domingo, 3 de mayo de 2009

Teaching segmental and suprasegmental features


Welcome to our English Phonology blog!

We'll use it to discuss our views on different topics dealt with in the Language and Oral Expression IV syllabus. Here goes some food for thought:


Is it necessary to give similar treatment to suprasegmental and segmental features? Must both be taught either systematically or incidentally? Or might we have a different approach to each?

13 comentarios:

Anónimo dijo...

Hi people!

I think that it is important to give equal treatement to both suprasegmental and segmental features in class. Besides, I think that it is possible to teach them both sistematically and incidentally as long as we have a carefully organized plan where we state exactly what we want to teach. Again, the time issue appears. time is not enough during the year to teach everything! This is why we must select the topics and aspects that we will include in our plan attentively.



Anabela

Anónimo dijo...

Shall I make my first comment? Well, if you ask me, I would say that I give equal importance to suprasegmental and segmental features when teaching pronunciation, especially when I am assessing speaking skills.
Brown,H.D.(2007)referred to current approaches to pronunciation: "Rather than attempting only to build a learner´s articulatory competence from the bottom up, and simply as the mastery of a list of phonemes and allophones, a top down approach is now taken in which the most relevant features of pronunciation- stress, rhythm and intonation- are given high priority" He goes on quoting Rita Wong (1987) who reminded us that" contemporary views(of language) hold that the sounds of language are less crucial for understanding than the way they are organized. The rhythm and intonation of English are two major organizing structures that native speakers rely on to process speech...Because of their major roles in communication, rhythm and intonation merit a greater priority in the teaching programm than attention to individual sounds"
I hope that this contribution serve for further discussion.
Verónica

Silvia Roncero dijo...

On Verónica's contribution:
Rita Wong's words are a very good example of an extreme movement of the pendulum. Notice the date of publication of her article: 1987.
I invite everybody to react to her views.
My question, however, pointed to a different issue: must segmentals and suprasegmentals be approached in the same way (either systematically or incidentally?)
Thank you for your posting!

Silvia Roncero dijo...

To Anabela (and everybody else!):
To decide to teach something systematically or incidentally constitutes an 'either...or' choice; they are opposites. Reading Chapter 9 from Brazil et al's book will help you understand this issue.
Thank you very much for you contribution, Anabela!

Anónimo dijo...

Hi!
Ana and Vero, I agree with you in that we should give equal treatment to both segmental and suprasegmental features.
Now, according to what I’ve read (and understood) about systematic and incidental approaches, they refer to inductive and deductive learning…Am I right?
If systematic learning is the same as inductive, I think that is more adequate for applying in the classroom. I also think that it could be applied for both segmental and suprasegmental features. We may also combine them and teach both of them at the same time. For example we may prepare a listening using a real life interaction in which students have to identify certain sounds. Then, using that same recording as a sample we may ask students to record themselves and find ( or guess)differences in the intonation. Although this method demands a lot of time on the part of the teacher (e.g. when looking for the right dialogues), it gives the students the chance of discovering the rules by their own. So, that way learning becomes more meaningful.
Through the use of an incidental approach, we do not give the students the possibility of assessing their own work. Lessons become teacher centered, and the students just get explanations and drilling of utterances. So then, we may find ourselves (as it happened to me once) asking what is the use of this? Why am I teaching this? Is it necessary to teach the difference between these 2 sounds?
Is the comment clear?If not, ask for explanations!!
I expect your reactions guys!!thank you!!
Melisa

Silvia Roncero dijo...

Thank you, Melisa! Notice that 'systematic' and 'incidental' should not be equated to 'inductive' and 'deductive'. Please read chapter 9 from Brazil et al (1980).

Anónimo dijo...

After several readings, I think I`ve got something to say!

The author parts from the assumption that many course books for English show a marked lack of orientation to the sound system of the language, and that most general course books include neither segmental nor suprasegmental aspects of the sound system of English. He also states that those who do include intonation in the syllabus do it either incidentally or systematically, being the first the predominant.
I think that we should teach intonation (suprasegmental features) systematically. As a trainee teacher, I think that if our aim is to develop the communicative skills of our students, it is important to draw attention to intonation choices and their meanings simply because they play a crucial role in communication. Of course, before integrating these suprasegmental features in our programs and decide on a criteria for selecting what to teach first, I think we should pay careful attention to the characteristics of the teaching situation we are in. It is important to take into account how necessary oral proficiency is for our students.
Do you think it is Incomplete? , I agree. I need more reflection time, and then I will come back!!!
Kisses (y no se copien)

Anabela

Anónimo dijo...

Hi everybody!
First of all, I think that perhaps it is not necessary to give similar treatment to both segmental and suprasegmental features. On the one hand, I think that segmental features involve the teaching of specific and particular oral skills, so they may be taught systematically. On the other hand, I think that suprasegmental features are more related to context, so they may not be taught neither systematically nor incidentally. Perhaps one appropriate way of teaching suprasegmental features is the one suggested by the authors of " Discourse intonation and language teaching ", following a sequence according to the level of complexity, (that is; first, recognition of tone units; second, recognition of prominence; third, production of tone unit; fourth, recognition of tones; fifth, production of tone units with correct tone choice; sixth, recognition of "chunking" effect of pitch in monologue; seventh, recognition of termination; eighth, recognition of key; and ninth, production of tone units with correct tonic location, tone choice, key and termination). Besides, I think that as future teachers of English, we should expose our students to varieties of spoken interaction to compensate the natural empoverishment of spoken interaction in the classroom.
All in all, I agree with Allen's view, that in order to have control over a language, the student must undergo a long process of trial and error which needs to be supported by a combination of methods: drills, explanations and exposure to the language.

Anónimo dijo...

Sorry, but I forgot to write my name! I'm Regina!
Kisses

Silvia Roncero dijo...

Anabela:
Good point, but I'm not sure I understand why you would prefer to teach suprasegmentals systematically. Your explanations would equally apply to an incidental approach.
Besides, you should re-read the question: would you follow the same approach to teach both segmentals and suprasegmentals?? (there is nothing about sound segments in your commentary). Go on thinking!!

Regina:
Thank you for your posting!
I'm afraid it is not possible to teach 'neither systematically nor incidentally'. It is either one or the other. The approach favoured by Brazil et al. (1980) is systematic.
And I have a question for you: How would you teach sound segments systematically?

Silvia Roncero dijo...

To everybody!
I'd like you to react to the other contributors' postings, saying whether you agree with them or not, and why.
I'll be looking forward to reading your next comments!

Anónimo dijo...

Hi People!
Silvia, thank you for helping me clarify some important points that evidently I had unclear.
Well, I think that teaching sound segments systematically would be a more focused way of helping students pronounce English sounds. For example, I would teach my students the difference between a short and a long vowel, giving them discrimination exercises, so that they could practise and train hard, seeing how sounds occur and how their mispronunciation may change the meaning of a word.
Well, I will keep on thinking about other examples!
Kisses,

Regina

Romina M. dijo...

hi people!!

well i think segmental and suprasegmental features should both be taught systematically.i think it would be important to communicative meaning,i mean,teaching in that way would help students to produce spontaneous productions more effectively than those who only have been taught segmental contents ( vowels, consonants)

well,i will keep on working on this.

kisses

Romina M.