Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:24:29.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHING AND RESEARCHING PRONUNCIATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

John Levis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pronunciation, long on the periphery of applied linguistics research and pedagogy, continues to grow in importance because of its central roles in speech recognition, speech perception, and speaker identity. Pronunciation-related issues such as comprehensibility, accent, and the mutual intelligibility of varieties of world Englishes are central to many questions in applied linguistics. This calls for a sophisticated understanding of how technological tools that have long been used to shed light on phonological categories can be applied to teaching. Research into computer-assisted pronunciation teaching (CAPT) suggests that both researchers and pronunciation teachers increasingly make use of technology to answer key questions, to ensure that claims are defensible, and to develop theories and practices that more closely match acoustic reality. This article reviews three key areas where computer technology and pronunciation intersect: (1) appropriate pedagogical goals and the measurement of improvement; (2) the ability of CAPT to give useful, automatic feedback; and (3) the use of technology in diagnosing pronunciation errors. This article concludes with recommendations for key technological competencies needed by any researcher or teacher who examines pronunciation-related issues.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 27 , March 2007 , pp. 184 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

ANNOTATED REFERENCES

Hardison, D. (2004a). Generalization of computer-assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning and Technology, 8 (1), 34–52.Google Scholar
Hirata, Y. (2004). Computer-assisted pronunciation training for native English speakers learning Japanese pitch and duration contrasts. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17 (3–4), 357–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2003). Automatic speech recognition for second language learning: How and why it actually works. Proceedings of 15th International Conference of Phonetic Sciences, 1157–2260. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/neri.2003.1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Neumeyer, L., Franco, H., Digalakis, V., & Weintraub, M. (2000). Automatic scoring of pronunciation quality. Speech Communication, 30, 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, M. (2006). Teaching pronunciation and intonation with computer technology. In Ducate, L. & Arnold, N. (Eds.), Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching (CALICO Monograph Series, Vol. 5, pp. 127–148). San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Google Scholar

OTHER REFERENCES

Anderson-Hsieh, J. (1994). Interpreting visual feedback on suprasegmentals in computer assisted pronunciation instruction. Calico Journal, 11 (4), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, P., & Ehrlich, S. (1992). Teaching American English pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bradlow, A., Pisoni, D., Akahana-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2299–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breitkreutz, J., Derwing, T., & Rossiter, M. (2002). Pronunciation teaching practices in Canada. TESL Canada Journal, 19, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, J., & Spencer, S. (2000). Phonology and pronunciation in integrated language teaching and teacher education, System, 28, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cauldwell, R. (2002). Streaming Speech: Listening and advanced pronunciation for advanced learners of English. Talking Computers, Proceedings of the IATEFL Pronunciation and Computer Special Interest Groups, pp. 18–22.Google Scholar
Chun, D. (1998). Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning and Technology, 2 (1), 74–93.Google Scholar
Chun, D. (2007). Come ride the wave: But where is it taking us? Calico Journal, 24 (2), 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coniam, D. (1999). Voice recognition software accuracy with second language speakers of English. System, 27, 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coniam, D. (2002). Technology as an awareness raising tool for sensitising teachers to features of stress and rhythm in English. Language Awareness, 11 (1), 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranen, B., Weltens, B., de Bot, K., & van Rossum, N. (1984). An aid in language teaching: The visualization of pitch. System, 12 (1), 25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2000). Different aspects of expert pronunciation quality rating and their relation to scores produced by speech recognition algorithms. Speech Communication, 30, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, C., & Seidlhofer, B. (1994). Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Delmonte, R. (2000). SLIM prosodic tools for self-learning instruction. Speech Communication, 30, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T., & Munro, M. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39 (3), 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T., & Rossiter, M. (2003). The effects of pronunciation instruction on the accuracy, fluency, and complexity of L2 accented speech. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–17.Google Scholar
Derwing, T., Munro, M., & Carbonaro, M. (2000). Does popular speech recognition software work with ESL speech? TESOL Quarterly, 34 (3), 592–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehsani, F., & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning and Technology, 2 (1), 54–73.Google Scholar
Eskenazi, M. (1999). Using Automatic Speech Processing for foreign language pronunciation tutoring: Some issues and a prototype. Language Learning and Technology, 2 (2), 62–76.Google Scholar
Field, J. (2005). Intelligibility and the listener: The role of lexical stress. TESOL Quarterly, 39 (3), 399–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franco, H., Neumeyer, L., Digalakis, V., & Ronen, O. (2000). Combination of machine scores for automatic grading of pronunciation quality. Speech Communication, 30, 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorozny, S., Rapp, S., & Kompe, R. (2004). Generating non-native pronunciation variants for lexicon adaptation. Speech Communication, 42, 109–123.Google Scholar
Hardison, D. (2004b). Contextualized computer-based L2 prosody training: Evaluating the effects of discourse context and video input. Calico Journal, 22 (2), 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hincks, R. (2005). Measures and perceptions of liveliness in student oral presentation speech: A proposal for an automatic feedback mechanism. System, 33, 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaltenboeck, G. (2002). Computer-based intonation teaching: Problems and potential. Talking Computers, Proceedings of the IATEFL Pronunciation and Computer Special Interest Groups, 11–17.Google Scholar
Kawai, G., & Hirose, K. (2000). Teaching the pronunciation of Japanese double-mora phonemes using speech recognition technology. Speech Communication, 30, 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, I. S. (2006). Automatic speech recognition: Reliability and pedagogical implications for teaching pronunciation. Educational Technology and Society, 9 (1), 322–344.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. (1980). The structure of intonational meaning. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Lambacher, S. (1999). A CALL tool for improving second language acquisition of English consonants by Japanese learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12 (2), 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levis, J. (2005). changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39 (3), 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levis, J., & Pickering, L. (2004). Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System, 32 (4), 505–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, S. (2002). Pronunciation–views and practices of reluctant teachers. Prospect, 17 (3). Retrieved April 10, 2007, from http://nceltr.edu.au/prospect/17/pros17_3smac.aspGoogle Scholar
Mich, O., Neri, A., & Giuliani, D. (2006). The effectiveness of a computer assisted pronunciation training system for young foreign language learners. Proceedings of CALL 2006 (pp. 135–143). Antwerp, Belgium. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/neri.2006.4.pdfGoogle Scholar
Molholt, G. (1988). Computer-assisted instruction in pronunciation for Chinese speakers of American English. TESOL Quarterly, 22 (1), 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morley, J. (1991). The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of other languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25 (3), 481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, J. (1997). Phonology courses offered by MATESOL programs in the United States. TESOL Quarterly, 31 (4), 741–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M., & Derwing, T. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 49(Supp.1), 285–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, M., & Derwing, T. (2006). The functional load principle in ESL pronunciation instruction: An exploratory study. System, 34, 520–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2002a). Feedback in computer assisted pronunciation training: Technology push or demand pull? Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 2002 (pp. 1209–1212). Denver, CO. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/neri.2002.2.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2002b). Feedback in computer assisted pronunciation training: When technology meets pedagogy. Proceedings of “CALL professionals and the future of CALL research” Conference (pp. 179–188). Antwerp, Belgium. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/neri.2002.1.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). The pedagogy-technology interface in computer assisted pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15 (5), 441–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2006a). Selecting segmental errors in L2 Dutch for optimal pronunciation training. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 44, 357–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2006b). ASR-based corrective feedback on pronunciation: Does it really work? Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 2006 (pp. 1982–1985). Pittsburgh, PA. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://lands.let.kun.nl/literature/neri.2006.2.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oh, Y. R., Yoon, J. S., & Kim, H. K. (2007). Acoustic model adaptation based on pronunciation variability analysis for non-native speech recognition. Speech Communication, 49, 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennington, M. (1999). Computer-aided pronunciation pedagogy: Promise, limitations, directions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12 (5), 427–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogue, D. (2004, December 2). Speaking naturally, anew. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/02/technology/circuits/02POGUE-EMAIL.html?ex=1259730000&en=339f1ddcdf5fab69&ei=5088&partner=rssnytGoogle Scholar
Protea Textware. (2007). Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.proteatextware.com.au/Google Scholar
Rypa, M., & Price, P. (1999). VILTS: A tale of two technologies. Calico Journal, 16 (3), 385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ScanSoft. (2005). Dragon Naturally Speaking (8th ed.) [Computer software] Nuance Communications, Inc., www.nuance.com.Google Scholar
Scharenborg, O. (2007). Reaching over the gap: A review of efforts to link human and automatic speech recognition research. Speech Communication, 49, 336–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seferoğlu, G. (2005). Improving students' pronunciation through accent reduction software. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (2), 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spaai, G., & Hermes, D. (1993). A visual display for the teaching of intonation. Calico Journal, 10 (3), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, M., & Smith, B. (2001). Learner English (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truong, K., Neri, A., de Wet, F., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. 2005. Automatic detection of frequent pronunciation errors made by L2 learners. Proceedings of InterSpeech (pp. 1345–1348). Lisbon, Portugal.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Compernolle, D. (2001). Recognizing speech of goats, wolves, sheep and . . . non-natives. Speech Communication, 35, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X., & Munro, M. (2004). Computer-based training for learning English vowel contrasts. System, 32, 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, S., & Young, S. (2000). Phone-level pronunciation scoring and assessment for interactive language learning. Speech Communication, 30, 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar