Advertisement

Evaluating Multisensory Learning System for Teaching English Intonation

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 182)

Abstract

In recent years, the focus of English pronunciation teaching has been moved toward suprasegmental features including intonation. Despite of its importance, it is not easy for adult second language (L2) learners to adjust to second languages’ intonation. A system was designed using vibration motor and micro-controller for suggesting multisensory stimuli. To establish the learning effect of system, multisensory stimuli, visual, sound cue and vibrotactile stimulus were suggested to help acquisition of English intonation. Visual and vibrotactile stimuli were manipulated. The vibrotactile device is design to express the change of intonation of sentences with 2 levels of intensity. Visual cue is suggested as picture of waveform analyzed by Praat program. Participants were divided into four group depending on suggested stimuli; control, vibrotactile, visual and vibrotactile-visual group. Participants’ responses are recorded and analyzed by Praat, the sound analysis program. Participants’ intonation changes are measured and compared.

Keywords

English intonation intonation teaching vibrotactile multisensory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D.M., Goodwin, J.M. (eds.): Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teacher of English to speakers of other languages, 16th edn. Cambiridge University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pennington, B.F.: Diagnosing Learning Disorders: A Neuropsychological Framework. Guilford Press, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Felix, S.W.: Linguistische Untersuchungen zum natürlichen Zweitsprachenerwerb. Wilhelm Fink, München (1978)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Verdugo, D.: A study of intonation awareness and learning in non-native speakers of English. Language Awareness 15(3), 141–159 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lieberman, P.: Intonation, Perception and Language. MIT Press, Cambridge (1967)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Auer Jr., E.T., Bernstein, L.E.: Temporal and spatio-temporal vibrotactile displays for voice fundamental frequency: An initial evaluation of a new vibrotactile speech perception aid with normal-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arias, J.P., Yoma, N.B., Vivanco, H.: Automatic intonation assessment for computer aided language learning. Speech Communication 523, 254–267 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bernat, E.: Assessing EAP learners’ beliefs about language learning in the Australian context. Asian EFL J. 8(2), (Article 9) (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ohkawa, Y., Suzuki, M., Ogasawara, H., Ito, A., Makino, S.: A speaker adaptation method for non-native speech using learners’ native utterances for computer-assisted language learning systems. Speech Communication 51(10), 875–882 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crystal, D.: Prosodic systems and intonation in English. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1969)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holden, K.T., Hogan, J.T.: The emotive impact of foreign intonation: An experiment in switching English and Russian intonation. Language and Speech 36, 67–88 (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’connor, J.D., Arnorld, G.F.: Intonation for colloquial English. Longman, London (1973)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cook, V.J.: Active intonation. Longman, London (1968)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anderson-Hsieh, J., Johnson, R., Koehler, K.: The Relationship Between Native Speaker Judgments of Nonnative Pronunciation and Deviance in Segmentais, Prosody and Syllable Structure. Language Learning 42, 529–555 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murphy, N.: A multisensory vs. conventional approach to teaching spelling. Unpublished master thesis. Kean College of New Jersey, USA (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Birsh, J.R.: Multisensory Teaching of Basic Language Skills. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rothenborg, M., Molitor, R.D.: Encoding voice fundamental frequency into vibrotactile frequenct. J. Acount. Soc. Am. 66, 1029–1038 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kroonenberg, N.: Meeting language learners’ sensory-learning-style preferences. In: Reid, J.M. (ed.) Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom, pp. 74–86. Heinle & Heinle, Boston (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    O’Brien, L.: Learning styles: Make the student aware. National Association of Secondary School Principals’ Bulletin 73, 85–89 (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oxford, R.L., Ehrman, M.: Second language research on individual differences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13, 188–205 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Lier, L.: The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: A Sociocultural Perspective. Kluwer Academic, Boston (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cognitive Engineering Laboratory, Department of Interaction ScienceSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations