Advertisement

What to Teach and What Not to Teach, Yet Again: On the Elusive Priorities for L2 English Phonetics

  • Sylwia ScheuerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)

Abstract

The author takes stock of the different, sometimes rather emotionally charged, and invariably overlapping, instalments of the discussion about the segmental elements of the English sound system that merit more attention than others. The claims that not everything can be taught in the EFL/ELF classroom, and not all types of deviation from the intended target norm are of equal gravity, are relatively undisputed. What is a matter of continuing debate, however, is how that target is defined and, consequently, which errors matter more than others. The paper will home in on three major types of yardsticks that have been used—or at least proposed—in recent years, or that could serve as benchmarks for evaluation purposes: strength of perceived foreign accent, intelligibility, and broadly understood aesthetic considerations. The overarching criterion of teachability will also be invoked. The aim of the paper is to tentatively identify types of errors that figure prominently in all the above, and consequently point to areas of L2 phonetics that may deserve to be tackled first and foremost. While English dental fricatives and vowels re-emerge in the discussion several times, the overall conclusion is, rather predictably, that matters of pedagogic priorities are far from straightforward, and the discussion is, and promises to be for years to come, ongoing.

Keywords

Native Speaker Corrective Feedback Pedagogic Priority Vowel Quality Foreign Accent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Andreasson, A. M. (1994). Norm as a pedagogical paradigm. World Englishes, 13(3), 395-409.Google Scholar
  2. Beebe, L. M. (1987). Myths about interlanguage phonology. In G. Ioup, & S. G. Weinberger (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second Language sound system (pp. 165-175). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  3. Brennan, E. M., & Brennan, J. S. (1981). Measurements of accent and attitude toward Mexican-American speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 10, 487-501.Google Scholar
  4. Chambers, J. K., & Trudgill, P. (1998). Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cunningham-Andersson, U. (1997). Native speaker reactions to non-native speech. In A. James, & J. Leather (Eds.), Second-Language speech. Structure and process (pp. 133-144). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  6. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, K., & Przedlacka, J. (Eds.) (2005). English pronunciation models: A changing scene. A democratic accent for the global village? Frankfurt a/M: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  7. Giles, H. (1970). Evaluative reactions to accents. Educational Review, 22, 211-227.Google Scholar
  8. Horgues, C., & Scheuer, S. (forthcoming). Why some things are better done in tandem.Google Scholar
  9. Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Jenkins, J. (2006). Global intelligibility and local diversity: possibility or paradox? In R. Rubdy, & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the world. Global rules, global roles (pp. 32-39). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  11. Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a Lingua Franca: attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B. (2010). Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 1093–1096.Google Scholar
  13. Lipińska, D. (2013). Influence of formal instruction in English phonetics and phonology on Polish learners’ production of English /æ/. In J. Przedlacka, J. Maidment, & M. Ashby (Eds.), Proceedings of the Phonetics Teaching and Learning Conference UCL, London, 8-10 August 2013 (pp. 59-62). London: Phonetics Teaching and Learning Conference.Google Scholar
  14. Markham, D. (1997). Phonetic imitation, accent and the learner. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
  15. McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Nowacka, M. (2010). The ultimate attainment of English pronunciation by Polish college students: a longitudinal study. In E. Waniek-Klimczak (Ed.), Issues in accents of English 2. Variability and norm (pp. 233-257). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Rojczyk, A. (2010). Temporal parameters in the implementation of the voicing contrast in English spoken by Poles: a pedagogical perspective. In A. Henderson (Ed.), English pronunciation: Issues and practices (EPIP). Proceedings of the First International Conference (pp. 159-175). Chambéry: Université de Savoie.Google Scholar
  18. Scheuer, S. (1998). Interference-motivated pronunciation errors in Polish students of English: A corpus-based study. Unpublished PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
  19. Scheuer, S. (2003). What to teach and what not to teach? Some reflections on the relative salience of interlanguage errors. In W. Sobkowiak, & E. Waniek-Klimczak (Eds.), Zeszyty Naukowe PWSZ w Koninie 2 (pp. 93-99). Konin: Wydawnictwo PWSZ.Google Scholar
  20. Scheuer, S. (2005a). Why native speakers are (still) relevant? In K. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, & J. Przedlacka (Eds.), English pronunciation models: A changing scene. A democratic accent for the global village? (pp. 111-130). Frankfurt a/M: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  21. Scheuer, S. (2005b). L1 transfer in a PC world: why not the Lingua Franca Core again? Papers and Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 40, 197-207.Google Scholar
  22. Scheuer, S. (2007). Why certain errors seem to matter more than others, or: what is wrong with native speakers being right? Speak Out!, 38, 17-21.Google Scholar
  23. Schwartz, G. (2005). The Lingua Franca Core and the phonetics-phonology interface. In K. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, & J. Przedlacka (Eds.), English pronunciation models: A changing scene. A democratic accent for the global village? (pp. 177-198). Frankfurt a/M: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  24. Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  25. Sobkowiak, W. (1996). English phonetics for Poles. Poznań: Bene Nati.Google Scholar
  26. Sobkowiak, W. (2003). Dlaczego nie LFC? In W. Sobkowiak, & E. Waniek-Klimczak (Eds.), Zeszyty Naukowe PWSZ w Koninie 1/2003 (2) (pp. 114-124). Konin: Wydawnictwo PWSZ.Google Scholar
  27. Sobkowiak, W. (2005). Why not LFC? In K. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, & J. Przedlacka (Eds.), English pronunciation models: A changing scene. A democratic accent for the global village? (pp. 131-149). Frankfurt a/M: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  28. Waniek-Klimczak, E. (2005). Temporal parameters in second language speech: An applied linguistic phonetics approach. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Paris 3—Sorbonne NouvelleParisFrance

Personalised recommendations