Cover not available

Article published In: FORUM
Vol. 17:2 (2019) ► pp.249–268

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Explicit teaching of segmentals versus suprasegmentals in developing speaking skills by interpreter trainees

An experimental study

 | University of Nahavand
Published online: 3 December 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.18007.yen
Abstract
The present study investigates the effect of explicit teaching of segmentals and suprasegmentals in developing speaking skills for Farsi-English interpreter trainees. Three groups of student interpreters were formed. All were native speakers of Farsi who studied English translation and interpreting at the BA level at the University of Applied Sciences in Tehran, Iran. Participants were assigned to groups at random, but with equal division between genders (7 female and 7 male students in each group). No significant differences in English language skills (TOEFL scores) could be established between the groups prior to the experiment. Participants took a pretest of speaking skills before starting the program. The control group listened to authentic audio tracks in English and discussed their contents, watched authentic English movies, and discussed issues in the movies in pairs in the classroom. The first experimental group spent part of the time on theoretical explanation of, and practical exercises with, English suprasegmentals. The second experimental group spent part of the time on theoretical explanation of, and practical exercises with, English segmentals. The total instruction time was the same for all three groups, i.e. 12 hours. Students then took a posttest in speaking skills. The results show that the explicit teaching of suprasegmentals significantly improved the students’ speaking skills more than that of the other groups. These results have pedagogical implications for curriculum designers, interpreting programs for training future interpreters, material producers and all who are involved in language study and pedagogy.
Résumé
La présente étude examine l’effet de l’enseignement explicite des segmentaux et des suprasegmentaux sur le développement des compétences d’expression orale des apprenants en interprétation farsi-anglais. Trois groupes d’étudiants interprètes ont été formés. La langue maternelle de tous ces étudiants était le farsi et ils étudiaient la traduction et l’interprétation en anglais en licence à l’université des sciences appliquées à Téhéran, en Iran. Les participants ont été répartis en groupes au hasard, mais en respectant la parité des sexes (7 étudiants de sexe féminin et 7 étudiants de sexe masculin dans chaque groupe). Aucune différence significative dans les compétences linguistiques en anglais (scores TOEFL) n’a pu être établie entre les groupes avant cet examen. Les participants ont fait un test préliminaire d’expression avant de commencer le programme. Le membre du groupe de contrôle ont écouté des enregistrements audio authentiques en anglais et discuté de leur contenu, ont regardé des films anglais authentiques et discuté des problèmes liés aux films, deux par deux en classe. Le premier groupe choisi pour cette expérience a consacré une partie de son temps à des explications théoriques et à des exercices pratiques avec les suprasegmentaux anglais. Le deuxième groupe expérimental a consacré une partie de son temps à une explication théorique et à des exercices pratiques avec des segmentaux anglais. Le temps de l’instruction totale était le même pour les trois groupes, à savoir 12 heures. Les étudiants ont ensuite passé un post-test concernant l’expression orale. Les résultats montrent que l’enseignement explicite des suprasegmentaux a considérablement amélioré les compétences d’expression orale chez les étudiants par comparaison aux autres groupes. Ces résultats ont des implications pédagogiques pour les concepteurs de curriculum d’étude, les programmes d’interprétation permettant de former les futurs interprètes, les producteurs de matériel et les personnes impliquées dans l’étude et la pédagogie des langues.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1English and Farsi sound systems
  • 2.Main aim and the research question
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Procedure
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (49)
References
Adams-Goertel, R. (2013). Prosodic elements to improve pronunciation in English language learners: A short report. Applied Research on English Language, 21, 117–128.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aquil, R. (2012). Listening to English connected speech: A problem and solutions. Arab World English Journal, 31, 329–364.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bailey, K. (1999). Speaking: A critical skill and a challenge. Calico Journal, 16(3), 277–293.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bissiri, M. P., & Pfitzinger, H. R. (2009). Italian speakers learn lexical stress of German morphologically complex words. Speech Communication, 511, 933–947. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cebrian, J., & Carlet, A. (2014). Second-language learners’ identification of target-language phonemes: a short-term phonetic training study. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 70(4), 474–499. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M.; Brinton, D. M.; Goodwin, J. M. & Griner, B. (2010). Teaching Pronunciation: A Course Book and Reference Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2009). Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles in communication. Language Teaching, 421, 476–490. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Diepenbroek, L. G. & Foote, J. A. (2012). How well do general-skills ESL textbooks address pronunciation? TESL Canada Journal, 301, 22–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48 (3), 393–410. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferris, D., & Tagg, T. (1998). Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 289–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gómez Lacabex, E., & del Puerto, F. G. (2014). Two phonetic-training procedures for young learners: Investigating instructional effects on perceptual awareness. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 70(4), 500–531. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, C. (2015). Suprasegmentals. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, 2nd edition, Volume 231. Oxford: Elsevier, 714–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, M. (2007). Phonological characteristics of Farsi speakers of English and L1 Australian English speakers’ perception of proficiency. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Linguistics, Curtin University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hardison, D. M. (2004). Generalization of computer assisted prosody training: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning & Technology, 81, 34–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, X., Heuven, V. J. van & Gussenhoven, C. (2012). The selection of intonation contours by Chinese L2 speakers of Dutch: Orthographic closure vs. prosodic knowledge. Second Language Research, 281, 283–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heuven, V. J. van (2017). Prosody and sentence type in Dutch. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 221, 3–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2008). Making sense of strange sounds: (mutual) intelligibility of related language varieties. A review. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 21, 39–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heuven, V. J. van (1994). Introducing prosodic phonetics. In C. Odé & V. J. van Heuven (Eds.), Experimental studies of Indonesian prosody. Semaian 91. Leiden: Vakgroep Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië, Leiden University, 1–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirose, K. (2004). Accent type recognition of Japanese using perceived mora pitch values and its use for pronunciation training system. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Tonal Aspects of Languages (TAL), Beijing, 77–80. Retrieved from [URL]
Hirschfeld, U. & Trouvain, J. (2007). Teaching prosody in German as foreign language. In J. Trouvain & U. Gut (Eds.), Non-native prosody. Phonetic description and teaching practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 171–189.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauranen, A. (2006). Spoken discourse, academics and global English: A corpus perspective. In R. Huges (Ed.), Spoken English, TESOL and applied linguistics (pp. 143–158). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Missaglia, F. (1999). Contrastive prosody in SLA – An empirical study with adult Italian learners of German. Proceedings of the 14th Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 11, 551–554.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nagano, K., & Ozawa, K. (1990). English speech training using voice conversion. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 90), Kobe, 1169–1172.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicolosi, L., Harryman, E., & Keresheck, J. (1989). Terminology of communication disorders. Baltimore, MD: William & Wilkins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nooteboom, S. G. (1997). “The Prosody of Speech: Melody and Rhythm.” In The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, edited by W. J. Hardcastle and J. Laver, 640–673. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nooteboom, S. G. & Doodeman, G. J. N. (1984). Speech quality and the gating paradigm. In M. P. R. van den Broecke & A. Cohen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Dordrecht: Foris, 481–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pike, K. L. (1945). The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saito, K.; Trofimovich, P. & Isaacs, T. (2016). Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 371, 217–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samareh, Y. (1986). Phonology of Farsi language. Tehran: Markaz e Nashre Daneshgahi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shademan, S. (2002). Epenthetic vowel harmony in Farsi. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of California Los Angeles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Su, C.-Y. & Tseng, C.-Y. (2015). A phonetics-based computer aided prosody training system for L2 English learning. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow. Retrieved from [URL]
Sundström, A. (1998). Automatic prosody modification as a means for foreign language pronunciation training. Proceedings of an ISCA Workshop on Speech Technology in Language Learning (STILL 98), Marholmen, 49–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Turk, A. E., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2007). Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. Journal of Phonetics, 35(4), 445–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ueno, N. (1998). Teaching English pronunciation to Japanese English majors: A comparison of a suprasegmental-oriented and a segmental-oriented teaching approach. JACET Bulletin, 291, 207–225.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, H., Zhu, L., Li, X. & Heuven, V. J. van. (2011). Relative importance of tone and segments for the intelligibility of Mandarin and Cantonese. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, 2090–2093.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Windfuhr, G. (1979). Persian grammar: History and state of its study. The Hague, Paris and New York: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yates, K. (2003). Teaching linguistic mimicry to improve second language pronunciation (Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of North Texas, Denton).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yenkimaleki, M. (2016). Why prosody awareness training is necessary for training future interpreters. Journal of Education and human development, 51, 256–261. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Effect of prosody awareness training on the quality of consecutive interpreting between English and Farsi. LOT: Utrecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yenkimaleki, M. & Heuven, V. J. van. (2013). Prosodic feature awareness training in interpreting: An experimental study. In L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martínez & I. Candel Torres (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Education, Research and Innovation, November 18–20, 2013, Seville, 4179–4188.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2016a). Effect of explicit teaching of prosodic features on the development of listening comprehension by Farsi-English interpreter trainees: An experimental study. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 41, 32–41.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2016b). The effect of prosody teaching on developing word recognition skills for interpreter trainees: An experimental study. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 71, 1101–1107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2016c). Prosody teaching matters in developing speaking skills for Farsi-English interpreter trainees: An experimental study. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 41, 82–91.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2016d). Effect of prosody awareness training on the performance of consecutive interpretation from Farsi into English: An experimental study. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 1–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2018). The effect of teaching prosody teaching on interpreting performance: An experimental study of consecutive interpreting from English into Farsi. Perspectives: Studies in translatology, 261, 84–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2019). The relative contribution of computer assisted prosody training vs. instructor-based prosody teaching in developing speaking skills by interpreter trainees: an experimental study. Speech Communication, 1071, 48–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Wu, Wei
2025. Research on the Problems and Enhancement Strategies in Higher Vocational English Translation Teaching. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences 10:1 DOI logo
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood, Vincent J. van Heuven & Mostafa Hosseini
2024. The effect of providing feedback and feedforward in prosody instruction for developing listening comprehension skills by interpreter trainees. Foreign Language Annals 57:1 ► pp. 184 ff. DOI logo
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood, Vincent J. van Heuven & Hassan Soodmand Afshar
2023.  The efficacy of segmental/suprasegmental vs. holistic pronunciation instruction on the development of listening comprehension skills by EFL learners . The Language Learning Journal 51:6 ► pp. 734 ff. DOI logo
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood & Vincent J. van Heuven
2021. Effects of attention to segmental vs. suprasegmental features on the speech intelligibility and comprehensibility of the EFL learners targeting the perception or production-focused practice. System 100 ► pp. 102557 ff. DOI logo
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood & Vincent J. van Heuven
2023. Relative contribution of explicit teaching of segmentals vs. prosody to the quality of consecutive interpreting by Farsi-to-English interpreting trainees. Interactive Learning Environments 31:1 ► pp. 451 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue