International intelligibility of English: directions and resources

Abstract

This is a summary of the state-of-the-art research in international intelligibility with emphasis on English. It also suggests some directions for future research. It is argued that in future research it would be desirable to make distinctions between three key concepts: intelligibility, comprehensibility and interpretability. The selected bibliography of 163 items has been assembled to give the reader an indication of how widespread this literature is, and at the same time to indicate its limitations. The sources searched include publications across various disciplines. This indicates that intelligibility can be approached from a variety of points of view and interests. Since intelligibility depends upon so many factors of different types involved in a given speech event, it is difficult to find ways o,f integrating approaches and parameters. That is a challenge for future research.In order to provide a clear perspective on the international intelligibility of English, we have selected 163 items (articles, books etc.) which represent the research done on intelligibility and comprehension during the period 1950-1985. This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but we believe it is representative, and that a study of these resources can provide sufficient information on the current state of the art, and can offer directions for future research. The bibliographies of the works listed will lead interested readers to other material.The research findings from these sources sometimes appear to be in conflict with one another; however, concerning the international intelligibility of English, it is generally agreed that:( I ) For at least the last 200 years there have been English-speaking people in parts of the world who have not been intelligible to other English-speaking people in other parts of the world. This is accepted as a natural phenomenon which will continue. It is agreed that it is unnecessary for every speaker of English to be intelligible to every other speaker of English. Our speech/writing in English needs to be intelligible only to those with whom we are likely to communicate in English.(2) Native speakers are no longer the sole judges of what is intelligible in English. More and more non-native English speakers are interacting in English with other non-native speakers. In such cases, they must decide what is and is not intelligible. International intelligibility studies are now concerned with inreractions between nonnative English speakers, between native English speakers of different national varieties, and between native and non-native English speakers.(3) Native speakers are not always more intelligible than non-native speakers. Given the same hearer, the speaker (native or non-native) who speaks clearly, is able to paraphrase, and talks at the appropriate level of the hearer in terms of proficiency, topic and speed will be most intelligible.(4) Intelligibility is not speaker-or listener-centered but is interactional between speaker and listener. ( 5 ) The greater the active involvement (not just ex...

A Model for Speech Processing in Second Language Listening Activities

“…In listening and speaking classes the definitions of intelligibility and comprehensibility by Smith and Nelson (1985) may be more functional for three reasons. The first reason is the ability of their definitions to reflect the reciprocal relationship between recognising words and understanding the utterance (as mentioned above).…”

“…I don't think that refers to intelligibility of the speaker to the hearer but to the comprehensibility of the speaker's presentation." (Nelson, 2008, p. 301) The definition of these terms by Smith and Nelson (1985) places these concepts at two different levels: intelligibility is limited to recognition of the individual words by which the speaker conveys his/her message, while comprehensibility is the ability to understand the message being delivered. At this level, comprehensibility acts beyond the boundaries of individual words by drawing in neighbouring words in the same utterance.…”

“…Based on the above discussion considering the literature on top-down/bottom-up processing and the definitions of intelligibility and comprehensibility by Smith and Nelson (1985), Figure 3 was developed to visualize the relationship between these two contrasting processes and the intelligibility and comprehensibility of speech. In www.ccsenet.org/elt English Language Teaching Vol.…”

“…Linguists have provided several definitions for the concept of 'intelligibility', which is more commonly seen in the literature than 'comprehensibility'. This work gives equal weight to both of these two terms, and subscribes to the distinction between them given by Smith and Nelson (1985) in which 'intelligibility' refers to recognition of individual utterances, while 'comprehensibility' refers to understanding the meaning of the utterance. The concept of 'intelligibility' has been widely appealed to as an important criterion for any pronunciation model.…”

“…This paper critically reviews Catford's model and proposes an alternative one distinguishing between two levels of perceiving speech: word recognition and utterance comprehension. Smith and Nelson (1985) refer to these as 'intelligibility' and 'comprehensibility', respectively. The proposed model could inform classroom practice as well as curriculum and material design.…”