Listening for Reduced Forms

Brown, James Dean; Hilferty, Ann; Enright, Scott

doi:10.2307/3586525

Cited by 36 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Speakers modify their speech to help the nonnative listener better understand the information conveyed or to help the nonnative listener continue to communicate with the native speaker (cf. Brown, 1977;Brown & Hilferty, 1986;Chaudron, 1983aChaudron, , 1986Faerch & Kasper, 1986;Hatch, 1983;Henzl, 1973Henzl, , 1975Kelch, 1985;Krashen, 1980aKrashen, , 1980bLong, 1983;Pica, Doughty, & Young, 1986;Snow & Hoefnagel-Hohle, 1982;Wesche & Ready, 1985;Wong Fillmore, 1982. The speech modifications can entail a simplification of linguistic form involving an alteration in the syntax (e.g., the use of two simple sentences rather than one complex sentence) and/or a change in the lexis of the message (e.g., using "to hold on tightly to" rather than "to cling to").…”

Section: Background Speech Modification and L2 Discourse Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, and Listening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the listening comprehension of 388 high-intermediate listening proficiency (HILP) and low-intermediate listening proficiency (LILP) Chinese students of English as a foreign language. These students listened to a lecture, the discourse of which was (a) familiar-unmodified, (b) familiar-modified, (c) unfamiliar-unmodified, or (d) unfamiliar-modified. The modified discourse contained information redundancies and elaborations. After the lecture, the EFL subjects took a multiple-choice exam testing recognition of information presented in the lecture and general knowledge of the familiar ("Confucius and Confucianism") and unfamiliar ("The Amish People") topics. A significant interaction between speech modification (redundant vs. nonredundant speech) and listening proficiency (HILP vs. LILP) indicated that the HILP students benefited from speech modification, which entailed elaboration/redundancy of information, but the LILP students did not. A significant interaction between prior knowledge (familiar vs. unfamiliar topic) and test type (passage-independent vs. passagedependent items) was also found. For both the HILP and LILP subjects, prior knowledge had a significant impact on subjects' memory for information contained in the passage-independent test items on the postlecture comprehension test. Those EFL subjects who listened to the familiar-topic lecture on Confucius had higher passage-independent than passage-dependent scores. There was no difference in the performance on the passage-independent and passage-dependent items of those who listened to the lecture on an unfamiliar topic (the Amish). However, the passage-independent performance of subjects who listened to the familiar topic lecture was superior to that of those who listened to the lecture on the unfamiliar topic. Subjects' performance on passage-dependent items did not differ significantly whether the familiar or unfamiliar topic was presented. Implications of the findings for assessing and teaching EFL listening comprehension are suggested.

show abstract

Section: Background Speech Modification and L2 Discourse Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, and Listening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, due to such influences as assimilation, prosodic patterns, and utterance speed, there is a noticeable difference between natural fluent speech and maximally distinct isolated utterances (Bond & Garnes, 1980). Indeed, knowledge of L2 phonological modification has been shown to be associated with L2 aural proficiency (Brown & Hilferty, 1986;Henrichsen, 1984;Ito, 2001). In seeking to understand spoken communication, unlike during the speeded lexical decision experiment, proficient L2 learners are not wholly signal dependent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it has been found that "textbook dialogues do not reflect the ways in which real talk is produced in actual interactions" (Jones & Ono, 2000, p. 12). Furthermore, it has been argued that the study of reduced forms is neglected (e.g., Brown & Hilferty, 1986;Field, 1997;Rosa, 2002). This study implies that teachers need to help students efficiently understand connected speech.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Word Recognition Processing Efficiency as a Component of Second Language Listening

Joyce

2013

International Journal of Listening

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the application of the speeded lexical decision task to L2 aural processing efficiency. One-hundred and twenty Japanese university students completed an aural word/nonword task. When the variation of lexical decision time (CV) was correlated with reaction time (RT), the results suggested that the single-word recognition task could be successfully applied to the L2 aural modality. However, when CV and RT were correlated with L2 listening ability, a statistically significant relationship was not found. It was concluded that the single-word word recognition task might not be suited to measuring L2 aural word recognition efficiency.

show abstract

“…Has the study been designed, conducted, and presented in such a way that it can be replicated without great difficulty, or are there small omissions? Some examples of good candidates for replication from recent issues of the TESOL Quarterly are Crookes and Rulon (1988), Dunkel (1988), August (1987), Hansen-Strain (1987), Light, Xu, and Mossop (1987), Brown andHilferty (1986), andBrock (1986). Diverse as these studies are in topic and length, they share the qualities of clarity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Replication in Applied Linguistics Research

Santos

1989

TESOL Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listening for Reduced Forms

Abstract: The TESOL Quarterly invites readers to submit short reports and updates on their work. These summaries may address any areas of interest to Quarterly readers. Authors' addresses are printed with these reports to enable interested readers to contact the authors for more details.

Cited by 36 publications

References 4 publications

The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, and Listening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning

The Effect of Speech Modification, Prior Knowledge, and Listening Proficiency on EFL Lecture Learning

Word Recognition Processing Efficiency as a Component of Second Language Listening

Replication in Applied Linguistics Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About