I’d really be interested on research on the topic of learning to hear new sounds. The article I linked to on Vietnamese learners claims that loads of listening is needed first, but I agree with Underhill that the physicality is more important. I don’t care how many times you hear a sound, if you don’t position the mouth right there is no way you’ll be able to produce it. Especially if you cant’ distinguish between the sounds. I have no evidence to back this up, but I feel that pronouncing a sound and hearing it are very connected. I’m not convinced that one comes before the other. Rather I think that both work to support the other. Just a guess, but I’d think that if the a speaker tries to make a sound, the brain will probably develop an ability to hear or distinguish it.

I know English speakers have an almost impossible time distinguishing two sounds in Mongolian and a couple Inuit languages. I’d be curious to know if anyone reading this blog has learned either language and if they ever become able to distinguish the sounds.

The mirror is really useful and Adrian mentions that as well I believe. Unfortunately, that never occurred to me before. Sort of a “duh” moment there .

Why don’t teachers cover pronunciation more? Well, in Turkey I’d say it’s because many teachers make major pronunciation errors. Some know it and are scared to teach spoken English because of it. Other don’t know it’s wrong. We’ve got generations of students saying heig instead of high and sooeet instead of suit. It also seems to be glossed over in training courses. I remember I was at a complete loss for it until I moved to Vietnam and really realized the need for an intense focus. I don’t think ELF helps much either. I’ve talked to a lot of people at conferences that say if the speaker is intelligible why bother? But the problem becomes that, since 90% of listening done in class is with other students, if the students don’t say it correctly, they never learn to hear it when others say it. This is why I push contractions, the schwa, and linking words so much in my classes. If you say it one way, you expect to hear it that way. Hmm, it might even be worth doing a short post on that.

As for the link, any time

I loved the picture you used to illustrate how to pronounce the TH sound. This seems to be a major difficulty for Brazilian learners too. It’s somewhat of a challenge for learners to get their tongue round certain words simply because they have never learned how to produce – or even listen – to certain sounds. The problem you described with Vietnamese learners is also true of Brazilian learners for certain sounds. It’s quite common for Brazilian learners to say TURD instead of THIRD, or UDDER instead of OTHER. Another big challenge is the correct pronunciation of the vowel sounds – BITCH instead of BEACH, SEEKS instead of SIX, and so on and so forth.

I really think the main advantage of working with Underhill’s phonemic chart is regarding the physicality (can I say it like that?) of pronunciation. As you pointed out in your post, once learners are taught how to pronounce certain sounds, it seems it’s a lot easier for them to listen to the sound and speak it – and I believe it happens in this order, first listening and then speaking. If learners are not shown that they need to position their tongue in a certain way, and don’t consciously think about what they’re doing, they’re likely not to remember that specific sound. I also do it like you, asking students to look at my mouth and try to repeat the movement, and then look at each other’s mouth. Adding a mirror to the activity is also helpful, as they are able to self correct. Once their brain finally understands that there is a difference between “I think” and “I sink”, it apparently creates a new slot for the sound, and is now able to listen to it.

I particularly like the places that Underhill has chosen to place the sounds there, and that’s the best feature of it. Just like you, I don’t think learners should be forced to learn those ‘greek symbols’, as they usually call them. However, if there’s consistency with the work of pronunciation, they end up learning the IPA. Another advantage to that is adding a visual support to what is mainly dealt with as being oral input. A great asset for visual learners in the classroom, and also to kinesthetic ones, a they’ll be trying to position their speech apparatus in the correct way. But I’m definitely against the teaching of the phonemic alphabet as an end on its own, just like you.

Now, why is it that so many teachers fail to teach pronunciation consistently? Is it because the coursebooks they use don’t cover it properly? Lack of confidence? Time constraints? Whatever the reason is, I think this should seriously be reconsidered. Pronunciation fosters sense of progress, it’s fun to work with, and learners are likely to be more motivated to learn the sounds of the language than the grammar of it. However, it’ll be useless if teachers simply teach a certain pronunciation topic, i.e. regular verbs in the past, and consider it done and dealt with. Just as we correct vocabulary and grammar mistakes, we should also correct pronunciation mistakes.

I wasn’t aware of the fact that Underhill had started blogging, so thank you for telling me that. And thank you for linking it to my post. I’m really flattered!

Henrick