally lead to better
messages better perceived. In another article on evaluations of preference amongst listeners from any
listening, Cauldwell (2002–2003) suggests that more of the groups, but that the preference among the non-
attention needs to be placed on understanding fast Mandarin speakers was for slightly slower Mandarin-
speech, and that teachers need to be equipped with accented English. They conclude that asking learners
the ability and terminology to describe it effectively to “slow down” may not actually be beneficial.
to learners. For this purpose, a teacher or teacher
educator could certainly do a lot worse than investing
in a copy of Shockey’s Sound patterns of spoken English 3.5 Pronunciation research within a
(2003), which is a fully comprehensive guide to communicative-discourse paradigm
connected speech processes in English. Discourse intonation research began more than three
In another study on suprasegmental issues, decades ago with Halliday and the Prague School
Erickson et al. (1999) show that Japanese listeners (see Halliday, 1970). Since then, the main focus has
have difficulty perceiving and counting syllables in been on English, most notably the pioneering work
English, and attribute this to negative language of Brazil and his colleagues at the University of
transfer at the suprasegmental level, and also, in part, Birmingham, although there has also been research
to the fact that English words are written down using into discourse intonation involving other languages,
Japanese katakana, which represents English words such as Moyer (1999) on German. Brazil’s research
in terms of the Japanese unit of timing, the mora. was published posthumously (Brazil, 1997) by his col-
Strategies for learning how to predict the number of leagues, although it had earlier (1985) been published
syllables in an English word are surely implicated. as a Birmingham University monograph as publishers
The above activities are aimed at enabling NNSs had not at that time appreciated the significance
to decode NS speech. Imai et al. (2003) look at the of Brazil’s contribution to the understanding of the
responses of both Spanish and English speakers of relationship between intonation and grammatical
English, presented with English single-word stimuli meaning on the one hand or the expression of at-
in noise, some of which are Spanish accented and titude on the other. For more recent publications on
some not. The English NS group performed best discourse intonation see Wichman (2000), and Chun
overall; interestingly, the Spanish listeners performed (2002) specifically on discourse intonation in L2.
better perceiving unaccented speech than Spanish Discourse intonation is an empirically-based
accented speech, but better than the native English model which is concerned with the communicative
speakers in perceiving Spanish accented speech. function of intonation rather than the grammatical
Major et al. (2002) looked at what happened when and attitudinal functions which are to this day the
listeners from many different language backgrounds concerns of traditional models. Its primary interests
were asked comprehension questions based on are firstly the establishing of social meanings and
lectures given in English by NS and NNS. It was roles through the assignment of prominence, key and
found that all groups scored badly when listening to tone choice (with a falling, or ‘proclaiming’, tone
lectures given by NNS, Spanish speakers did much for non-shared and a fall-rise, or ‘referring’ tone for
better when listening to L1 Spanish speakers and shared information), and secondly the intonational
Chinese speakers did much worse when listening to mechanisms for controlling conversation, such as
L1 Chinese speakers. It is suggested that using NNS turn-taking and introducing/concluding topics. The
speech in listening comprehension tests may well model thus provides teachers and researchers with a
disadvantage listeners from different L1 backgrounds, means of analysing speakers’ intonation choices in
7
Pronunciation ■
authentic speech in a way that traditional models, This research, however, has had very little impact
based on invented examples and intuition, cannot. on pronunciation teaching materials. On the whole,
Nevertheless, discourse intonation is only now be- many teachers still believe in stress-timing. But this
ginning to be widely taken up in language teaching. may not be a complete misnomer. Although it has
This is to some extent because the earliest teaching been proven that the difference between stress- and
materials to embrace the model (e.g. Bradford, 1988; syllable-timing does not have much basis in reality
Brazil, Coulthard & Johns, 1980) tended to apply the from a speech production point of view, there is evi-
model in its entirety for productive use. While analysis dence to show that it is important for speech
and interpretation of intonation choices after the perception, particularly among speakers of what may
event was found to be a useful activity, the assessment be considered OVEs, such as British and American
of shared/non-shared status and consequent assigning English. Cutler (1993), in an article which discusses
of tone proved too subconscious and too fleeting the speech segmentation problem in different lang-
to be conducive to teaching for production. More uages, asserts that rhythm based on word stress is
recent materials (e.g. Bowler & Cunningham, 1999; a key factor in English speech segmentation. For
Hancock, 2003; Gilbert, 2001; Levis, 2001), perhaps French listeners, however, the syllable is more salient
for this reason, focus for production more on pro- in speech segmentation, and for Japanese listeners, it
minence, where it is easier to apply the ‘rules’ at a is the mora. Speakers of different languages use that
conscious level, and less on tone assignment, which language’s approach to linguistic rhythm in order to
they tend to treat at a receptive level except in segment a stream of speech from another language,
relation to conversation management where, again, with, for example, French speakers using the syllable
productive ‘rules’ are more amenable to conscious to segment Japanese and English. The fact that
manipulation. Wennerstrom (2001, 2003) emphasises speakers segment a stream of speech differently, using
the need to provide learners with authentic con- different, language specific rhythmic rules to do so,
versation data which they can work on at an analytical is attributed to how we acquire language as infants,
level, in effect, becoming discourse analysts, before the suggestion being that the “characteristic rhythmic
they move on to develop their discourse intonation pattern of a language is sufficiently salient to assist the
productive skills. newborn child in segmenting the continuous speech
Pronunciation has also begun to be taught from a stream into discrete units” (Cutler, 1993: 455). It
discourse perspective within the lexical approach, an appears to be the case that, once we have acquired
approach which advocates the teaching of vocabulary a particular approach as infants, it stays with us as a
and grammar in lexical phrases rather than as a series strategy for parsing the speech signal; studies of what
of discrete items (see e.g. Nattinger & DeCarrico, are referred to as “maximally competent French-
1992). The potential for the teaching of discourse English bilinguals” show that they seem only to have
intonation within the lexical approach was first “one rhythmic segmentation procedure available to
explained in detail by Seidlhofer & Dalton-Puffer them” (Cutler, 1993: 455).
(1995). Subsequently the idea has been taken up It is asserted that the appropriate production of
in numerous teaching materials with lexical phrases stressed syllables is, therefore, of a high degree of im-
being taught complete with their intonation contours portance in the effective communication of mes-
and tone units being introduced by means of the sages in English among speakers of OVEs, and for
lexical phrase. some researchers this importance cannot be overem-
phasised in learner situations. If, as Adams (1979: 87)
suggests, learners “fail to recognise the significance of
3.6 Controversies in L2 pronunciation the timing of syllables” when producing utterances in
research English, and instead “produce an anomalous rhythm
English speech rhythm is often described as ‘stress- which seriously impairs the total intelligibility of their
timed’; in basic terms, this means that the beginning utterance”, both parties to the act of communication
of each stressed syllable is said to be equidistant in will be at a loss to explain what has happened and
time from the beginning of the next stressed syllable. what was intended. In short, the communicative
This is in comparison to ‘syllable-timed’ languages transaction will not be successful. This is a matter
(e.g., Spanish, Cantonese), in which the start of which has not eluded researchers, materials writers
each individual syllable is said to be equidistant in and teachers (see, for example, Anderson-Hsieh et al.,
time from the start of the next. Instrumental studies 1992; Anderson-Hsieh & Venkatagiri, 1994; Chela-
have, in fact, shown that very little difference can be Flores, 1998; Gilbert, 1984; Taylor, 1981; Wong,
found between typically ‘stress-timed’ and typically 1987), but, claim Anderson-Hsieh & Venkatagiri
‘syllable-timed’ languages. Roach (1982) and Dauer (1994), it is something which has, until recently,
(1983), for example, investigated so-called stress- and been somewhat under-investigated. Taylor comments
syllable-timed rhythm; both found that the theory that “perhaps the most widely encountered difficulty
fell down when tested empirically. Cauldwell (2002a) among foreign learners of English is rhythm” (1981:
finds English speech rhythm to be “irrhythmical”. 219), a sentiment echoed by Anderson-Hsieh (1992:
8
■ Pronunciation
51) when she claims that “suprasegmentals often parsing of English. They suggest that lexical access
elude ESL students”. is initiated by the occurrence of a stressed syllable,
The difficulty experienced by NNSs of English and claim that the high frequency of English content
in acquiring English speech rhythm can therefore words starting with a stressed syllable means that
be considered to have implications for intelligibility. this strategy would work very well in English. The
This is especially so in the light of studies like the importance of stressed syllables in spoken word
one by Anderson-Hsieh et al. (1994), which asserts recognition is also supported by Grosjean and Gee,
that prosody is the most critical feature in English who claim that “stressed syllables (and only they) are
pronunciation (1994: 531), and that of Magen (1998). used to initiate lexical search” (Grosjean & Gee, 1987:
These two studies, both of which use English- 144). They do not, however, offer much in the way
speaking raters to assess the pronunciation perform- of empirical evidence.
ance and intelligibility of the subjects in such areas In fact, if the stressed syllables in a stream of
as segmentals, syllable structure, vowel quantity and English speech are incorrectly placed, native speakers
voicing, provide us with firm evidence that prosodic may process the message as something completely
and suprasegmental features have a consistently high different. Cutler (1984) gives the following as an
influence on the intelligibility of a non-native example: “[ . . . ] a hearer who heard the word
speaker’s pronunciation. ‘perfectionist’ stressed on the first syllable, with the
So what does happen in other Englishes? Looking second syllable reduced, parsed it as ‘perfect shnist’,
at a variety from South East Asia, Low et al. (2000) and only became aware of the error when no meaning
study the temporal features of Singapore English. could be given to ‘shnist’”(Cutler, 1984: 79). Cutler
Vowel quality and vowel duration in Singapore (1984) also cites and old study by Bansal (1966),
English is compared with that of British English using who presented listeners with English spoken by
a measure especially developed by the authors, the Indian speakers. It was found that, if words with an
‘Pairwise Variability Index’ or PVI. Their data show initial stress were produced with second syllable stress,
that Singapore English speakers fail to reduce vowels ‘atmosphere’ was heard as ‘must fear’, ‘yesterday’ as
in weak syllables to the same extent that British ‘or study’, ‘character’ as ‘director’, and ‘written’ as
English speakers do, a phenomenon also found in the ‘retain’, and when two-syllable words with stress on
English of Hong Kong speakers by Setter (2000, the second syllable were uttered with initial stress,
2003). This can be expected to contribute to the rhy- hearers perceived ‘prefer’ as ‘fearful’, ‘correct’ as
thmic differences between British English and the ‘carried’, and ‘about’ as ‘come out’ (Cutler, 1984:
varieties studied, with the implication that both 79–80).
Singapore and Hong Kong English will be difficult Although the above work is on word stress and
for speakers of British English to understand. not speech rhythm in longer stretches of speech, the
Although this is speculation as far as these two studies point is clearly this: if the normally strong syllables
are concerned, various psychological studies of are weakened and the weak syllables strengthened,
speech perception demonstrate that deviations from the intelligibility is lost, or at least severely impaired.
what may be considered normal English stress pat- This strongly advocates the use of conventional pat-
terns can indeed cause difficulty in the correct parsing terns of English speech rhythm as an essential factor
of a message. Cutler (1984) points out that, in English, in the correct parsing of messages in NNS-NS inter-
“word stress patterns are an integral part of the actions. In order to test the difference made in ease
phonological representations of words in the mental of perception among NNSs and NSs, Tajima et al.
lexicon” (1984: 78), a statement which has far- (1997) recorded phrases spoken in English by a native
reaching implications for English speech perception American English speaker and a Mandarin Chinese/
and production. What this means is that the listener Taiwanese speaker of English, and acoustically manip-
has a model of any given lexical item held in the ulated each according to the other’s rhythmic patterns
mental lexicon; that model includes its stress pattern. to see whether this had any affect on intelligibility.
For the listener’s correct retrieval of a particular item It was found that the intelligibility of the Chinese
during the process of speech perception, something speaker’s speech among NSs of American English
which comes rather close to approximating that improved by between 15% and 25% compared with
model must be produced by the speaker. If, as unaltered speech, and that the American English
Cutler (1984: 79) asserts, native English speakers draw speaker’s speech became less intelligible by similar
“heavily on information about stress pattern” as a proportions. This leads them to conclude that “native
normal and efficient way of understanding speech, it listeners’ ability to recognise English phrases is signi-
is crucial that this close approximation to the model ficantly influenced by whether or not the phrases have
has correct stressing. If this is not achieved, the listener appropriate native-like temporal properties” (Tajima
will at the very best have difficulty reconstructing the et al., 1997: 17).
message, or, at worst, not understand it at all. Research on perception of stress and rhythm
In a more recent work, Cutler & Norris (1988) notwithstanding, Cauldwell, in a version of his
investigate the importance of strong syllables in the 1996 article published on the web, concludes “The
9
Pronunciation ■
continued presence of the refuted hypothesis, that answer, carrying on to say that “learners should be
has become hard-wired into our thinking, is an exposed to plenty of examples of yes/no questions”
obstacle to progress in understanding the nature (Thompson, 1995: 240). Computer corpora recorded
of spontaneous speech: long-refuted, it should be from naturally occurring speech could certainly be
now discarded. Life without the stress and syllable- used to provide those examples in the development
timing hypothesis will be more difficult, but it should of listening activities.
make possible real advances in the understanding of
spontaneous speech” (Cauldwell, 2002a: 22). This
conclusion is based on his own research, and, taking
that and the findings of Roach (1982) and Dauer 3.7 Research into the potential for
(1983) into account, he certainly has a point. But technology in pronunciation teaching
although the influence of research into the reality of When one thinks of using computers in pronun-
the production of stress- and syllable-timed languages ciation teaching, the most obvious use is perhaps
is growing, it would not be sensible to throw the to focus on the identification and production of
baby out with the bathwater and fail to focus on the individual speech sounds, and this has indeed been
importance of appropriate stressing in order to make the case. However, in recent years there has been a
messages clear. Many teachers and especially teacher greater focus on suprasegmental aspects in materials
educators now qualify the claim by referring to stress produced for students to use on computer platforms,
timing as only a tendency and as occurring mainly which clearly reflects the importance placed on these
in more formal speech. Marks (1999: 198) argues, features in pronunciation teaching text books.
meanwhile, that the use of rhythmical structures Programmes which deal specifically with segmen-
such as rhymes in the classroom is valid in so far tal issues include SPECO, which combines advanced
as it “provides a convenient framework for the per- speech technology with user-friendly graphics to aid
ception and production of a number of characteri- clinical remediation of children’s speech pathologies.
stic features of English pronunciation which are often The programme has obvious applications in the field
found to be problematic for learners: stress/unstress of L2 English pronunciation teaching (see Roach,
(and therefore the basis for intonation), vowel 2002). PRAAT, an application developed for speech
length, vowel reduction, elision, compression, pause researchers by Paul Boersma and David Weenik of the
(between adjacent stresses)”. This is a sensible University of Amsterdam, which has applications in
recommendation that is likely to continue finding speech analysis, synthesis, manipulation and labelling,
favour with teachers long after they have abandoned among others, and offers a facility for phoneme
any belief in the existence of stress timing. identification and discrimination tests, has also been
Another controversial area, related to speech modified to teach vowel and diphthong production
rhythm in that it concerns itself with suprasegmental by means of formant plotting (see Brett, 2002).
aspects of pronunciation, and one in which The PRAAT programme can be downloaded free
technology is becoming invaluable in pronunciation of charge from www.praat.org.
teaching, is that of intonation. In particular, studies Examples of this kind may lead to the conclusion
have been carried out on intonation in yes/no that computers are making the teacher redundant, but
questions, which, conventional wisdom and the this is an over simplistic view; at best programmes
majority of teaching materials tell us, always have such as those described can only be used in con-
a rising intonation. Both Levis (1999) in respect of junction with classroom teaching, and recent research
American English and Cauldwell (1999) in respect urges us towards the careful evaluation of computer
of British English have arrived at similar conclusions programmes for teaching pronunciation. PRAAT, for
about yes/no questions. Both constructed a corpus example, was designed to be used by serious speech
of naturally occurring speech samples from native researchers, and computer readouts of formant plots
speakers of the respective varieties of English (as require a sophisticated level of understanding which
opposed to the invented examples favoured by earlier may be lacking in many teachers and learners, or
pronunciation researchers) and analysed them for take too much classroom time to develop. Derwing
final pitch direction in yes/no questions. Neither et al. (2000) looked at popular automatic speech
researcher found that yes/no questions unilaterally recognition (ASR) packages for ESL speech and
have a rising tone. As yet, this finding has failed to found that they are still not able to perform as well
have had much of an impact on materials writers, as human listeners listening to non-native speech,
although an understanding of intonation in yes/no concluding that “the possibilities for using ASR
questions does seem to have filtered through to software in the L2 classroom are intriguing”, but as
teachers and teacher educators. Thompson (1995), yet still possibilities. Anderson-Hsieh (1992) points
for example, suggests a simple binary approach, in out that, useful though it may be, using electronic
which learners should be encouraged to use a rising feedback “cannot carry out for students all the other
tone if they are genuinely asking a question and work that goes into acquiring native-like speech”,
a falling tone if they think they may know the although it is useful as an awareness raising tool.
10
■ Pronunciation
The recent surge of interest in harnessing com- of the electronic ‘talking’ dictionaries which first
puters for teaching suprasegmentals has lead to the became available in the late 80s/early 90s. The new
development of a number of programmes. Kalten- CD-ROMs offer learners a range of features such as
boeck, for example, has developed a CD-ROM the opportunity to hear words in isolation and, in
for the teaching of intonation (see Kaltenboeck, some cases, in connected speech. There is also the
2002). Protea Textware have published three CD- possibility of recording and listening to themselves
ROMs focusing on connected speech in American in order to compare their own pronunciation
English, Australian English and British English (see with the dictionary version. The only pronouncing
Westwood & Kaufmann, 2002). Cauldwell (2002c) dictionary to currently be accompanied by a CD-
has published a CD-ROM, Streaming speech, which ROM is the latest edition of Daniel Jones’ English
deals with a range of aspects of British English pronouncing dictionary (Roach et al., 2003), providing
pronunciation. The material on the CD-ROM is the learner with a copious amount of information
underpinned by extensive research, some snippets about American and British English pronunciation.
of which feature in pop-ups while the programme However, in the current format, only the British
is running. For example, the section which deals English pronunciation of words can be heard on the
with connected speech processes is informed by CD-ROM.
Shockey (2003), the section dealing with units of Another electronic medium which hardly requires
speech is based on the research of Brazil (1997), an introduction is the internet. As with any materials,
Halliday (1994) and Tench (1996), and that on however, caution is advised; transcription systems in
the functions of level tone again links with Brazil particular vary from site to site, and this may be a
(1997). The student is able to record him or cause of confusion for students. British-based and
herself speaking in some sections, and compare this influenced sites tend to have the most consistency
with an English-speaking model. Fraser’s (2001a) in symbols used for individual phonemes, although
CD-ROM, Learn to speak clearly in English, is slight variations do exist. Many sites focus on pro-
another which covers different aspects of English nunciation without the use of phonetic symbols, and
pronunciation. It starts by encouraging the student these may well be best for students, depending on
to think about communication in general, before their aims. There are sites which test and train English
moving on to sections on sentence stress and rhythm, phonemic transcription (see Tench, 2002; Luscombe,
the role of segmentals and suprasegmentals, and 1996; Cooke et al., no date), allow you to listen and
‘critical listening’. Again, students are able to record identify intonation contours (see Maidment, 2000a,
themselves and compare it with a speaker on the disk. 2000b and 2001) or work on minimal pairs (Kelly
For teachers, there is a companion disk (see Fraser, 2001), offer pronunciation tips (see Maidment, 1999),
2001b), which similarly makes uses of clever graphics and work with both teachers and students on a variety
and comparisons with other culture-specific ideas, of issues (see Fraser, 2000; Widmayer & Gray, 2002).
like colour, to demonstrate how speakers of different Widmayer & Gray’s site is particularly good value,
languages categorise phonemes differently. Another directing teachers and learners to all sorts of resources,
interesting feature of the materials discussed in this including sites with authentic materials. Here we
paragraph is that they have clearly been designed have given references to but a few of the many
with learner autonomy in mind; as Kaltenboeck sites available on-line. It has to be said that these
(2002: 13) points out, this is particularly relevant to are all basically listening sites, but, as listening and
the acquisition of pronunciation. Students are en- pronunciation go hand in hand, awareness-raising of
couraged to listen to themselves and think more about the kind offered on these sites is an invaluable addition
what makes a message clear, rather than focussing to pronunciation learning and teaching.
on the precise production of individual sounds. This
may well make them more successful in producing
effective communicators than the segmental speech
4. Socio-political issues
recognition packages because of the shortcomings As was pointed out in section 3.2 above, the vast ma-
of the latter identified by Derwing et al. and jority of pronunciation research and classroom teach-
Anderson-Hsieh (above). Although suprasegmental ing is grounded on the premise that learners need
materials are still in their infancy, they point to an to understand and be understood by native speakers
important teaching tool for the future, one which (NSs) of the language in question. However, for an
complements rather than supersedes written materials increasing number of learners, most particularly in the
and classroom teachers. case of English but also in the case of other languages
Dictionaries are another area in which technology such as Spanish, pronunciation training is needed in
is coming to the fore. Many of the major pub- order to facilitate communication with other non-
lishers have started to issue CD-ROMs with their native speakers (NNSs) from different first languages.
dictionaries, promoting learner autonomy in pro- A distinction can therefore be made between a
nunciation acquisition. Fortunately, what is now foreign language, where interaction typically takes
available on disk is far superior to the stilted speech place between a NS and a NNS, and an international
11
Pronunciation ■
language, where interaction is more typically between on Speech (later ‘Communication’) Accommodation
a NNS and another NNS. Theory (Beebe & Giles, 1984; Giles et al., 1991)
As far as English is concerned, research into the to demonstrate that intelligible pronunciation in EIL
learning of the language for international purposes, communication is not a monolithic construct, but
i.e. English as an International Language (EIL), has that it requires constant negotiation and adjustment
demonstrated not only the critical part played by pro- in relation to speaker-listener factors specific to the
nunciation in maintaining successful communication particular context of the interaction (see Jenkins,
between NNSs from different L1s, but also the ways 2003).
in which the pronunciation priorities involved in EIL
differ from those of EFL. 5. Implications for pronunciation
The main EIL research approach to have been
adopted to date focuses on the role of pronunciation
teaching
in promoting and obstructing intelligibility. Building From a broad point of view, pronunciation needs to
on earlier research (Smith, 1992; Smith & Bisazza, lose its isolated character and be treated pedagogically
1982; Smith & Nelson, 1985; Smith & Rafiqzad, as part of communication and discourse. This would
1979) in which listeners from a range of L1s were mean focusing on what will help a learner make
asked to rate the comprehensibility of speakers meaning in communicative situations at the same
from different L1s, Jenkins (2000, 2002) identifies time as learning about other aspects of language in
a number of pronunciation features which appear to general language teaching textbooks; pronunciation
be crucial, or ‘core’, in safeguarding the intelligibility practice should be incorporated at as early a stage
of pronunciation for NNS listeners who do not as possible. In line with research conducted within
share the speaker’s L1. Her Lingua Franca Core an SLA framework, the notion of the teachability of
targets these core features: consonant sounds other various pronunciation features should be taken into
than the voiceless and voiced dental fricatives \T \ account, along with factors such as age, motivation
and \D \ and dark ‘l’; vowel quantity; word-initial and the influence of L1. Aspects which require focus
and word-medial consonant clusters, with deletion from the perspective of discourse and communication
being more problematic than epenthesis (addition); include appropriate use of discourse intonation, the
tonic stress. Meanwhile, the remaining features of understanding of how sentences break down into
NS English pronunciation (vowel length; features of tone units and lexical phrases, the ability to highlight
connected speech such as assimilation, elision, weak stressed syllables in a stream of speech, and production
forms; word stress; pitch direction) were found in the of the segmental elements.
research to be unnecessary for intelligibility in EIL Approaches to pronunciation teaching should also
communication contexts and are therefore designated be willing to adapt, and not continue to be influenced
‘non-core’. Jenkins argues that in cases where these by old fashioned notions. Where research identifies
non-core features are affected by transfer from the the mythical nature of beliefs, such as rigid stress-
NNS’s first language, the resulting forms should be timing and the use of specific intonation patterns
described as regional (L2) sociolinguistic variation on questions, for example, teachers, teacher trainers
rather than pronunciation ‘error’. and materials developers should be ready to take this
Subsequently, Lin’s (2003) research into the sim- on board and develop curricula which make use of
plification of word-initial consonant clusters, building this information. Also, the notion of ‘error’ needs to
on Weinberger (1987), has demonstrated that sim- be readdressed in the light of the NVEs which are
plification by epenthesis is communicatively less emerging, and of EIL. The implications for models
harmful to intelligibility for an NNS listener than and goals include a change of emphasis from accent
simplification by deletion. By preserving more of the reduction to accent addition, and, in parallel, the
underlying form, Lin points out, epenthesis limits development of accommodation skills, in order to
ambiguity, whereas consonant deletion leads to non- make spoken messages clearer to all speakers/listeners.
recoverability and greater ambiguity. Lin’s research However, a learner should not be discouraged from
thus supports the Lingua Franca Core claim regarding using an OVE as a model, if that is what is desired by
consonant clusters. On the other hand, Peng & Ann’s the learner.
(2001) research into word stress demonstrates that There should also be an enhanced role for listening
there may be common patterns of stress across L2 in pronunciation teaching. Learners need to be
varieties of English. If further research supports their exposed not only to OVEs but also to other varieties
finding, the Lingua Franca Core will need to be of English, particularly those of speakers of local L2
modified so as to incorporate word stress, though Englishes with whom they are likely to communicate.
with stress patterns being determined by NNSs rather Learners need to be trained to be able to pick out the
than by NSs. salient information in a stream of speech, so that they
Research into pronunciation in EIL contexts has do not feel left behind, and also need to be introduced
also begun to show the importance of accom- to pitfalls arising from the use of connected speech
modation. For example, Jenkins’s research draws features by proficient users of English.
12
■ Pronunciation
As far as resources are concerned, pronunciation Anderson-Hsieh, J., Johnson, R. and Koehler, K. (1992).
(and listening) resources should be made more readily The relationship between native speaker judgments of non-
native pronunciation and deviance in segmentals, prosody,
available to teachers and students, and these resources and syllable structure. Language Learning 42, 4, 529–
should be introduced and demonstrated positively 555.
during teacher training, rather than being treated Anderson-Hsieh, J. and Venkatagiri, H. (1994). Syllable
like poor relatives to general teaching texts and duration and pausing in the speech of Chinese ESL
materials, or, worse still, regarded as rather scary speakers. TESOL Quarterly 28, 4, 807–812.
Aoyama, K., Flege, J. E., Guion, S. G., Akahane-Yamada, R.
and too difficult. Updated printed pronunciation and Yamada, T. (2003). Foreign accent in English words
materials which take into account World Englishes produced by Japanese children and adults. 15th International
and EIL need to be developed. The extent to which Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, 3201–
technology can be exploited is enormous; as with 3204.
all materials, teachers should be judicious in what is Archibald, J. (2002). Parsing procedures and the question of
full access in L2 phonology. New Sounds 2000: The Fourth
actually being taught via computers and the internet, International Symposium on the Acquisition of Second-Language
in order to make sure the materials have taken Speech, University of Amsterdam, 11–21.
research into account and are not just rehashing Archibald, J. (1997). The relationship between L2 segment
old ideas through technological means. Computer and syllable structure. New Sounds 97: The Third Interna-
applications have a great potential as use in learner tional Symposium on the Acquisition of Second-Language Speech,
University of Klagenfurt, 17–25.
independence and self-access situations; it is the job Bamgbos.e, A. (1998). Torn between the norms: innovations
of the teacher to be able to evaluate these materials in world Englishes. World Englishes 17, 1, 1–14.
and ensure the learner has made the best selection for Bansal, R. K. (1966). The Intelligibility of Indian English: PhD
his/her level and needs. Thesis, London University.
Barrera-Pardo, D. and Lópex-Soto, T. (2003). Language
We have highlighted the need to take research input and choice of English pronunciation models in local
into account when devising curricula for teaching contexts. 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences,
pronunciation. Research into pronunciation clearly Barcelona, Spain, 2837–2840.
needs to go on, and the obvious area is research Beebe, L. and Giles, H. (1984). Speech-accommodation the-
into NNS-NNS interaction. As much as possible ories: a discussion in terms of second-language acquisition.
International Journal of the Sociology of Language 46, 5–32.
of this research should be driven and completed by Benrabah, M. (1997). Word-stress: a source of unintelligib-
teachers, who are in the position to see the difficulties ility in English. IRAL 35, 3, 157–165.
encountered and use their own research to inform Bond, Z. S. and Fokes, J. (1985). Non-native patterns of
their teaching. This can only strengthen the position English syllable timing. Journal of Phonetics 13, 407–420.
of the teacher with respect to pronunciation teaching Bowler, B. and Cunningham, S. (1999). Headway pronun-
ciation course. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
and learning. Bradford, B. (1988). Intonation in context. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
6. Conclusion Brazil, D. (1997). The communicative value of intonation in
English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
To conclude, we would like to finish by stating the Brazil, D. (1994). Pronunciation for advanced learners of English.
obvious: pronunciation is the major contributor to Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brazil, D., Coulthard, M. and Johns, C. (1980). Discourse
successful spoken communication, and how anyone intonation and language teaching. London: Longman.
learning a language can expect to be understood Brett, D. (2002). Improved vowel production with the
with poor pronunciation skills is outside of our PRAAT programme. In D. Teeler (ed.), Talking computers,
comprehension. Teachers must take a step back 7–10.
from current practice and evaluate their own Brown, A. (1988). The staccato effect in the pronunciation
of English in Malaysia and Singapore. In J. Foley (ed.), New
pronunciation skills and teaching methodologies, and Englishes: the case of Singapore, 115–147.
also have accessible to them current research, so Brown, A., Deterding, D. and Low, E. L. (eds.) (2000).
that they are able to look at how they can improve The English language in Singapore: research on pronunciation.
not only the communicative skills of their students, Singapore: Singapore Association for Applied Linguistics.
but also their own. The onus is on the teacher Bürki-Cohen, J., Miller, J. L. and Eimas, P. D. (2001).
Perceiving non-native speech. Language and Speech 44, 2,
educator, teacher and student to learn to listen, 149–169.
both to themselves and other speakers, and address Burton, J. and Clennell, C. (eds.) (2003). Interaction and
features of their speech which may make it difficult language learning. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
for communication to take place. If we are going to Carlisle, R. S. (2002). The acquisition of two and three
use English as a world language, then let’s use it for member onsets: time III of a longitudinal study. New Sounds
2000: The Fourth International Symposium on the Acquisition
mutual understanding. of Second-Language Speech, University of Amsterdam, 42–47.
Carlisle, R. S. (2001). Syllable structure universals and
Bibliography second language acquisition. International Journal of English
Studies 1, 1, 1–20.
Adams, C. (1979). English speech rhythm and the foreign learner. Carlisle, R. S. (1999). The modification of onsets in a
The Hague, Paris and New York: Mouton. markedness relationship: testing the conformity hypothesis.
Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1992). Using electronic visual feedback In J. Leather (ed.), Phonological issues in language learning, 59–
to teach suprasegmentals. System 20, 1, 51–62. 93.

13
Pronunciation ■
Carter, R. and Nunan, D. (eds.) (2001). The Cambridge guide pronunciation. In A. McLean (ed.) (1997). SIG Selections
to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: 1997 Special interests in ELT, 80–85.
Cambridge University Press. Dauer, R. M. (1983). Stress timing and syllable timing
Cauldwell, R. (2002–2003). Grasping the nettle: the reanalysed. Journal of Phonetics 11, 51–62.
importance of perception work in listening compre- Derwing, T. M. and Munro, M. J. (2001). What speaking
hension. http://www.developingteachers.com/articles tchtraining/ rates do non-native listeners prefer? Applied Linguistics 22,
perception1 richard.htm 3, 324–337.
Cauldwell, R. (2002a). The functional irrythmicality of Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J. and Carbonaro, M. (2000).
spontaneous speech: a discourse view of speech rhythms. Does popular speech recognition software work with ESL
http://www.solki.jyu.fi/apples/. speech? TESOL Quarterly 34, 592–603.
Cauldwell, R. (2002b). Phonology for listening: relishing Derwing, T. M. and Rossiter, M. J. (2002). ESL learners’
the messy. http://www.speechinaction.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ perception of their pronunciation needs and strategies.
pdf%20files/Phonology%20for%20Listening Relishing%20the System 30, 155–166.
%20messy.pdf. Derwing, T. M., Rossiter, M. J. and Munro, M. J. (2002).
Cauldwell, R. (2002c). Streaming speech: listening and pro- Teaching native speakers to listen to foreign accented
nunciation for advanced learners of English. Birmingham, UK: speech. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
Speechinaction. 23, 4, 245–259.
Cauldwell, R. (1999). Judgements of attitudinal meanings Deterding, D. and Poedjosoedarmo, G. R. (1998). The
in isolation and in context. http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/ sounds of English: phonetics and phonology for English teachers
johnm/cauld.htm in South East Asia. Singapore: Simon & Schuster (Asia).
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M. and Goodwin, J. M. Dörnyei, Z. and Csizér, K. (2002). Some dynamics of
(1996). Teaching pronunciation: a reference for teachers of language attitudes and motivation: results of a longitudinal
English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge nationwide survey. Applied Linguistics 23, 4, 421–462.
University Press. Eckman, F. R., Elreyes, A. and Iverson, G. K. (2001).
Cenoz, J. and Garcia Lecumberri, L. (1999). The acqui- Allophonic splits in L2 phonology: the question of
sition of English pronunciation: learners’ views. Inter- learnability. International Journal of English Studies 1, 1, 21–
national Journal of Applied Linguistics 9, 1, 3–17. 52.
Chela-Flores (1998). Teaching English rhythm: from theory to Erickson, D., Akahane-Yamada, R., Tajima, K. and
practice. Caracas, Venezuela: Fondos Editorial Tropykos. Matsumoto, K. F. (1999). Syllable counting and mora units
Chun, D. M. (2002). Discourse intonation in L2: from theory and in speech perception. ICPhS99, San Francisco, 1479–1482.
research to practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Field, J. (2003). Promoting perception: lexical segmentation
Clements, G. (1990). The role of the sonority cycle in core in L2 listening. ELT Journal 57, 4, 325–333.
syllabification. In J. Kingston and M. Beckman (eds.), Papers Flege, J. E. (2002). No perfect bilinguals. New Sounds 2000:
in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of The Fourth International Symposium on the Acquisition of
speech, 283–333. Second-Language Speech, University of Amsterdam, 132–
Cohen, P. R., Morgan, J. and Pollack, M. E. (eds.) (1990). 141.
Intentions in communication. London: MIT Press. Flege, J. E. (1997). The role of category formation in
Collins, B. and Mees, I. M. (2003). Practical phonetics and second-language speech learning. New Sounds 97: The
phonology: a resource book for students. London and New York: Third International Symposium on the Acquisition of Second-
Routledge. Language Speech, University of Klagenfurt, 79–88.
Collins, B. and Mees, I. M. (1999). The real Professor Higgins. Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: theory,
The life and career of Daniel Jones. Berlin and New York: findings and problems. In W. Strange (ed.), Speech perception
Mouton de Gruyter. and linguistic experience: theoretical and methodological issues,
Cooke, M., Lecumberri, M. L. G., Maidment, J. 233–277.
and Ericsson, A. (no date). Web transcription tool. Flege, J. E. (1987). A critical period for learning to pronounce
http://www.wtt.org.uk/index.html. foreign languages? Applied Linguistics 8, 2, 162–177.
Corder, S. P. (1971). Language continua and the Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H. and Liu, S. (1999).
interlanguage hypothesis. In S. P. Corder and E. Roulet Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of
(eds.), The notions of simplification, interlanguages, and Memory and Language 41, 78–104.
pidgins, and their relation to second language pedagogy, 11– Fraser, H. (2001a). Learn to speak clearly in English. Kingston,
17. ACT: Catalyst Interactive.
Corder, S. P. and Roulet, E. (eds.) (1971). The notions of Fraser, H. (2001b). Teaching pronunciation: a guide for teachers
simplification, interlanguages, and pidgins, and their relation to of English as a second language. Fyshwick ACT: Catalyst
second language pedagogy. Geneva: Librarie Droz. Interactive.
Cruttenden, A. (2001). Gimson’s pronunciation of English (6th Fraser, H. (2000). Teaching pronunciation. http://www-
edn.). London: Arnold. personal.une.edu.au/∼hfraser/pronunc.htm.
Cutler, A. (1993). Segmenting speech in different languages. Gibbon, D. and Richter, H. (eds.) (1984). Intonation, accent
The Psychologist 6, 453–455. and rhythm: studies in discourse phonology. Berlin and New
Cutler, A. (1984). Stress and accent in language production York: W. de Gruyter.
and understanding. In D. Gibbon and H. Richter (eds.), Gilbert, J. (2001). Clear speech from the start. Cambridge:
Intonation, accent and rhythm: studies in discourse phonology, Cambridge University Press.
77–90. Gilbert, J. (1984). Clear speech: pronunciation and listening
Cutler, A. and Norris, D. (1988). The role of strong syllables comprehension in North American English. Cambridge:
in segmentation for lexical access. Journal of Experimental Cambridge University Press.
Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 14, 1, 113– Giles, H., Coupland, N. and Coupland, J. (eds.) (1991).
121. Contexts of accommodation. Developments in applied socio-
Dalton-Puffer, C., Kaltenboeck, G. and Smit, U. (1997). linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Learner attitudes and L2 pronunciation in Austria. World Goh, C. (2000). A discourse approach to the description
Englishes 16, 1, 115–128. of intonation in Singapore English. In A. Brown, D.
Daniels, H. (1997). Psycholinguistic, psycho-affective and Deterding and E. L. Low (eds.), The English language in
procedural factors in the acquisition of authentic L2 Singapore: research on pronunciation, 35–45.
14
■ Pronunciation
Gorsuch, G. J. (2001). Testing textbook theories and tests: Levis, J. M. (2001). Teaching focus for conversational use.
the case of suprasegmentals in a pronunciation textbook. English Language Teaching Journal 55, 1, 47–54.
System 29, 119–136. Levis, J. M. (1999). Intonation in theory and practice,
Goswarmi, U. and Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and revisited. TESOL Quarterly 33, 1, 37–63.
learning to read. Hove, East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press. Lin, Y. H. (2003). Interphonology variability: sociolinguistic
Grosjean, F. and Gee, J. P. (1987). Prosodic structure and factors affecting L2 simplification strategies. Applied
spoken word recognition. Cognition 25, 135–155. Linguistics 24, 4, 439–464.
Grotjahn, R. (1998). Ausspracheunterricht: ausegewählte Lindfield, K. C., Wingfield, A. and Goodglass, H. (1999).
Befunde aus der Grundlagenforschung und didaktisch- The contribution of prosody to spoken word recognition.
methodische Implikationen. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachen- Applied Psycholinguistics 20, 395–405.
forschung 9, 1, 35–83. Low, E. L., Grabe, E. and Nolan, F. (2000). Quantitative
Gutiérrez, F. (2001). The acquisition of syllable timing by characterizations of speech rhythm: syllable-timing in
native speakers of English. An empirical study. International Singapore English. Language and Speech 43, 4, 377–
Journal of English Studies 1, 1, 93–114. 401.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Luscombe, S. (1996). On-line phonology course. http://
Grammar (2nd edn.). London: Edward Arnold. www.celt.stir.ac.uk/staff/HIGDOX/STEPHEN/PHONO/
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). A course in spoken English: PHONOLG.HTM.
intonation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Magen, H. S. (1998). The perception of foreign-accented
Hancock, M. (2003). English pronunciation in use. Cambridge: speech. Journal of Phonetics 26, 381–400.
Cambridge University Press. Maidment, J. (2001). Online intonation (OI!). http://www.
Hansen, J. G. (2001). Linguistic constraints on the acquisition phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/johnm/oi/oiin.htm.
of English syllable codas by native speakers of Mandarin Maidment, J. (2000a). Plato. http://www.btinternet.com/
Chinese. Applied Linguistics 22, 3, 338–365. ∼eptotd/vm/plato/platmen.htm.
Hewings, M. (1995). Tone choice in the English intonation Maidment, J. (2000b). TONI. http://www.btinternet.com/
of non-native speakers. IRAL 33, 3, 251–265. ∼eptotd/vm/toni/tonimenu.htm.
Howatt, A. P. R. with Widdowson, H. G. (2004). A Maidment, J. (1999). English pronunciation tip of the day.
history of English language teaching. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/johnm/eptotd/tiphome.htm.
University Press. Major, R. C. (2002). The ontogeny and phylogeny
Imai, S., Flege, J. E. and Walley, A. (2003). Spoken of second language phonology. New Sounds 2000:
word recognition of accented and unaccented speech: The Fourth International Symposium on the Acquisition
lexical factors affecting native and non-native listeners. 15th of Second-Language Speech, University of Amsterdam,
International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, 223–230.
845–848. Major, R. C. (1999). Chronological and stylistic aspects of
James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) (2002). New sounds 2000: second language acquisition of consonant clusters. In J.
proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Second- Leather (ed.), Phonological issues in language learning, 123–
Language Speech. University of Amsterdam. 151.
Jarvella, R. J., Bang, E., Lykke Jakobsen, A. and Mees, Major, R. C. (1997). Further evidence for the similarity
I. M. (2001). Of mouths and men: non-native listeners’ differential rater hypothesis. New Sounds 97: The Third
identification and evaluation of varieties of English. International Symposium on the Acquisition of Second-Language
International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11, 1, 37–56. Speech, University of Klagenfurt, 215–222.
Jenkins, J. (2003). Intelligibility in lingua franca discourse. Major, R. C. (1987a). A model for interlanguage phonology.
In J. Burton and C. Clennell (eds.) Interaction and language In G. Ioup and S. H. Weinberger (eds.), Interlanguage
learning, 83–97. phonology: the acquisition of a second language sound system,
Jenkins, J. (2002). A sociolinguistically based, empirically 101–124.
researched pronunciation syllabus for English as an Major, R. C. (1987b). The natural phonology of second
international language. Applied Linguistics 23, 1, 83–103. language acquisition. In A. James and J. Leather
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international (eds.), Sound patterns in second language acquisition, 207–
language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 224.
Kaltenboek, G. (2002). Computer-based intonation Major, R. C., Fitzmaurice, S. F., Bunta, F. and
teaching: problems and potential. In D. Teeler (ed.), Talking Balasubramanian, C. (2002). The effects of nonnative
computers, 11–17. accents on listening comprehension: implications for ESL
Kelly, C. I. (2001). American English pronunciation practice. assessment. TESOL Quarterly 36, 2, 173–190.
http://www.manythings.org/pp/. Marks, J. (1999). Is stress-timing real? ELT Journal 53, 3,
Kingston, J. and Beckman, M. (eds.) (1990). Papers in 191–199.
laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. McLean, A. (ed.) (1997). SIG Selections 1997 Special interests
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. in ELT. Whitstable: IATEFL.
Kreidler, C. W. (2004). The pronunciation of English: a course McMahon, A. (2002). An introduction to English phonology.
book in phonology (2nd edn.). Oxford and New York: Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Blackwell. Miller, M. (1984). On the perception of rhythm. Journal of
Leather, J. (ed.) (1999). Phonological issues in language learning. Phonetics 12, 75–83.
Malden MA & Oxford: Blackwell. Mohanan, K. P. (1992). Describing the phonology of non-
Leather, J. and James, A. (eds.) (1997). New sounds 97: native varieties of a language. World Englishes 11, 2/3, 111–
proceedings of the Third International Symposium of Second- 128.
Language Speech. Klagenfurt: University of Klagenfurt. Monroy, R. (2001). Profiling the phonological processes
Lecumberri, M. L. G. (2001). Native language influence in shaping the frozen IL of adult learners of English
learners’ assessment of English focus. International Journal of as a Foreign Language. Some theoretical implications.
English Studies 1, 1, 53–72. International Journal of English Studies 1, 1, 157–218.
Lehiste, I. (1977). Isochrony reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics Morley, J. (ed.) (1994). Pronunciation pedagogy and theory. New
5, 253–263. views, new directions. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. Moyer, M. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology’.
New York: Wiley. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1, 81–108.
15
Pronunciation ■
Munro, M. J. and Derwing, T. M. (1998). The effects of Seidlhofer, B. and Dalton-Puffer, C. (1995). Appropriate
speaking rate on listener evaluations of native and foreign units in pronunciation teaching: some programmatic
accented speech. Language Learning 48, 2, 159–182. pointers. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 5, 1, 135–
Munro, M. J. and Derwing, T. M. (1995a). Processing time, 146.
accent, and comprehensibility in the perception of native Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL 18, 139–152.
and foreign-accented speech. Language and Speech 38, 3, Setter, J. E. (2003). A comparison of speech rhythm
289–306. in British and Hong Kong English. 15th International
Munro, M. J. and Derwing, T. M. (1995b). Foreign accent, Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, 467–
comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of 470.
second language learners. Language Learning 45, 1, 73–97. Setter, J. E. (2000). Rhythm and timing in Hong Kong English.
Nattinger, J. R. and De Carrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases PhD thesis. Reading: University of Reading.
and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Setter, J. E. and Deterding, D. (2003). Extra final consonants
Nelson, C. (1992). Intelligibility and non-native varieties of in the English of Hong Kong and Singapore. 15th
English. In B. B. Kachru, P. Strevens and L. K. Ayers (eds.), International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain,
The other tongue: English across cultures, 58–73. 1875–1878.
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C. and Strik, W. (2003). Automatic Shockey, L. (2003). Sound patterns of spoken English. Malden,
speech recognition for second language learning: how and MA and Oxford UK: Blackwell.
why it actually works. 15th International Congress of Phonetic Smit, U. (2002). The interaction of motivation and
Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, 1157–1160. achievement in advanced EFL pronunciation learners.
Nichols, A. C. (1964). Apparent factors leading to errors in IRAL 40, 1/2, 89–116.
audition made by foreign students. Speech Monographs 5, 31, Smit, U. and Dalton, C. (2000). Motivation in advanced EFL
85–91. pronunciation learners. IRAL 38, 3/4, 229–246.
Peng, L. and Ann, J. (2001). Stress and duration in three Smith, L. (1992). Spread of English and issues of intelligibility.
varieties of English. World Englishes 20, 1, 1–27. In B. B. Kachru (ed.) The other tongue. English across cultures,
Peng, L. and Setter, J. (2000). The emergence of 2nd ed. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
systematicity in the English pronunciations of two Smith, L. and Bisazza, J. (1982). The comprehensibility
Cantonese-speaking adults in Hong Kong. English of three varieties of English for college students in seven
World-Wide 20, 1, 81–108. countries. Language Learning 32, 259–270.
Pickering, L. (2004). The structure and function of into- Smith, L. and Nelson, C. (1985). International intelligibility
national paragraphs in native and nonnative speaker instruc- of English: directions and resources. World Englishes 4, 3,
tional discourse. English for Specific Purposes 23, 19–43. 333–342.
Pickering, L. (2002). Patterns of intonation in cross-cultural Smith, L. and Rafiqzad, K. (1979). English for cross-cultural
communication exchange structure in NS & ITA classroom communication: the question of intelligibility. TESOL
discourse. The Seventh Annual Conference on Language, In- Quarterly 13, 3, 371–380.
teraction & Culture, University of California, Santa Barbara, Stankler, G. (2002). The CD-ROM pronunciation basics.
1–7. In D. Teeler (ed.), Talking computers, 5–6.
Pickering, L. (2001). The role of tone choice in improving Strange, W. (ed.) (1995). Speech perception and linguistic ex-
ITA communication in the classroom. TESOL Quarterly perience: theoretical and methodological issues. Timonium MD:
35, 2, 233–255. York Press.
Pierrehumbert, J. and Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of Tajima, K., Port, R. and Dalby, J. (1997). Effects of temporal
intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In correction on intelligibility of foreign-accented English.
P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan and M. E. Pollack (eds.), Intentions Journal of Phonetics 25, 10–24.
in communication, 271–311. Tarone, E. E. (1987). The phonology of interlanguage. In G.
Piske, T., Flege, J. E. and Mackay, I. (2002). Factors affecting Ioup and S. H. Weinberger (eds.), Interlanguage phonology:
degree of global foreign accent in an L2. New Sounds the acquisition of a second language system, 70–85.
2000: The Fourth International Symposium on the Acquisition Taylor, D. S. (1991). Who speaks English to whom? The
of Second-Language Speech, University of Amsterdam, 290– question of teaching English pronunciation for global
297. communication. System 19, 4, 425–435.
Przedlacka, J. (1999). Estuary English? A sociophonetic study Taylor, D. S. (1981). Non-native speakers and the rhythm of
of teenage speech in the Home Counties. Frankfurt am Main: English. IRAL 14, 3, 219–226.
Peter Lang. Teeler, D. (ed.) (2002). Talking computers. Whitstable:
Roach, P. J. (2002). SPECO: computer-based phonetic IATEFL.
training for children. In D. Teeler (ed.), Talking computers, Tench, P. (2002). Transcribing English words. http://www.
23–27. cf.ac.uk/encap/staff/tench/tswords.html.
Roach, P. J. (2000). English phonetics and phonology: a practical Tench, P. (2001). An applied interlanguage experiment into
course (3rd edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. phonological misperceptions. International Journal of English
Roach, P. J. (1994). Working on the model pronunciation. Studies 1, 1, 259–278.
Unpublished paper, Singapore Tertiary English Teachers’ Tench, P. (1996). The intonation of English. London & New
Society, Singapore. York: Cassell.
Roach, P. J. (1982). On the distinction between ’stress-timed’ Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction. London: Longman.
and ‘syllable-timed’ languages. In D. Crystal (ed.), Linguistic Thompson, S. (1995). Teaching intonation on questions. ELT
controversies, 73–79. Journal 49, 3, 235–243.
Roach, P. J., Hartman, J. W. and Setter, J. E. (eds.) Tsukada, K., Birdsong, D., Bialystok, E., Mack, M.,
(2003). Daniel Jones’ English pronouncing dictionary (16th Sung, H. and Flege, J. E. (2003). The perception
edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. and production of English /E/ and /æ/ by Korean
Schumann, J. H. (1986). Research on the acculturation model children and adults living in North America. 15th
for second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain,
Multicultural Development 7, 5, 379–392. 1589–1592.
Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Pronunciation. In R. Carter and D. Tyler, A. (1995). The coconstruction of cross-cultural
Nunan (eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to miscommunication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition
speakers of other languages, 56–65. 17, 129–152.
16
■ Pronunciation
Upton, C., Kretzschmar, W. and Konopka, R. (eds.) (2001). Wennerstrom, A. (1998). Intonation as cohesion in academic
Oxford dictionary of pronunciation for current English. Oxford: discourse: a study of Chinese speakers of English. Studies in
Oxford University Press. Second Language Acquisition 20, 1–25.
Vaughan-Rees, M. (2002). Pronunciation in CD-ROM Wennerstrom, A. (1994). Intonational meaning in English
dictionaries: a comparative review. In D. Teeler (ed.), discourse: a study of non-native speakers. Applied Linguistics
Talking computers, 28–32. 15, 4, 399–420.
Weinberger, S. H. (1999). Speech accent archive. Westwood, V. W. and Kaufmann, H. (2002). Connected speech.
http://classweb.gmu.edu/accent/. Hurstbridge VIC: Protea Textware.
Weinberger, S. H. (1987). The influence of linguistic context Wichmann, A. (2000). Intonation in text and discourse:
on syllable simplification. In G. Ioup and S. H. Weinberger beginnings, middles and ends. Harlow: Longman.
(eds.) Interlanguage Phonology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Widmayer, S. and Gray, H. (2002). Sounds of English.
Newbury House. http://www.soundsofenglish.org/index.html.
Wells, J. C. (2000). Longman pronunciation dictionary (2nd Wilson, M. (2003). Discovery listening: improving perceptual
edn.). London: Longman. processing. ELT Journal 57, 4, 335–343.
Wennerstrom, A. (2003). Students as discourse analysts Wong, R. (1987). Teaching pronunciation: focus on English
in the conversation class. In J. Burton and C. rhythm and intonation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Clennell (eds.) Interaction and Language Learning, 161– Young-Scholten, M. (1997). Second language syllable sim-
175. plification: deviant development or deviant input? New
Wennerstrom, A. (2001). The music of everyday speech: Sounds 97: The Third International Symposium on the Acqui-
prosody and discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University sition of Second-Language Speech, University of Klagenfurt,
Press. 351–360.

17

View publication stats