Online guided pronunciation practice helps adult EFL learners improve L2 prosody

This study tests the efficacy of a pronunciation course in developing advanced EFL learners’ expressive reading during a semester of online instruction. The course, designed for future English-language professionals, emphasises primacy of perception before production, the importance of noticing phonetic detail, expert and peer feedback, and context-situated tasks. The magnitude of pitch movements and reading tempo were assessed before and after the course for a trained group, who received the pronunciation practice, and a comparison group attending a course about the theory and research of foreign accents in English. Only the Trained group’s expressive prosody improved: the learners slowed down their delivery and produced the utterances with a wider pitch range. The results suggest that adult foreign language learners can benefit from pronunciation training in a distance learning environment.

1. Baese-Berk, M. M. (2019). Interactions between speech perception and production during learning of novel phonemic categories. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(4), 981-1005. CrossRef

2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. CrossRef

3. Cowie, R., Douglas-Cowie, E., & Wichmann, A. (2002). Prosodic characteristics of skilled reading: Fluency and expressiveness in 810-year-old readers. Language and Speech, 45(1), 47-82. CrossRef

4. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

5. De Mareüil, P. B., & Vieru-Dimulescu, B. (2006). The contribution of prosody to the perception of foreign accent. Phonetica, 63(4), 247-267. CrossRef

6. Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2015). Pronunciation fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research. John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossRef

7. Dowhower, S. L. (1991). Speaking of prosody: Fluency's unattended bedfellow. Theory into practice, 30(3), 165-175. CrossRef

8. Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (1988). Creative automatization: Principles for promoting fluency within a communicative framework. TESOL quarterly, 22(3), 473-492. CrossRef

9. Hirschberg, J. (2002). Communication and prosody: Functional aspects of prosody. Speech Communication, 36(1-2), 31-43. CrossRef

10. Huang, L. F., & Gráf, T. (2020). Speech Rate and Pausing in English: Comparing Learners at Different Levels of Proficiency with Native Speakers. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 17(1), 57-86.

11. Kang, O. (2008). Ratings of L2 oral performance in English: Relative impact of rater characteristics and acoustic measures of accentedness (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia).

12. Kang, O., Rubin, D. O. N., & Pickering, L. (2010). Suprasegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English. The Modern Language Journal, 94(4), 554-566. CrossRef

13. Kerr, J., & McEwan, G. (2006). The tiger who came to tea. HarperCollins Childrens' Books.

14. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Elizabeth B. Meisinger, E. B. 2010. Aligning Theory and Assessment of Reading Fluency: Automaticity, Prosody, and Definitions of Fluency. Reading Research Quarterly 45(2): 232-253. CrossRef

15. Lengeris, A. (2012). Prosody and second language teaching: Lessons from L2 speech perception and production research. In J. Romero-Trillo (Ed.) Pragmatics and prosody in English language teaching, Springer. 25-40. CrossRef

16. Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (27- 44). Multilingual Matters. CrossRef

17. Lüdecke, D. (2018). ggeffects: Tidy Data Frames of Marginal Effects from Regression Models. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(26), 772. CrossRef

18. Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305-315. CrossRef

19. Mennen, I., & de Leeuw, E. (2014). Beyond segments: Prosody in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(2), 183-194. CrossRef

20. Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1998). The effects of speaking rate on listener evaluations of native and foreign‐accented speech. Language Learning, 48(2), 159-182. CrossRef

21. Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (2001). Modelling perceptions of the accentedness and comprehensibility of L2 speech the role of speaking rate. Studies in second language acquisition, 23(4), 451-468. CrossRef

22. R Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.

23. Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form‐focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of/ɹ/by Japanese learners of English. Language learning, 62(2), 595-633. CrossRef

24. Singmann H., Bolker B., Westfall J., Aust F., & Ben-Shachar M. (2022). afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R package version 1.1.1, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=afex.

25. Volín, J., Poesová, K., & Weingartová, L. (2015). Speech melody properties in English, Czech and Czech English: Reference and interference. Research in Language, 13(1), 107-123. CrossRef

26. Volín, J., & Skarnitzl, R. (2010). Suprasegmental Acoustic Cues of Foreignness in Czech English. Proceedings of Odyssey: The Speaker and Language Recognition Workshop Odyssey 2010. Brno: VUT, 271-78.

27. Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag. CrossRef