Nghiên cứu hiệu quả của phương pháp sử dụng phần mềm luyện ngữ âm trong việc nâng cao khả năng phát âm của sinh viên. Điển cứu âm vị tiếng Anh / æ/ đối với sinh viên không chuyên tại Học viện Ngân hàng =an investigation into the effectiveness of computer

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Vowel chart Figure 2 - F1/F2 value based on data from Ladefoged 2006 Figure 3 - The pronunciation of /æ/ by Japanese learner of English Figure 4 – the pronunci

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

ACADEMY

(Nghiên cứu hiệu quả của phương pháp sử dụng phần mềm luyện ngữ âm trong việc nâng cao khả năng phát âm của sinh viên Điển cứu âm vị tiếng Anh / æ/ đối với sinh viên

không chuyên tại Học viện Ngân hàng)

M.A THESIS

Field: English Linguistics

Code: 60.22.15

HANOI - 2009

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT

ACADEMY

(Nghiên cứu hiệu quả của phương pháp sử dụng phần mềm luyện ngữ âm trong việc nâng cao khả năng phát âm của sinh viên Điển cứu âm vị tiếng Anh / æ/ đối với sinh viên

không chuyên tại Học viện Ngân hàng)

1 Statement of the problem and the rationale of the study 1

1.1.1 Why second/ foreign language pronunciation should be taught? 6

1.2.4 Benefits of computer assisted learning and teaching 17

1.2.5 Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) 18

1.2.5.1 The features of Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training 19

1.2.5.2 Ten suggestions for improving CAPT pedagogy 21

1.2.5.3 Selecting computer software for learning English pronunciation 22

2.2.2.1 Current English ability and knowledge of English pronunciation of

non-major-first-year students in Banking Academy 61

2.2.2.2 Situation of teaching and learning English pronunciation in

2.2.2.3 Feasibility and suggestions for the use of CAPT in teaching and

learning English pronunciation in Banking Academy 73

2.2.2.4 The effectiveness of CAPT in helping students improve their

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

1 ARS: Automatic Speech Recognition

2 CAPT: Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training

3 CALL: Computer Assisted Language Learning

4 EFL: English as a Foreign Language

5 ESL: English as a Second Language

6 F1: First Formant

7 F2: Second Formant

8 F3: Third Formant

9 IPA: International Phonetic Alphabet

10 IT: Information Technology

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 – Average F1 and F2 of RP pure vowels

Table 2 – Summary of participants’ background information in the experiment Table 3 – Respondents’ suggestions for pronunciation-teaching in Banking Academy

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Vowel chart

Figure 2 - F1/F2 value based on data from Ladefoged (2006)

Figure 3 - The pronunciation of /æ/ by Japanese learner of English

Figure 4 – the pronunciation of /æ/ by a native speaker of English

Figure 5 – Summary of the experimental design

Figure 6 – Students’ length of English – studying time

Figure 7 – Reasons for students’ lack of confidence when speaking English

Figure 8 – Reasons for students’ lack of confidence when speaking English (from teachers’ perspective)

Figure 9 – Aspects of pronunciation that students had got knowledge of

Figure 10 – Students’ learning methods

Figure 11 – Time spent on pronunciation teaching in class

Figure 12 – Students’ opinions on materials used in pronunciation teaching

Figure 13 – Students’ opinions on pronunciation-teaching methods

Figure 14 – Teachers’ opinions on pronunciation-teaching methods

Figure 15 – Students’ opinions on the efficiency of pronunciation-teaching methods

Figure 16 – Difficulties that teachers encountered in their pronunciation teaching process Figure 17 – Teachers’ opinion on possible advantages CAPT

Figure 18 – Teacher’s opinion on possible disadvantages of CAPT

Figure 19 – Experimental results of subject 1

Figure 20 – Experimental results of subject 2

Figure 21 – Experimental results of subject 3

Figure 22 – Experimental results of subject 4

Figure 23 – Experimental results of subject 5

Figure 24 – Experimental results of subject 6

Figure 25 – Experimental results of subject 7

Figure 26 – Experimental results of subject 8

INTRODUCTION

1 Statement of the problem and rationale of the study

These days, under the great influence of globalization, English has become the major medium of international communication The remarkable increase in the need of English for communication in every area resulted in the shift of ultimate English language teaching goal from students‘ mastery of English structures and vocabulary to their communicative proficiency

With the emphasis on meaningful communication, Morley‘s (1991: 488) premises that

‗intelligible pronunciation is an essential component of communication competence‘ It is because learners with good pronunciation in English are more likely to be understood even if they make errors in other areas, whereas unintelligible pronunciation prevents even those with

a large vocabulary and grammar from successful communication with first language (L1) speakers

Yet many adult learners find pronunciation one of the most difficult aspects of English to acquire, and need explicit help from the teacher (Morley 1994; Fraser 2000) Surveys of student needs consistently show that learners of English feel the need for pronunciation work

in class (e.g Willing 1989) Thus some sort of pronunciation work in class is essential

However, according to a literature review on teaching pronunciation by Wei (2006), although English has become more disseminated globally and the importance of pedagogies for English has increased, pronunciation teaching is still not given enough attention, especially in English education in Asian countries where English is not used on a daily basis and learners cannot have regular access to real-life communication with native speakers of English (NS)

There are several plausible reasons for this situation On the one hand, some misconceptions about the possibility of successfully teaching L2 pronunciation have made research on this field less attractive than, for instance, research on grammar or vocabulary acquisition As a result, few empirical studies are available on pronunciation training and clear pedagogical guidelines that could be used by language educators are still lacking On the other hand, when designing a pronunciation-training programme, one has to reckon with practical constraints For the student, learning pronunciation ideally requires prolonged

supervised practice and interaction with native speakers For the teacher, it ideally implies intensive interaction with the student and the provision of feedback on individual problems These tasks are extremely time-consuming and difficult to implement in class-based settings

Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) seems to offer a solution to the problem of practical constrains CAPT systems allow students to access virtually unlimited and realistic L2 input through different channels, to practise individually as often as they wish, and to enjoy unlimited patience from the tutor Moreover, through the integration of Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) technology, these systems can provide individualized feedback automatically and instantaneously It is not surprising, then, that a wealth of CAPT systems has been developed, most of which are already available

on the market

Despite the popularity of CAPT systems, however, not only Vietnamese students but also Vietnamese teachers of English are not fully aware of the availability and effectiveness of those programs in improving students‘ English pronunciation This may be one of the crucial factors that hinder Vietnamese students‘ advance in English speaking ability in general and pronunciation in particular

For that reason, I desire to study the effectiveness of CAPT in the context of Vietnam However, since pronunciation is a large field, with limited time and experience, it is extremely hard for me to cover all of the matters related to CAPT and its application in teaching English pronunciation Therefore, the scope of the study is narrowed to investigating the effectiveness

of CAPT in improving students‘ segmental pronunciation It is because examining the relationship between the sentence intelligibility of deaf speakers and acoustic properties at the segmental and suprasegmental level, Monsen (1978) found that the majority of variance in the intelligibility of sentences was related to variations at the segmental level and this result is also emphasised in many other studies (Rogers, Dalby & DeVane, 1994; Maassen and Povel, 1985; Rogers, 1997)

Moreover, as many studies have substantiated, numerous factors can affect L2 speech production such as age of L2 acquisition, length of residence in the L2 environment, motivation, and the amount of L1 usage However, according to Flege‘s study

Speech Learning Model, shows that L2 learners usually substitute the closest L1 phonemes for similar L2 ones In other words, rather than create a new sound category, L2 learners substitute the closest L1 counterpart This may account for the fact that a great number of Vietnamese students, particularly non-English major ones, mispronounce unfamiliar sounds such as /θ/, /đ/, /dʒ/, and are unable to distinguish the difference between /e/, /r/ and /æ/ (Nguyen and Ingram, 2004) As a result, many of them tend to use the Vietnamese sounds /e/

or /a/ to substitute those vowels, which leads to intelligibility problems

From my observation as a lecturer of English in Banking Academy, mispronouncing vowel /æ/ or being unable to differentiate the three vowels /e, æ, r / seems to be a common

problem among non-English major students Therefore, I decide to conduct research on: ―The

effectiveness of Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) in improving students’ pronunciation The case of vowel /æ/ and non-English-major students in Banking Academy”

2 Aims and objectives of the study

The aim of the study is to examine the situation of learning and teaching English

pronunciation in Banking Academy; the efficiency of CAPT in facilitating Banking Academy’s learners’ segmental pronunciation of the target language as well as to provide some practical suggestions to the administrators and English teachers in Banking Academy

It targets the low front vowel /æ/ that exists in English, but not in Vietnamese, and is among

several sounds that are problematic for Vietnamese learners of English

The study hopes to make a modest contribution to an increased understanding of CAPT and segmental pronunciation in the context of Vietnamese learners of English It is also expected to be useful for any teacher who has intention to utilize CAPT to enhance students‘ English pronunciation

3 Significance of the study

As a prestigious training and research institute in Vietnam, Banking Academy has for long realized its mission of training excellent cadres in Banking, Finance and Economics-related fields, who not only possess good professional knowledge but also excellent English communicative skills in order to handle demanding tasks in the economic globalization However, with students of low English level in large classes, and serious lack of time in class,

it is nearly impossible for English lecturers in Banking Academy to help their students improve their speaking skill, and more specifically, their pronunciation

The present study presents a research-based experiment that examines the effectiveness

of CAPT programs in helping students in Banking Academy enhance their segmental pronunciation Therefore, it is expected to offer a valuable guidance for English teachers in Banking Academy when using CAPT to deal with their difficulties in teaching pronunciation, which surely enables English teachers in Banking Academy to improve their teaching quality, and accordingly enhances the reputation of the university

The study also makes a good suggestion for learners who want to better their English pronunciation by utilizing CAPT in their self-studying time

Additionally, the results of the study are believed to contribute to the knowledge of pronunciation teaching in general and the effectiveness of CAPT in pronunciation teaching and learning in particular It is also supposed to open up new aspects for further studies

4 Scope of the study

Due to the limited time, and materials accessed, it is impossible to discuss all of the matters related to pronunciation as well as Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) Therefore, the present study is designed as a pilot study, and the main purpose is to investigate how CAPT works in the context of Vietnamese learners of English in general and non-English major students at Banking Academy in particular as well as to measure its impact

on improving learners‘ segmental phonology with the focus on vowel /æ/ In order to fulfill these objectives, only background knowledge of CAPT, its effectiveness in enhancing learners‘ pronunciation, as well as features of English vowels and vowel /æ/ is reviewed The objects of the study are also restricted to students at Banking Academy and the experiment is carried out to measure only the efficiency of CAPT in bettering students‘ pronunciation of vowel /æ/

5 Research questions

The study is implemented to answer the following questions:

1 What is the situation of teaching and learning English pronunciation in Banking Academy? Has English pronunciation received enough attention from students and teachers of English there?

2 Is CAPT really effective for non-English major students in Banking Academy to

improve their pronunciation of /æ/ sound?

6 Methods of the study

To carry out this study, books and internet are two main sources for reference The background knowledge is collected from various books and websites, then analyzed and put together systematically

A practical work is done to conduct the study Data are mainly collected from classroom observation, questionnaires for both teachers and students at Banking Academy and

an experiment in which the effectiveness of CAPT is evaluated This data instruments give persuasive data and appropriate assumption of real situation of teaching and learning English pronunciation in Banking Academy as well as the efficiency of CAPT in improving students‘ pronunciation

7 An overview of the rest of the paper:

The study consists of five parts:

- The introduction includes some brief information about the rationale for the study, the aims and objectives of the study, the scope, research questions, the methods as well as the design of the study

- Chapter I deals with the literature review of pronunciation teaching and learning, features of English vowels, the vowel /æ/ and CAPT as well as its effectiveness in enhancing students‘ pronunciation

- Chapter II presents the subjects, instruments, procedures, data presentation, data analysis and interpretation of findings of the study

- Chapter III provides some pedagogical suggestions on how to use CAPT in learning and teaching English pronunciation in Banking Academy

The final part is the conclusion and summary of the whole study, followed by references and appendices

CHAPTER I LITERATURE REVIEW

1.0 Introduction

Chapter one is aimed at providing readers with theoretical background concentrating

on the importance of teaching English pronunciation in TEFL, definitions of CAPT, its effectiveness in enhancing students‘ pronunciation, features of English vowels as well as features of the investigated vowel /æ/

Firstly, the importance of pronunciation in TEFL will be investigated

1.1 Pronunciation learning and teaching

1.1.1 Why second/ foreign language pronunciation should be taught?

The usefulness of teaching second/foreign language pronunciation is a widely debated issue in the language teaching world Purcell and Suter (1980:286) hold that pronunciation practice in the class has little effect on the learner‘s pronunciation skills and, moreover ‗that the attainment of accurate pronunciation in a second language is a matter substantially beyond the control of educators‘ Contrariwise, Pennington (1989) questions the validity of Purcell and Suter‘s findings, and states that there is no firm basis for asserting categorically that pronunciation is not teachable or it is not worth spending time on teaching pronunciation However, Stern (1992: 112) maintains ‗there is no convincing empirical evidence which could help us sort out the various positions on the merits of pronunciation training‘

Nonetheless, pronunciation is definitely the biggest thing that people notice when a person is speaking Let us look at an anecdote:

Whenever I spoke to a person in America, they kept asking me “What? What?” I would repeat my sentence again and again Finally they would say “Ah-ha!” and then say my sentence, using exactly my words! It was very humiliating I knew my words and grammar were good, but nobody would understand me, just because of my pronunciation

(Antimoon.com)

Hence, Gilbert (1995: 1) believes that the skills of listening comprehension and pronunciation are interdependent, and contends ‗if they (learners) cannot hear well, they are cut off from language If they (learners) cannot be understood easily, they are cut off from conversation with native speakers.‖ Likewise, Nooteboom (1983) suggests that speech

production is affected by speech perception, and stresses the need of pronunciation in both listening and speaking Wong (1987) points out that even when the non-native speakers‘ vocabulary and grammar are excellent, if their pronunciation falls below a certain threshold level, they are unable to communicate efficiently and effectively Tench (1981:1) rightly maintains pronunciation is not an optional extra for the language learner, any more than grammar, vocabulary or any other aspect of language is If a learner‘s general aim is to talk intelligibly to others in another language, a reasonable pronunciation is important

Varonis and Gass (1982) examine the factors affecting listening comprehension in native speakers of English exposed to L2 accents, and conclude that grammar and pronunciation interact to influence intelligibility

Moreover, Wong (1993) argues that the importance of pronunciation is even more distinct when the connection between pronunciation and listening comprehension is taken into account Wong (1993) also demonstrates that a lack of knowledge of pronunciation could even affect learners‘ reading and spelling According to Baker (1992), pronunciation is very important and learners should pay close attention to pronunciation as early as possible Otherwise, the result will be that advanced learners find that they can improve all aspects of their proficiency in English except their pronunciation, and mistakes which have been repeated for years are impossible to eradicate Scarcella and Oxford (1994) similarly postulate that pronunciation should be taught in all second (/foreign) language classes through a variety

of activities With the emphasis on meaningful communication and Morley‘s (1991: 488) premise, that ‗intelligible pronunciation is an essential component of communication competence‘, teachers should include pronunciation in their courses and expect their learners

to do well in them

Therefore, we should countenance what Morley (1991) puts forward: The question is not whether pronunciation should be taught, but instead what should be taught in a pronunciation class and how it should be taught

1.1.2 What should be taught?

The question ‗What should be taught?‘ encompasses two different points: (a) the level, variety

or accent of EFL pronunciation and (b) the aspects, components or features of EFL pronunciation

The level, variety or accent of EFL pronunciation

It has long been believed and accepted that ESL/EFL learners have to try to get as close as possible in their pronunciation to one of the dominant native-speaker accents, such as Received Pronunciation (RP), the USA equivalent However, the time covering the last fifteen years or so with the trend of globalization has brought about such a significant change in the role of the English language throughout the world that it is unavoidable to reexamine and rethink this situation English is currently the world‘s most widely used and principal international language, as a result of which there are now more exchanges between non-native speakers of English than between non-native speakers and native speakers It is, moreover, predictable that in the near future at least this situation is not going to change in favour of the minority of native speakers, and so suddenly the hegemony of their specific accents is under fire (Walker, 2001) Macaulay (1988) and Crystal (1995) also question the idea of a native-speaker accent as a model or norm for ESL/EFL learners

What accent of English should the learner be exposed to then? Kenworthy (1987) puts forward the concept of ―comfortable intelligibility‘ as a suitable goal for the majority of learners Morley (1991: 496) supports Kenworthy‘s view and advocates that the goal of pronunciation should be changed from the attainment of ‗perfect‘ pronunciation to the more realistic goals of developing functional intelligibility, communicability, increased self-confidence, the development of speech monitoring abilities and speech modification strategies for use beyond the classroom The overall aim of these goals is for the learner to develop awareness and monitoring skills that will allow learning opportunities outside the classroom environment Robertson (2003:4) quotes Morley (1991) in saying that ‗intelligible pronunciation is an essential component of communicative competence‘

Influenced by both the strands stated above, I am in favour of both a dominant speaker ascent, such as BBC English or standard American accent and an intelligible accent, but in a practical, convenient and useful manner I, of course, advocate an intelligible accent; but to acquire that the learner has to be exposed to appropriate and adequate input being constituted of a standard or dominant accent However, the ultimate target of both the teaching and the learning of EFL pronunciation would be an intelligible accent

native-The aspects, components or features of EFL pronunciation

EFL pronunciation teaching should cover both the segmentals and the suprasegmentals as well as the training of the speech organs, such as lips, teeth, alveolar ridge, palate, tongue, vocal folds, ears, etc

The segmentals embody vowel and consonant sounds, preferably phonemes, as well as syllables A phoneme is a set of similar sounds showing meaning differences or differentiating between words And a syllable consists of a vowel as a compulsory element and one or more consonants at the onset and/or in the termination as optional elements, which is pronounced with a single contraction of the lungs The English language has twenty vowel phonemes (twelve monophthongs and eight diphthongs) and twenty four consonant phonemes While the vowels are articulated without any obstacle in the vocal tract, the consonants are produced with some blockage of the air passage The treatment of the segmentals basically includes sound contrast in words, pronunciation of vowel and consonant phonemes The phonemes which are not available in the learner‘s mother tongue and problematic to him/her should receive special treatment in the teaching material and methodology and sufficient room in the learner‘s practice

The suprasegmentals are comprised of stress in words and connected speech, rhythm, pitch, loudness, length, quality, tone and intonation that play an essential and natural role in English speech production and perception As Vietnamese is syllable- timed language in which the rhythm appears to be fairly even, whereas English is stress timed, Vietnamese students learning English inevitably finds mastering EFL pronunciation a very daunting task Hence, the differences in suprasegmentals between the learner‘s mother tongue and the target language are momentous topics that he/she should not only be aware of but should make a conscious effort to study and focus on (Thompson and Gaddes, 2005)

Moreover, the learner should be helped to retrain his/her speech organs which have so long been trained naturally and used to articulate the sounds in his/her L1 This tremendously helps him/her to comfortably and sufficiently use his/her articulators so as to produce the sounds of the target language in an intelligible manner

1.1.3 How can EFL pronunciation be taught?

The question ‗How can EFL pronunciation be taught?‘ comprises axiomatic, procedural and implemetational issues related to pronunciation teaching: teaching approaches and classroom techniques/activities

Teaching approaches

In recent years, with the renewed professional support to enable learners to be effective and efficient speakers of English as an L2, there has been an incessant progress to bring pronunciation back on stage since, as a large number of prominent theorists and researchers uncover, it should be given preferential treatment However, researchers and teachers are not yet completely convinced of which models, goals, approaches and methodology are more helpful for leaning and teaching pronunciation alike

To have a look at the various approaches to pronunciation teaching, the ‗bottom-up approach‘ begins with the articulation of individual sounds or phonemes and works up towards stress, rhythm, tone and intonation On the other hand, the ‗top-down approach‘ starts with patterns of intonation and brings separate sounds or phonemes into sharper focus as and when required According to Dalton and Seidlhofer (1994), the former is based on the idea that if the segmentals are taught first, the suprasegmentals will subsequently be acquired without the need of formal instruction whereas the latter rests on the assumption that once the suprasegmentals features are in place, the necessary segmental discriminations will follow accordingly The bottom-up approach and the top-down approach respectively correspond to the traditional approach and the research-based approach propounded by Scarcella and Oxford (1994) While the traditional approach is concerned with isolated sounds and native like pronunciation, the research-based approach deals with suprasegmental features and targets at communication

According to Celce-Murcia (2001), the top-down approach, in which suprasegmental aspects of pronunciation are addressed first, has been the main trend in pronunciation teaching Levis (2005) shows that, over the past 25 years, segmental pedagogy has not been considered critical unless speech is very unclear However, Levis (2005) claims that the mainstream emphasis on suprasegmental aspects is not entirely valid because it is not based on sound research, and he points out that a segmental focus makes a more important contribution

to intelligibility

It can be readily argued that one must understand the segmental in order to be able to understand the suprasegmental fully Considering communicative significance, phoneme awareness should be prioritized For instance, if speakers mispronounce the suprasegmental

fails if speakers do not differentiate certain sounds in minimal pairs in English such as sea or she (/s/ and /sh/), rock or lock (/r/ and /l/), and fold or hold (/f/ and /h/)—those combinations are very common problems among Vietnamese learners of English

From my perspective, I agree with Witt and Young‘s (1998) argument that pronunciation quality is based on both phonetic and prosodic features They believe that for beginners, phonetic characteristics are of greater importance because these cause mispronunciations But they stressed that as learners‘ fluency increases, more emphasis should

be given to teaching prosody, i.e., intonation, stress and rhythm (p 26)

As revealed from the survey conducted among first-year students in Banking Academy, though English is taught in secondary and high school, most of them entered the university with low level of English In addition, since English speaking and listening skills are still not paid as much attention as reading, writing and grammar at school, Banking Academy‘s students are usually lack of basic knowledge of English pronunciation, which results in simple mistakes with not only suprasegmental but also segmental phonology Therefore, to non-English-major students in Banking Academy, the bottom-up approach should be applied, in which students are provided with knowledge and time to practice segmental aspects before suprasegmetal ones

Classroom techniques/activities

Due to pedagogical reasons, it might be helpful to think about the learnability scale as introduced by Dalton and Seidlhofer (1994) which suggests that there are certain aspects of the English pronunciation which appear to be easily taught; namely, phonemes, stress while others, such as intonation, are extremely dependent on individual circumstances and thus practically impossible to separate out for direct teaching Therefore, it could then be sensible to think that instead of pushing learners to strive for perfect pronunciation, a focus on pedagogic attention to those items which are teachable and learnable and also essential in terms of intelligible pronunciation appears to be a more reasonable goal Based on the exploration and critical analysis of the different approaches to teaching pronunciation and what seems to be teachable and learnable for EFL classroom settings, Maniruzzaman (2007) proposes ten techniques and activities that, according to influential pronunciation researchers (e.g Morley, 1991, Scarcella and Oxford, 1994, Fraser, 1999,

teachability-Thompson, Taylor and Gray, 2001) and his own experience, appear to be useful for learners and teachers alike:

a Utilization of known sounds: In the early stage of learning, the learner, especially the young

one can be helped to compare the sounds of the target language with those of his/her mother tongue This eventually helps the learner produce the EFL sound pattern to a considerable extent

b Explanation: Explanation of how to produce sounds or use pronunciation patterns

appropriately should be kept to a minimum through directions about what to do with the vocal organs can help some young and adult EFL learners in some circumstances

c Communication activities: The teacher can design communicative tasks, such as dialogues

or mini-conversations for both young and adult EFL learners according to their linguistic level

to practise particular sounds, especially those which are not available in their mother tongue, for example, /æ, , / in case of Vietnamese learners Besides, the learner can be taught some useful communication strategies, such as retrieval strategies, rehearsal strategies, cover strategies which will help him/her give the impression that his/her pronunciation is better than

it really is (Oxford, 2000)

d Written versions of oral presentations: At the more advanced levels, learners can be given

strategies for analyzing the written versions of their oral presentations This helps them detect, identify and correct errors or mistakes committed in their oral presentations

e Modelling and individual correction: In this technique, the teacher reports the results of

analyses of learner speech sample individually The young or adult learner gets feedback from the analyses and stop repeating previous errors or mistakes

f Incorporation of novel elements: The instructor can add novel pronunciation elements, such

as sounds, stress placement, tones to the old ones with the use of directions This helps both the young and the adult learner get his/her EFL pronunciation further improved

g Tutorial sessions and self-study: Tutorial sessions commence with a diagnostic analysis of

each learner‘s spoken English, and an individualized programme is designed for each learner This technique can be used for both young and adult learners

h Self-monitoring and self-correction: Self-monitoring is the conscious action of listening to

one‘s own speech in order to find out errors and mistakes This action is followed by

self-correction standing for the process of fixing one‘s errors and mistakes after they have occurred

by repeating the word or phrase correctly By teaching our adult learners to self-monitor and self-correct, we enable them to make their learning of EFL pronunciation more personal, more meaningful and more effective

i Computer-assisted language learning: Computer-assisted language learning or CALL can

be an important tool when attempting to help the learner become more autonomous by allowing him/her to hear his/her own errors and mistakes and see both segmental and suprasegmental graphic representations CALL benefits the learner by letting him/her study at his/her own pace in a semi-private environment as well as allowing him/her to build profiles that enable the teacher to monitor the learner‘s improvement in EFL pronunciation In addition, the teacher can exploit visual displays of speech patterns to teach intonation, stress and phonemes to individuals and small groups of learners This tool can be used for both young and adult learners, but in an adjusted manner

j Reading aloud: The learner can be given a piece of spoken text to read out loudly Here the

teacher‘s job is to identify pronunciation the errors and mistakes made by the learner, and then give feedback that will help the learner improve his/her EFL pronunciation

Finally, these classroom techniques/activities for teaching EFL pronunciation are in no way exhaustive, but substantially useful when they are used on the basis of feasibility and suitability in a particular environment having particular learners Moreover, according to Morley (1991: 507), the teacher can perform the role of a ‗speech coach‘ or ‗pronunciation coach‘ who, rather than just correcting the learner‘s errors and mistakes, supplies information, gives models, offers cues, suggestions and constructive feedback about the performance, sets high standards, provides a wide variety of practice opportunities, and overall supports and encourages the learner

With regard to teaching English pronunciation in Banking Academy, since class time for English subject is very limited with only two semesters for general English, each semester contains only forty-five contact hours, organizing communication activities or pronunciation-tutoring sessions is nearly impossible With a wide range of computer assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) software available, utilizing CAPT seems to be the best solution for both teacher and students there Accordingly, in the next part, definition of CALL as well as the effectiveness of CAPT in improving students‘ pronunciation will be reviewed

1.2 Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

1.2.1 Definition of CALL

Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is often perceived, somewhat narrowly, as an approach to language teaching and learning in which the computer is used as

an aid to the presentation, reinforcement and assessment of material to be learned, usually

including a substantial interactive element (from Wikipedia.org) Levy (1997:1) defines

CALL more succinctly and more broadly as "the search for and study of applications of the computer in language teaching and learning" Levy's definition is in line with the view held by the majority of modern CALL practitioners

in educational institutions and in people's homes Since the beginning of the '80s computers have also found their way into many schools CALL software has also become more readily available on the market (Ittelson: 2000)

The emergence of inexpensive computer technology and mass storage media, including optical videodiscs and compact disks, has given instructional technologists better tools to work with Compact disks are used to store large amounts of data, such as encyclopedias or motion pictures In CALL centers with computers and software such as CD-ROM, CD-I, or videodiscs, a student who is interested in a particular topic can first scan an electronic encyclopedia, then view a film on the subject or look at related topics at the reach of

a button Thus, such learning centers present students with the advantages of reference materials and popularize computer-aided instruction The computer laboratory has become an integral component of foreign-language programs in most educational institutions (Hardisty & Windeatt: 1989)

Computers have been used for language teaching for more than three decades

stages: behaviouristic CALL, communicative CALL and integrative CALL Each stage corresponds to a certain pedagogical approach

1.2.2.2 Communicative CALL

It was the period of the 1980s This period was the time that behaviouristic approach to language teaching was being rejected at both theoretical and pedagogical level, and also personal computers were creating greater possibilities for individual work at school Communicative CALL corresponded to cognitive theories which stressed that learning was a process of discovery, expression and development Under the influence of Communicative Language Teaching, defendants of communicative CALL argued that computer based activities should focus more on using forms Software developed in this period included text reconstruction program and simulations In communicative CALL, the focus was not so much

on what students did with the computer, but rather what they did with each other while working at the computer

1.2.2.3 Interactive CALL

By the 1990s communicative CALL began to be criticized New second language acquisition theories and socio-cognitive views influenced many teachers and lead them to use more social and learner-centered methods This time, emphasis was put on language use in authentic social contexts Task-based, project-based and content-based approaches all sought

to integrate learners in authentic environments, and also to integrate the various skills of language learning and use In integrative approaches, students are enabled to use a variety of technological tools as an ongoing process of language learning and use rather than visiting the computer lab once a week basis for isolated exercises

1.2.3 CALL methodology

Computers are not very good at teaching themselves How effective computers are in the language classroom depends on the way the teacher and students use them Computers allow the user to carry out tasks which are impossible in other media such as providing feedback automatically on certain kinds of exercises or editing a piece of writing by deleting, moving and inserting text Students can do some exercises on their own and have them marked

by the computer Multiple-choice and total deletion programs provide examples of this Students can carry out exploratory work which is not assessed by the computer but which allows them to see the results of their decisions Hardisty & Windeatt (1989) say that the examples of this can be seen in word-processing, spreadsheet and simulation programs

Again they argue that students should have an opportunity to discuss with the teacher the activities they have done on the computer, otherwise they cannot learn effectively from them

With regards to the role of teacher in CALL, a review of the CALL literature identifies two prevalent positions concerning the role of the teacher: the traditional position and the progressive view The traditional position is that the teacher is and will remain indispensable and that the teacher is the ultimate arbiter regarding the place of the computer in language learning The traditional position sees the computer as a mere adjunct to the teacher‘s role, which remains central to the process of language learning Other supporters of this position include, to name but a few, Hope (1984), Alatis (1986), and Secan (1990) The progressive view is that the teacher should take a less intrusive role in managing language learning especially with the advent of multimedia and networked computers Progressivists point out that teachers are not the only source of language information in these days of global interconnectedness, and the language teachers should understand that students need to develop strategies to respond and adapt to changes rather than approaching the task of language learning in a uniform way (Warschauer & Healey, 1998) Warschauer and Healey advocate that the teacher should play the role of facilitator rather than being the fount of all knowledge (1998) Warschauer‘s ideas have been modified or elaborated by other researchers Gruba (2004: 637) refers to the teacher as a ―mediator‖ between the computer and students throughout the learning process, serving the role of ―keeping things running smoothly‖ The more progressive view can find support by many researchers, to name only a few of whom,

Debski, Gassin, & Smith (1997), Chapelle (2001), and Wang (2004) and it is also adopted in the present study

1.2.4 Benefits of computer assisted learning and teaching

Many educators indicate that the current computer technology has many advantages for second language learning The following are the advantages as stated by many experts:

1.2.4.1 Interest and motivation

Classical language teaching in classroom can be monotonous, boring, and even frustrating, and students can loose interest and motivation in learning CALL programmers can provide student ways to learn English through computer games, animated graphics, and problem-solving techniques which can make drills more interesting (Ravichandran 2000)

1.2.4.2 Individualization

CALL allows learners to have non-sequential learning habit; they can decide on their own which skills to develop and which course to use, as well as the speed and level by their own needs

1.2.4.3 A compatible learning style

Students have different style of learning, and an incompatible style for students will cause serious conflicts to them Computer can provide an exciting ―fast‖ drill for one student and ―slow‖ for another

1.2.4.4 Optimal use of learning time

The time flexibility of using computer enables students to choose appropriate timing for learning Winter (1997) in Kiliçkaya (2007) stressed the importance of flexible learning, learning anywhere, anytime, anyhow, and anything you want, which is very true for the web-based instruction and CALL Learners are given a chance to study and review the materials as many times they want without limited time

1.2.4.5 Immediate feedback

Students receive maximum benefit from feedback only if it is given immediately A delayed positive feedback will reduce the encouragement and reinforcement, and a delayed negative feedback affect the crucial knowledge a student must master Computer can give instant feedback and help the students ward off his misconception at the very first stage Brown (1997) listed the advantages of CALL as giving immediate feedback, allowing students

at their own pace, and causing less frustration among students

1.2.4.6 Error analysis

Computer database can be used by teacher to classify and differentiate the type of general error and error on account of the influence of the first language A computer can analyze the specific mistakes that students made and can react in different way from the usual teacher, which make students able to make self-correction and understand the principle behind the correct solution

1.2.4.7 Guided and repetitive practice

Students have freedom of expression within certain bounds that programmers create, such as grammar, vocabulary, etc They can repeat the course they want to master as many as they wish According to Ikeda (1999) in Kiliçkaya (2007), drill-type CALL materials are suitable for repetitive practice, which enable students to learn concepts and key elements in a subject area

1.2.4.8 Pre-determined to process syllabus

Computer enhances the learning process from a pre-determined syllabus to an emerging or process syllabus For example, a monotonous paper exercise of ‗fill-in-the-blanks‘ type can be made more exciting on the screen in the self-access mode, and students can select their own material Therefore, CALL facilitates the synthesis of the pre-planned syllabus and learner syllabuses ―through a decision-making process undertaken by teacher and learners together‖ (Breen 1986 in Ravichandran 2000)

1.2.5 Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT)

The advantages that Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) can offer are nowadays well-known to educators struggling with traditional language classroom constraints Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT), in particular, can be beneficial to second language learning as it provides a private, stress-free environment in which students can access virtually unlimited input, practise at their own pace and, through the integration of Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), receive individualized, instantaneous feedback It is not surprising, then, that a wealth of CAPT systems have been developed, many of which are available on the market for the language teacher or the individual learner In the following part, we will look at the features of CAPT, its‘ effectiveness in improving students‘ pronunciation, some suggestions for improving CAPT

pedagogy and some guidelines for selecting computer software for learning English pronunciation

1.2.5.1 The features of Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training

Neri et al (2002) stated that if students want to learn pronunciation, ideally they need

to be guided by teachers‘ instruction, and to interact with native speakers Teachers should provide their students with intensive interaction and feedback on individual problems When teachers face a large class of over thirty students, this is very difficult Although the solution to such large classes is not just computer based language programs, this is one of the available methods to help teachers and learners in learning language pronunciation CAPT can help teachers to provide students with a multi-native-speaker environment

CAPT systems seem to meet the requirements of pronunciation training and offer a number of advantages First, they make it possible to address individual problems Second, they allow students to train as long as they wish and in their own tempo Third, by giving students a chance to train individually, these systems may lead to a reduction of foreign language classroom anxiety and thus indirectly favor learning (Young, 1990) Finally, they offer the possibility to store student profiles in log-files, so that both the teacher and the student can monitor problems and improvements (Neri et al.,2002 P.43-44)

Neri et al (2002) also said that learning must take place in a stress-free environment in which students can be exposed to considerable and meaningful input and are stimulated to actively practice oral skills The feedback should focus on those ―segmental‖ and

―suprasegmental‖ aspects that affect intelligibility most Segmentals are vowels, consonants, diphthongs and clusters and suprasegmentals or prosodies are syllable structure, stress and accent, rhythm, pauses, linking or liaison, variation or sandhi, and intonation

Neri, Cucchiarini and Strik (2001) also observed that systems incorporating Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) modules can detect individual errors and provide immediate feedback Today there are many commercial products that make use of ASR technology to teach second language pronunciation Computer assisted learning of foreign languages also gives learners a stress-free environment Combining this with new directions in teaching pronunciation (Celce-Murcia, 1996), the computer assisted software today related to language learning and teaching has features listed as followed

1 Using multimedia in teaching pronunciation

2 Audio Feedback

3 Video

4 Computer-assisted Instruction

5 Speech Spectrographic Devices

6 System incorporating Automatic Speech Recognition modules

7 Stress free environment

8 Learner centered: focus on individual problem, allow self-pace and self-directed learning

9 Provides immediate corrective feedback

10 Provides multiple samples of native speakers

11 Interaction with the speakers in the software and classmates (incorporating Automatic Speech Recognition modules)

12 Focus on those segmental and suprasegmental aspects

One of the advanced technologies used in computer software is speech spectrographic devices, and some called ASR (automatic speech recognition), which include speech synthesis

or voice recognition (Anderson-Hsieh, 1992) This device can digitally measure the sound waves against model pronunciation in a graphic way visible to the learner It requires sound cards, speakers and microphones Shilling (1997) suggested that ―speech-synthesized feedback may be most supportive when children exhibit metalinguistic awareness or cognitive clarity‖ (cited in Beatty, 2003, p.188) Celce-Murcia (1996) also stated that the speech spectrographic devices combined with traditional classroom instruction may help students who have severe fossilized pronunciation These learners need special instruction to adjust their speech habits and fine-tune their vocal apparatus to make their speech more understandable to other English speakers

Computer assisted language learning gives students feedback immediately, and it also provides drill practice and repetition after each new teaching point (Chen & Liang, 2003) As Hess (2004) has pointed out, ―Most schools reported using software of the drill and practice methodology, with some variation of mastery learning For schools with more modern equipment, the most popular programs are based on the learning environment model, allowing for greater student control of instruction.‖ (Pembrook, as cited in Hess, 2004)

Whether or not the above features embedded in instructional technology assist students learning English pronunciation is the focus of this research

1.2.5.2 Ten suggestions for improving CAPT pedagogy

There are some studies on computer assisted pronunciation training (Pennington, 1999), voice recognition software (Myers, 2000), pronunciation feedback provided by computer software (Neri, et al.2002) and other subjects in the field (Levy, 2006) The main focus of these studies is on technological design, and there are few on pedagogical design:

It is maintained that considerable promise of the computer as an instructional tool for developing language learners‘ pronunciation has yet to be realized in practice, primarily because of lack of attention to pedagogical design rather than because of inherent limitations

of the technology (Pennington, 1999, p.427)

However, these studies have provided background knowledge and historical perspectives on computer assisted teaching and learning pronunciation In this research, the students were the main users of the computer software The data from the learner users provided their views on the effectiveness, usability, and comprehensibility of the computer software, as well as their views on the pedagogical aspects of computer software assisted learning and teaching pronunciation Pennington provided ten suggestions for improving CAPT pedagogy:

1 The CAP developer should start from a well-articulated theoretical position

―Linking the mechanics of articulation to communicative contexts or goals.‖

2 Establish a baseline for pronunciation in terms of one or more reference accents

3 Set an overall goal for performance This goal should be determined by the learner‘s characteristics, such as language proficiency and needs

4 Build in specific targets for performance: The developer will also need to consider what items, structures, skills or tasks will be good indicators of the learner‘s progress or achievement

5 Build skills in stages: move from easier to more challenging tasks and link production with in-production and post-production training

pre-6 Link production to other learning and communicative goals such as vocabulary, grammar, discourse and pragmatics

7 Design on a principled curriculum: The design of CAP pedagogy should be based

on a curriculum linked to creative use of the properties of the computer medium in concert with, rather than in place of, the other considerations of this list

8 Design based on creative use of properties of computer medium: CAP should be based on a principle language learning curriculum such as a communicative or task-based syllabus

9 Raise awareness of contrast with L1 and range of targets for L2: CAP should raise learners‘ awareness of the contrast of the L2 or target variety with the native language or variety and also of the range of acceptable or related targets and their social significance

10 Provide for exploration of database: As one of the most significant potentials of computer access for individualizing instruction and promoting learner control and independence, exploratory CALL should be a feature of CAPT

1.2.5.3 Selecting computer software for learning English pronunciation

Although the commercial software is attractive, teachers or learners need to select proper and suitable products How to choose suitable software for students is an important issue for teachers and schools Lee (2001) stated that: ―With a wide range of commercial software programs available to language teachers, selecting those that best suit the needs of the students has become a challenging task‖ (p.2) Students are the users of the programs and they know best what software works well for them

Lee (2001) listed six criteria for selecting computer assisted language learning (CALL) software programs in an EFL context, these being a) the purpose of purchasing a CALL software program, b) teacher readiness, c) financial concerns, d) content and methodology, e) design, and f) after-sales service The item ―design‖ in his list refers to the user friendliness and flexibility, layout, feedback and record-keeping features of ―good‖ software He focused

on text, audio, images and interface (navigation) Certain websites post criteria for selecting software, and these are based on the work of researchers such as Alessi and Trollip (1991), Bangert-Drowns and Kozma (1989) They include the criteria in the four following aspects:

- Instructional: Motivation, Interaction and Feedback, Goal orientation, Instructor‘s role, Treatment of errors, Learner control

- Curriculum: Sequencing, Experiencing, Cognitive Load, Knowledge Space, Understandability

- Cosmetic: Color, Text Layout, Use of Hypertext, Screen Layout, Graphics, Animation/ Video, Sound, Instructions, Menus and Icons, Interface design

- Technical: Individualization, Record Keeping, Security

Among the criteria for selecting computer software provided by different researchers in language learning, what are the criteria related to learning English pronunciation? What are the features of the software, which enhance students‘ learning English pronunciation? This research focused on some specific areas like instructional aspects such as motivation, interaction and feedback, goal orientation, treatment of errors, and cosmetic aspects such as color, text layout, screen layout, graphics, animation/video, sound, instructions, and interface design from the users‘ point of view Neri et al (2002) also provided certain rules for choosing software for learning pronunciation of English These are shown as followed

1 Present authentic speech samples and natural discourse

2 Focus learners‘ attention on both segmental and suprasegmental features

3 Support social interaction and communication

4 Focus on intelligibility

5 Support the development of metacognition and critical listening

6 Provide opportunities for practice

7 Provide scaffolding and individualized feedback

The suggestions given above from different researchers were used as a guide for the selection

of CAPT systems used in the study

1.2.5.4 Feedback in EFL and Feedback in CALL

Feedback differs in every learning situation It can be considered as affective/ cognitive, positive/ negative and content/ form The function of affective, positive and content feedback

is related to teacher encouragement, and the functions of cognitive, negative and form feedback refer to error correction (Brown, 2001) The following section of this chapter discusses feedback as it relates to learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and Computer assisted language learning (CALL)

Feedback in EFL

In explicit corrective feedback, the teacher provides the correct form, and he or she clearly indicates that what the student said was incorrect Recast (Implicit corrective feedback) includes corrections and confirmation checks without indicating the source of error Elicitation feedback requires the students to attempt to generate the correct form themselves Clarification requests indicate to students either that their utterance has been misunderstood, or that it is ill-formed in some way, and that a repetition or a reformulation is required Metalinguistic feedback requires the students to attempt to generate the correct form themselves Clarification requests indicate to students either that their utterance has been misunderstood, or that it is ill-formed in some way, and that a repetition or a reformulation is required Metalinguistic feedback contains comments, information, or questions related to well-formedness without explicitly providing the correct form Repetition refers to the teacher‘s repetition, in isolation,

of the student‘s erroneous utterance In most cases, teachers adjust their intonation so as to highlight the error (Lightbown & Spada, 1999) These terms and methods are all used in the teaching/ learning of English as a foreign language They are also considered and discussed in the design of CALL software but presented in different form, as visual or audio

Feedback in CALL

The feedback types stated above happen in a traditional EFL classroom What is the most effective feedback form for students learning pronunciation through CALL? Neri, Cucchiarini and Strik (2001, p.43) stated that ―the most effective feedback forms are those that not only indicate the correct form but that stimulate the students to produce the correct form themselves… elicitation will prove to be the most effective form of feedback for pronunciation too.‖ In addition, ―The generation of erroneous feedback is such a common problem for CALL pronunciation training systems, and patently wrong error detection can be

so frustrating for the student that Wachowicz and Scott recommend using implicit rather than explicit, judgmental feedback‖ (Neri, Cucchiarini & Strik, 2001, p.45)

Neri, Cucchiarini & Strik (2001) have researched feedback in computer assisted pronunciation systems and concluded that ―The integration of multimedia courseware with automatic speech recognition (ASR) technology opens up new possibilities for the training of conversational skills, thus adding extra value to these teaching environments Software designers have devised different methods to provide automatic instruction and pronunciation

scoring through ASR Some systems have been deployed that are also able to provide immediate feedback in written, aural and visual formats‖ (p.41)

One of the functions of computer assistance in learning English pronunciation is to provide immediate and patient feedback to learners Compared to a human teacher the most important advantages of computers in the feedback circuit are their availability and patience CALL systems are only useful if they are able to detect whether the learner‘s response to a question or command is adequate and to give meaningful guidance for correcting erroneous responses (Neri, 2004)

The computer-assisted programs for learning English pronunciation can provide the following benefits to learners to improve their learning: tracking performance, giving a second chance, encouraging, explanation, and immediate response (Lee, 2001) Neri, Cucchiarini and Strik (2001) also argued that ―Technology offers for practicing oral skills and addressing pronunciation problems, two areas that are hard to improve within traditional class-based settings‖ (p.40)

This research analyzed students‘ personal experience with feedback in the CALL programs used in the experiment

In conclusion, in this second part of Literature Review, we have taken a thorough look

at CALL, its history, methodology and benefits for second language acquisition In addition, features of CAPT, its‘ effectiveness in improving students‘ pronunciation, some suggestions for improving CAPT pedagogy and some guidelines for selecting computer software for learning English pronunciation have also been set basing on the review of literature on traditional pronunciation training and characteristics of available CAPT systems

Since the present study examines the effectiveness of CAPT in improving non-English major students‘ accuracy of vowel /æ/, in the next part, background knowledge of English vowels in general and vowel /æ/ in particular will be reviewed

1.3 English vowels

1.3.1 Vowels

As defined in Wikipedia.org, in phonetics, a vowel is a sound in spoken language, such

as English ah! [r] or oh! [әυ], pronounced with an open vocal tract so that there is no build-up

of air pressure at any point above the glottis This contrasts with consonants, such as English sh! [∫], where there is a constriction or closure at some point along the vocal tract A vowel is

also understood to be syllabic An equivalent open but non-syllabic sound is called a semivowel

In all languages, vowels form the nucleus or peak of syllables, whereas consonants form the onset and (in languages which have them) coda However, some languages also allow

other sounds to form the nucleus of a syllable, such as the syllabic /l/ in the English word table

['teІ.bļ] (the stroke under the l indicates that it is syllabic; the dot separates syllables), or the r

in Serbian vrt [vrţ] "garden"

There is a conflict between the phonetic definition of 'vowel' (a sound produced with

no constriction in the vocal tract) and the phonological definition (a sound that forms the peak

of a syllable) The approximants [j] and [w] illustrate this conflict: both are produced without much of a constriction in the vocal tract (so phonetically they seem to be vowel-like), but they occur on the edge of syllables, such as at the beginning of the English words 'yes' and 'wet' (which suggests that phonologically they are consonants) The American linguist Kenneth Pike suggested the terms 'vocoid' for a phonetic vowel and 'vowel' for a phonological vowel,

so using this terminology, [j] and [w] are classified as vocoids but not vowels

The word vowel comes from the Latin word vocalis, meaning "speaking", because in most languages words and thus speech are not possible without vowels Vowel is commonly used to mean both vowel sounds and the written symbols that represent them

1.3.2 Features of English vowels

English vowels can be described or distinguished in terms of articulation or acoustics

1.3.2.1 Articulation

The articulatory features that distinguish different vowel sounds are said to determine the vowel's quality Daniel Jones developed the cardinal vowel system to describe vowels in terms of the common features height (vertical dimension), backness (horizontal dimension) and roundedness (lip position) These three parameters are indicated in the schematic IPA vowel diagram below There are however still more possible features of vowel quality, such as the velum position (nasality), type of vocal fold vibration (phonation), and tongue root position

(Figure 1) 1.3.2.1.1 Height

Vowel height is named for the vertical position of the tongue relative to either the roof

of the mouth or the aperture of the jaw In high vowels, such as [i] and [u], the tongue is positioned high in the mouth, whereas in low vowels, such as [a], the tongue is positioned low

in the mouth The IPA prefers the terms close vowel and open vowel, respectively, which describes the jaw as being relatively open or closed However, vowel height is an acoustic rather than articulatory quality, and is defined today not in terms of tongue height, or jaw openness, but according to the relative frequency of the first formant (F1) The higher the F1 value, the lower (more open) the vowel; height is thus inversely correlated to F1

The International Phonetic Alphabet identifies seven different vowel heights:

 close vowel (high vowel)

True mid vowels do not contrast with both close-mid and open-mid in any language, and the letters [e ø γ o] are typically used for either close-mid or mid vowels

1.3.2.1.2 Backness

Vowel backness is named for the position of the tongue during the articulation of a vowel relative to the back of the mouth In front vowels, such as [i], the tongue is positioned forward in the mouth, whereas in back vowels, such as [u], the tongue is positioned towards the back of the mouth However, vowels are defined as back or front not according to actual articulation, but according to the relative frequency of the second formant (F2) The higher the F2 value, the fronter the vowel; backness is thus inversely correlated to F2

The International Phonetic Alphabet identifies five different degrees of vowel backness:

 Rounded, where the corners of the lops are brought towards each other and the lips pushed forwards This is most clearly seen in cardinal vowel /u/

 Spread, with the corner of the lips moved away from each other, as for a smile This is most clearly seen in cardinal vowel /i/

 Neutral where the lips are not noticeably rounded or spread The noise most English people make when they are hesitating (written ‗er‘) has neutral lip position

It is to be noticed that the front series [i, e, ε, a] and [ɑ] of the back series are pronounced with spread or open lips, whereas the remaining three members of the back series

have varying degrees of lip-rounding The combination of tongue and lip positions in the primary Cardinal Vowels are the most frequent in languages, i.e front and open vowels are most commonly unrounded while back vowels other than in the open position are most commonly rounded

1.3.2.1.5 Tenseness/checked vowels vs free vowels

Tenseness is used to describe the opposition of tense vowels as in leap, suit vs lax vowels as in lip, soot This opposition has traditionally been thought to be a result of greater muscular tension, though phonetic experiments have repeatedly failed to show this

Unlike the other features of vowel quality, tenseness is only applicable to the few languages that have this opposition (mainly Germanic languages, e.g English), whereas the vowels of the other languages (e.g Spanish) cannot be described with respect to tenseness in any meaningful way In discourse about the English language, "tense and lax" are often used interchangeably with "long and short", respectively, because the features are concomitant in the common varieties of English This cannot be applied to all English dialects or other languages

In most Germanic languages, lax vowels can only occur in closed syllables Therefore, they are also known as checked vowels, whereas the tense vowels are called free vowels since they can occur in any kind of syllable

1.3.2.1.5 Relatively pure vowels vs Gliding vowels

It is clearly not possible for the quality of a vowel to remain absolutely constant (or, in other words, for the organs of speech to function for any length of time in an unchanging way) Nevertheless, we may distinguish between those vowels which are relatively pure (or

unchanging), such as the vowel in learn, and those which have a considerable and voluntary glide, such as the gliding vowel in line

A vowel sound whose quality doesn't change over the duration of the vowel is called a monophthong Monophthongs are sometimes called "pure" or "stable" vowels A vowel sound that glides from one quality to another is called a diphthong, and a vowel sound that glides successively through three qualities is a triphthong

All languages have monophthongs and many languages have diphthongs, but triphthongs or vowel sounds with even more target qualities are relatively rare cross-linguistically English has all three types: the vowel sound in hit is a monophthong /ɪ/, the vowel sound in boy is in most dialects a diphthong /ɔɪ/, and the vowel sounds of flower, /a ʊ әr/, form a triphthong or disyllable, depending on dialect

In conclusion, vowels can be differentiated basing on their articulatory positions However, there is still another way for linguists to distinguish vowels, that is looking at their acoustic features

1.3.2.2 Acoustics

The different vowel qualities are realized in acoustic analyses of vowels by the relative values of the formants,

acoustic resonances of the

vocal tract which show up as

dark bands on a spectrogram

The vocal tract acts as a

resonant cavity, and the

position of the jaw, lips, and

tongue affect the parameters

of the resonant cavity,

resulting in different formant

values The acoustics of

vowels can be visualized

using spectrograms, which

display the acoustic energy at

each frequency, and how this changes with time

Formants are the distinguishing or meaningful frequency components of human speech and of singing By definition, the information that humans require to distinguish between vowels can be represented purely quantitatively by the frequency content of the vowel sounds The formant with the lowest frequency is called F1, the second F2, and the third F3

The first formant, abbreviated "F1", corresponds to vowel openness (vowel height) Open vowels have high F1 frequencies while close vowels have low F1 frequencies, as can be seen at right: The [i] and [u] have similar low first formants, whereas [ɑ] has a higher formant

The second formant, F2, corresponds to vowel frontness Back vowels have low F2 frequencies while front vowels have high F2 frequencies This is very clear at right, where the front vowel [i] has a much higher F2 frequency than the other two vowels However, in open vowels the high F1 frequency forces a rise in the F2 frequency as well, so an alternative measure of frontness is the difference between the first and second formants

R-colored vowels are characterized by lowered F3 values

Rounding is generally realized by a complex relationship between F2 and F3 that tends

to reinforce vowel backness One effect of this is that back vowels are most commonly rounded while front vowels are most commonly unrounded; another is that rounded vowels tend to plot to the right of unrounded vowels in vowel charts That is, there is a reason for plotting vowel pairs the way they are

Most often the two first formants, F1 and F2, are enough to disambiguate the vowel

In the third edition of his textbook, Peter Ladefoged recommended use of plots of F1 against F2 – F1 to represent vowel quality However, in the fourth edition, he changed to adopt a simple plot of F1 against F2, and this simple plot of F1 against F2 was maintained for the fifth (and final) edition of the book Katrina Hayward compares the two types of plots and concludes that plotting of F1 against F2 – F1 "is not very satisfactory because of its effect on the placing of the central vowels", so she also recommends use of a simple plot of F1 against F2 In fact, this kind of plot of F1 against F2 has been used by analysts to show the quality of the vowels in a wide range of languages, including RP British English, the Queen's English, American English, Singapore English, Brunei English, North Frisian, Turkish Kabardian, and various indigenous Australian languages

As defined by Fant, formants are ―the spectral peaks of the sound spectrum |P(f)|' of the voice‖ It is often measured by a peak in the frequency spectrum of the sound, using a spectrogram (in the figure) or a spectrum analyzer, though in vowels spoken with a high fundamental frequency, as in a female or child voice, the frequency of the resonance may lie between the widely-spread harmonics and hence no peak is visible In acoustics, it refers to a peak in the sound envelope and/or to a resonance in sound sources, notably musical instruments, as well as that of sound chambers

Table 1 gives average values in RP for the first and second formants of RP pure vowels This information is taken from article relating to formant in Wikipedia.org website

Vowel formant centers

(Table 1)

1.3.3 Vowel /æ/

Being one of English vowels, /æ/ also has its own articulatory and acoustic features

1.3.3.1 Examples

a- hand, lamp, macho, marry, rash, sat

(According to Alan Cruttenden, 99% of spelling of /æ/ are with <a>)

1.3.3.2 Articulation description

As can be seen from the English vowel quadrilateral, /æ/ is a near-open, front vowel Alan Cruttenden has provided a detailed articulation description of /æ/ in ―Gimson‘s Pronunciation of English‖ as follow:

The mouth is more open than for /e/; the front of the tongue is raised to a position midway just above open, with the side rims making a very slight contact with the back upper molars, the lips are neutrally open This vowel has become more open recently, previously being nearer to C[ε] where now it is close to C[a] Only tradition justifies the continuing use of the symbol ‗æ‘ for this phoneme Since the vowel /c/ has had a tendency over a somewhat longer period to move forward towards C[a], this may occasionally result in a neutralization of /æ/ and /c/ More often, however, the lowering of /æ/ has resulted in a retreat of /c/ towards the central region

This traditionally short vowel is now generally longer in RP than the other short vowels /I, e, c , q, u,/ Such lengthening is particularly apparent before voiced consonants, e.g

in cab, bad, bag, badge, man, /æ/ in these contexts is almose equivalent to the long vowels, so badge /bædз/ and barge /br dз/ have vowels of similar length Moreover, some RP speakers in the south of England appear to have a contrast between short /æ/ and long /æ:/ which shows up

in a limited number of minimal pairs like jam (to eat) (and probably also jamb) as [gæm] and jam (of traffic) [gæ:m]

It is also indicated in this book that the main difficulty for all foreign learners whose all languages have less complex vowel system than English lies in the establishment of the qualitative oppositions /І/ - /e/ - /æ/-/c/ The opposition /e/-/æ/ may be emphasized by making

use of the length component of RP /æ/ in certain contexts, e.g in men, man, bed, bad Where

length may not be so distinctive, e.g in net, gnat, learners are advised to be careful not to make /æ/ like the typical <a> vowel in those languages which only have one (central) vowel in the open region (e.g in those languages, like many in the Bantu group, which only have five

or seven vowel system) /æ/ must be kept fully front and, if necessary, above C[a] to avoid confusion with /c/ and even /r/ (e.g by Arabic speakers)

1.3.3.3 Acoustic features

According to Ladefoged (2006), F1/ F2 value of /æ/ are F1: 700Hz, F2: 1660Hz (F1: vowel height, F2: frontness/ backness) The following chart is the comparison between F1/ F2 value of /æ/ and some other vowels