语音作为英语教学中口语环节的重要组成部分,就其教学方式与侧重点学界内一直以来多有探讨。其中十分受人关注的一个问题在于音段与超音段特征在语音教学中孰轻孰重。传统的观点大多是从诸如教学效果、学习者差异、可理解度等视角出发来支持音段与超音段中的两者之一。虽然这些观点都有一定的道理,但是它们都将音段与超音段之间非此即彼的关系视为必然,而没有注意到它们之间的相互作用。通过指出语音可理解度的双向性以及对韵律层级模型的应用,本文强调了音段与超音段之间的特征并非独立而是会相互影响牵制,因而在教学上,重要的是从一个整合性的视角出发,帮助学生理解语音系统而非孤立的语音特征。
Pronunciation, as a crucial part in English speaking instruction, has long been discussed regarding its teaching method. One of the most compelling topics being debated is the selection of either segmental or suprasegmental features in pronunciation instruction. Viewing from perspectives like teaching effectiveness, learner difference, and intelligibility, most previous studies tend to support the importance of one over the other. Although these points are tenable to a degree, they simply take the binary opposition between segment and suprasegment for granted and ignore the interaction between them. Through pointing out the two-way nature of pronunciation intelligibility and elaborating prosodic hierarchy, it is highlighted that segmental and suprasegmental features are not exclusively established but interact with each other strongly. Therefore, in pronunciation instruction, it is important to help students to understand pronunciation system as a whole rather than teach segment and suprasegment as isolated features.
教学过程本身经常被学者们用来作为评判音段与超音段教学的重要视角。具体而言,音段与超音段在教学中展现出的教学效果被视为判断其是否重要的基本标准。从这一标准出发,虽然存在像Saito (2012) 这样的学者——认为语音教学能够同时提升学生对音段与超音段特征的掌握——但是绝大多数研究者倾向于支持两者中的任意一方;而在这些文献当中,虽然有强调音段更容易教学与习得的声音存在(如Levis,2005) [6] [7],支持超音段教学效果更好的又占了多数。例如,在Derwing等(1998)的研究中,所有的参与者被分成了三组:其中两组分别接受了对音段和超音段特征的教学,而另外一组则被设置为控制组,不接受任何关于语音的教学 [8]。在此之后,为了评估教学效果,所有的受试都被要求参加朗读与图片描述任务。结果显示,两个实验组都在重音位置与语音可理解度上有了一定提升;然而,只有超音段组在图片描述任务环节展现出了在流利度、重音位置以及可理解度上的显著提升。Gordon and Darcy (2012)通过定量分析手段对音段与超音段教学进行了研究,结果发现后者的教学效果可达前者的两倍之多 [9]。
2.2. 学习者差异
不同于上述这些研究——认为语音教学中的优先级必须给予音段与超音段中的两者之一——许多学者指出若不基于具体情况来探讨这个问题是没有意义的。比如Saito (2012, p. 850)就认为“教师不应该将学生卷入音段与超音段之间非此即彼的教学讨论与实践中来;相对地,他们应当基于学生的语言水平、学习目的以及母语背景来选择最应当传授的语音特征 [6]。
将音段与超音段分成单纯的两个对立项目不仅十分困难,同时它也忽略了一个重要事实,即音段与超音段之间存在着关联且两者之间的相互作用会影响到语音的可理解度。学界中已有一些文献指出了这一相互作用的存在。例如,Weismer and Martin (1992, p. 83)就强调音段特征的改变会影响到超音段特征:“在语音流中音段与超音段特征的出现具有共时性。对音段特征的改变不仅会影响到对其本身的理解,同时也可能影响到对语音流整体的韵律结构的理解” [17]。
同样,这一模型也可以被用于解释3.1中探讨的中国英语学习者的案例。在一般语境中,这句话中的关注点应该在于“skirt”和“鞋子”这样的内容物之上,因此在音韵层面上这句话应当被读作“Please wear skirt and black shoes”;同时,作为一个非重读的功能性词汇,“and”很可能由于英语中的“词尾辅音去除”而被读作/æn/。但是由于普通话的音韵限制,中国英语学习者很可能在词尾辅音后加上一个长元音。与/æn/相比,添加的长元音实际上将发音变成了/ændə:/这样的多音节读法。从结果上看,这一音节层面的改变会让句子中的“and”比标准发音的读音更重、节奏更长,而这会使得整个句子在音韵层面上的重音模式被改变。由此我们不难发现,音段层面上的特征改变会导致其他更高层级的语音特征的改变,而这些更高层级的特征改变可能与对话中语音的可理解度低下有着更大的关联,因为英语母语使用者对词汇之间的连接与界限的确定十分依赖于说者的音节重音模式 [21]。
叶桢彦. 论英语教学中音段与超音段的优先级之争——这一二元对立真的存在吗?The Debate over Segmental and Suprasegmental in Teaching English Pronunciation: Does This Dichotomy Exist?[J]. 国外英语考试教学与研究, 2019, 01(02): 63-69. https://doi.org/10.12677/OETPR.2019.12009
参考文献ReferencesSetter, J. and Jenkins, J. (2005) State-of-the-Art Review Article. Language Teaching, 38, 1-17.<br>https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480500251XZielinski, B.W. (2008) The Listener: No Longer the Silent Partner in Reduced Intelligibility. System, 36, 69-84.<br>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.11.004Fraser, H. (2001) Teaching Pro-nunciation: A Handbook for Teachers and Trainers. Three Frameworks for an Integrated Approach. TAFE NSW, Access Division, New South Wales.Chela-Flores, B. (2001) Pronunciation and Language Learning: An Integrative Approach. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 39, 85-101. <br> https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.39.2.85Collins, B. and Mees, I.M. (2013) Practical Phonetics and Phonology: A Resource Book for Students. Routledge, London. <br> https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203080023Saito, K. (2012) Effects of Instruction on L2 Pronunciation Development: A Synthesis of 15 Quasi-Experimental Intervention Studies. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 842-854. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.67Levis, J.M. (2005) Changing Contexts and Shifting Paradigms in Pronunciation Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 369-377. <br>https://doi.org/10.2307/3588485Derwing, T.M., Munro, M.J. and Wiebe, G. (1998) Evidence in Favor of a Broad Framework for Pronunciation Instruction. Language Learning, 48, 393-410. <br>https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00047Gordon, J., Darcy, I. and Ewert, D., (2012) Pronunciation Teaching and Learning: Effects of Explicit Phonetic Instruction in the L2 Classroom. In: Levis, J. and LeVelle, K., Eds., Proceedings of the 4th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 194-206.Zhang, L. (2009) The Implementation of English Pronunciation Instruction in Five-Year Normal English Major. China off Campus Education, 8, 246-247.Deterding, D. (2006) The Pronunciation of English by Speakers from China. English World-Wide, 27, 175-198.<br>https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.27.2.04detMoedjito, M. (2009) Priorities in English Pronunciation Teaching in EFL Classrooms. K@TA: A Biannual Publication on the Study of Language and Literature, 10, 129-142. <br> https://doi.org/10.9744/kata.10.2.129-142Rogers, C.L. and Dalby, J. (2005) Forced-Choice Analysis of Segmental Production by Chinese-Accented English Speakers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 306-322. <br>https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/021)Benrabah, M. (1997) Word-Stress: A Source of Unintelligibility in English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 35, 157-165. <br>https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1997.35.3.157Munro, M.J. and Derwing, T.M. (2006) The Functional Load Principle in ESL Pronunciation Instruction: An Exploratory study. System, 34, 520-531. <br> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.09.004Hansen, J.G. (2001) Linguistic Constraints on the Acquisition of English Syllable Codas by Native Speakers of Mandarin Chinese. Applied Linguistics, 22, 338-365. <br>https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.3.338Weismer, G. and Martin, R.E. (1992) Acoustic and Perceptual Approaches to the Study of Intelligibility. In: Kent, R.D., Ed., Intelligibility in Speech Disorders, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 67-118.<br>https://doi.org/10.1075/sspcl.1.04weiHayes, B. (1989) The Prosodic Hierarchy in Meter. In: Kiparsky, P. and Youmans, G., Eds., Rhythm and Meter. Phonetics and Phonology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 201-260. <br>https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409340-9.50013-9Demuth, K. (2009) The Prosody of Syllables, Words and Morphemes. In: Bavin, E., Ed., Cambridge Handbook on Child Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 183-198. <br>https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576164.011Schiering, R., Bickel, B. and Hildebrandt, K.A. (2010) The Prosodic Word Is Not Universal, but Emergent. Journal of Linguistics, 46, 657-709. <br>https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226710000216Liss, J.M., Spitzer, S., Caviness, J.N., Adler, C. and Edwards, B. (1998) Syllable Strength and Lexical Boundary Decisions in the Perception of Hypokinetic Dysarthric Speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 2457-2466. <br> https://doi.org/10.1121/1.423753