Research into practice: How research appears in pronunciation teaching materials

Abstract

Research into pronunciation has often disregarded its potential to inform pedagogy. This is due partly to the historical development of pronunciation teaching and research, but its effect is that there is often a mismatch between research and teaching. This paper looks at four areas in which the (mis)match is imperfect but in which a greater recognition of research can lead to better teaching materials (high variability phonetic training, intonation, information structure, and setting priorities). Furthermore, two areas in which teaching materials are desperate for research to be carried out (connected speech and the primacy of suprasegmentals) will be discussed.

The Effectiveness of Video‐Based Shadowing and Tracking Pronunciation Exercises for Foreign Language Learners

“…Given the influence of these social, cultural, and pragmatic factors on language use, some scholars have advocated exposing learners to naturalistic variations in pronunciation, particularly those representing diverse sociocultural contexts. Doing so may position learners to notice how pronunciation varies in relation to differing social situations, cultural norms, and conversational topics and purposes (Levis, ; Thomson, ; Yates, ). In addition, culturally contextualized approaches to pronunciation instruction may heighten learners’ awareness of differences in pronunciation between the L1 and the L2, may sensitize them to pragmatic factors that govern pronunciation in specific contexts, and may motivate their investment in refining their pronunciation by fostering a greater affinity for target language speakers (Yates, 2017).…”

“…One might also expect to encounter a significant number of studies that investigate effective methods for teaching pronunciation in the L2 classroom. However, although a multitude of strategies for doing so have been suggested, rigorous research on specific techniques has lagged behind other areas of research in the field (Eckstein, ; Fraser, ; Levis, ; Morin, ).…”

“…Research on high‐variability phonetic training, in which learners are trained to perceive contrasting phonemes through minimal pairs, has also demonstrated that learners may benefit from opportunities to compare their speech to high‐quality input that represents a range of normal speech produced by different speakers in varied contexts (Levis, ; Thomson, ). This is particularly true when such comparisons are accompanied by corrective feedback (Alshangiti, ; Levis, ).…”

“…Research on high‐variability phonetic training, in which learners are trained to perceive contrasting phonemes through minimal pairs, has also demonstrated that learners may benefit from opportunities to compare their speech to high‐quality input that represents a range of normal speech produced by different speakers in varied contexts (Levis, ; Thomson, ). This is particularly true when such comparisons are accompanied by corrective feedback (Alshangiti, ; Levis, ). However, making such comparisons in real time can be very difficult, so “it is essential for learners and teachers to work with recorded voices so that the speech they are discussing is external to both of them, and can be referred to objectively without distortion” (Gilakjani & Ahmadi, , p. 79).…”

“…This implies that pronunciation is a critical component of proficiency. However, for decades, studies have generally focused on phonology and perception as opposed to the pedagogy of pronunciation (Levis, ; Munro, ). Although such research has suggested that pronunciation instruction generally leads to measurable improvements in students’ pronunciation, it has focused primarily on the production of discrete sounds using controlled measures, such as reading prepared texts aloud.…”