Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:20:30.861Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMPREHENSION-BASED PRACTICE

The Development of L2 Pronunciation in a Listening and Reading Program

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2009

Pavel Trofimovich ,
Patsy M. Lightbown ,
Randall H. Halter  and
Hyojin Song
Pavel Trofimovich*
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Patsy M. Lightbown
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Randall H. Halter
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Hyojin Song
Affiliation:
Concordia University
*
*Address correspondence to: Pavel Trofimovich, Concordia University, Department of Education, 1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3G 1M8; e-mail: pavel.trofimovich@concordia.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We report the results of a 2-year longitudinal comparison of grade 3 and grade 4 English-as-a-second-language learners in an experimental, comprehension-based program and those in a regular (i.e., more typical) language learning program. The goal was to examine the extent to which sustained, long-term comprehension practice in both listening and reading—in the virtual absence of any speaking—can help develop learners’ second language (L2) pronunciation. We analyzed learners’ sentences from an elicited imitation task using several accuracy and fluency measures as well as listener ratings of accentedness, comprehensibility, and fluency. We found no differences between the two programs at the end of year 1. However, at the end of year 2, there were some differences—namely, in the listener ratings of fluency and comprehensibility—that favored learners in the regular program. These findings highlight the beneficial effects of comprehension practice for the development of L2 pronunciation but also point to some potential limits of this practice.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 609 - 639
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abraham, R. G. (1984). Patterns in the use of the present tense third person singular -s by university-level ESL speakers. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asher, J. J. (1965). The strategy of the total physical response: An application to learning Russian. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asher, J. J. (1969). The total physical response approach to second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 53, 3–17.Google Scholar
Asher, J. J., Kusudo, J. A., & de la Torre, R. (1974). Learning a second language through commands: The second field test. Modern Language Journal, 58, 24–32.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., Eldridge, M., & Lewis, V. (1981). The role of subvocalization in reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 439–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, W., Trofimovich, P., Flege, J. E., Mack, M., & Halter, R. (2008). Child-adult differences in second-language phonological learning: The role of cross-language similarity. Language and Speech, 51, 316–341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, E., & Goodman, J. C. (1997). On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition, aphasia, and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 507–584.Google Scholar
Blair, R. W. (1982). Innovative approaches to language teaching. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Chaudron, C. (1994). Elicited imitation as a measure of second-language competence. In Tarone, E., Gass, S. M., & Cohen, A. D. (Eds.), Research methodology in second-language acquisition (pp. 245–261). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., Akahane-Yamada, R., Pisoni, D. B., & Tohkura, Y. (1999). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: Long-term retention of learning in perception and production. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 977–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV—Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2299–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, S., & Chrétien, M. (2001). The development of oral production in content-based second language courses at the University of Ottawa. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 84–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burger, S., Wesche, M., & Migneron, M. (1997). Late, late immersion: Discipline-based second language teaching at the University of Ottawa. In Johnson, R. K. & Swain, M. (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 65–84). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chastain, K. (1969). Prediction of success in audiolingual and cognitive classes. Language Learning, 19, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M., & Newson, M. (1992). Assessing the importance of subvocalization during normal silent reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Jong, N. (2005). Can second language grammar be learned through listening? An experimental study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 205–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 97–113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48, 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Biase, B. (1994). Innovative programs for learning Italian. The Digest of Australian Languages and Literacy Issues, 9, 1–2.Google Scholar
Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning, 23, 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H. C., Burt, M. K., & Krashen, S. D. (1982). Language two. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2007). The associative-cognitive CREED. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 77–95). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit knowledge: An empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics, 27, 464–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. (1974). Is second language learning like the first? TESOL Quarterly, 8, 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 229–273). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., MacKay, I. R. A., & Meador, D. (1999). Native Italian speakers’ perception and production of English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2978–2987.Google ScholarPubMed
Forsyth, A. (1990). Projet expérimental en anglais langue seconde à l’élémentaire au Nouveau-Brunswick [Experimental program in English as a second language in New Brunswick elementary schools]. Education Canada, 30, 23–29.Google Scholar
Fraser, C., Bellugi, U., & Brown, R. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (1981). The interpretation of elicited imitation in a standardized context. Language Learning, 31, 369–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gary, J. O. (1975). Delayed oral practice in initial stages of second language learning. In Burt, M. K. & Dulay, H. C. (Eds.), New directions in second language teaching, learning and bilingual education (pp. 89–95). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Baddeley, A. D., & Emslie, H. (1994). The children’s test of nonword repetition: A test of phonological working memory. Memory, 2, 103–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gibbons, J. (1986). The silent period: An examination. Language Learning, 35, 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. (2001). Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauptman, P., Wesche, M., & Ready, D. (1988). Second language acquisition through subject-matter learning: A follow-up study at the University of Ottawa. Language Learning, 38, 433–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izumi, Y., & Izumi, S. (2004). Investigating the effects of oral output on the learning of relative clauses in English: Issues in the psycholinguistic requirements for effective output tasks. Canadian Modern Language Review, 60, 587–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janda, R. D., & Auger, J. (1992). Quantitative evidence, qualitative hypercorrection, sociolinguistic variables—And French speakers’ ‘eadhaches with English h/Ø. Language and Communication, 12, 195–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, D. (1999). Cool Edit 2000 [Computer software]. Phoenix, AZ: Syntrillium Software.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1993). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Lambacher, S. G., Martens, W. L., Kakehi, K., Marasinghe, C. A., & Molholt, G. (2005). The effects of identification training on the identification and production of American English vowels by native speakers of Japanese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 227–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (1985). Input and acquisition for second language learners in and out of classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 6, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (1992a). Can they do it themselves? A comprehension-based ESL course for young children. In Courchêne, R., St John, J., Thérien, C., & Glidden, J. I. (Eds.), Comprehension-based second language teaching (pp. 353–370). Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (1992b). Getting quality input in the second/foreign language classroom. In Kramsch, C. & McConnell-Ginet, S. (Eds.), Text and context: Cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural perspectives on language study (pp. 187–197). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., Halter, R. H., White, J., & Horst, M. (2002). Comprehension-based learning: The limits of “do it yourself.” Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 427–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1980). Inside the “black box”: Methodological issues in classroom research on language learning. Language Learning, 30, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de Bot, K., Coste, D., Ginsberg, R., & Kramsch, C. (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1973). Nurseries, streets, and classrooms: Some comparisons and deductions. Modern Language Journal, 57, 250–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCandless, P., & Winitz, H. (1986). Test of pronunciation following one year of comprehension instruction in college German. Modern Language Journal, 70, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDade, H., Simpson, M., & Lamb, D. (1982). The use of elicited imitation as a measure of expressive grammar: A question of validity. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 19–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 49, 285–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musumeci, D. (1997). Breaking tradition: An exploration of the historical relationship between theory and practice in second language teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Neufeld, G. G. (1978). On the acquisition of prosodic and articulatory features in adult language learning. Canadian Modern Language Review, 34, 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, H. E. (1968). The scientific study and teaching of languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1917)Google Scholar
Paradis, C., & LaCharité, D. (2001). Guttural deletion in loanwords. Phonology, 18, 255–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003). Probabilistic phonology: Discrimination and robustness. In Bod, R., Hay, J., & Jannedy, S. (Eds.), Probabilistic linguistics (pp. 177–228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Postovsky, V. (1974). Effects of delay in oral practice at the beginning of second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 58, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. (1988). Word recognition cues in children: The relative use of graphemic cues, orthographic cues, and grapheme-phoneme correspondence rules. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 473–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ready, D., & Wesche, M. (1992). An evaluation of the University of Ottawa’s sheltered program: Language teaching strategies at work. In Courchêne, R., St John, J., Thérien, C., & Glidden, J. I. (Eds.), Comprehension-based second language teaching (pp. 389–405). Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rvachew, S. (1994). Speech perception training can facilitate sound production learning. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 347–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, A., & Strange, W. (1982). The acquisition of /r/ and /l/ by Japanese learners of English: Evidence that speech production can precede speech perception. Applied Psycholinguistics, 3, 243–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I., & Welsh, C. A. (1973). Elicited imitation as a research tool in developmental psycholinguistics. In Ferguson, C. A. & Slobin, D. I. (Eds.), Studies of child language development (pp. 485–497). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Strevens, P. (1960). Spectra of fricative noise in human speech. Language and Speech, 3, 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Trofimovich, P. (2008). What do second language listeners know about spoken words? Effects of experience and attention in spoken word processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37, 309–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trofimovich, P., & Baker, W. (2006). Learning second-language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of second-language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8, 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winitz, H., Gillespie, B., & Starcev, J. (1995). The development of English speech patterns of a 7-year-old Polish-speaking child. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 117–143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winitz, H., & Reeds, J. A. (1973). Rapid acquisition of a foreign language (German) by the avoidance of speaking. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 11, 295–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wode, H. (1980). Learning a second language: An integrated view of language acquisition. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1996). Speech perception and L2 phonological acquisition. In Jordens, P. & Lalleman, J. (Eds.), Investigating second language acquisition (pp. 321–353). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar