Summary

Moving from segmental to suprasegrnental features, Field (2005)

investigated the role oflexical stress to intelligibility. The study was purely and simply whether incorrect placement of lexical stress by a non native speaker rendered the form of words unintelligible to an interlocutor. The

experiment was conducted by asking two groups of listeners, native

speakers and non native speakers, to transcribe recorded material of a non native speaker, in which the variables of lexical stress and vowel quality were manipulated. The statistical result of the study indicated an overall decrement of 19.780/o for native English speakers and 21.280/o for non native speakers. This finding might suggest that the threat to intelligibility posed by ineorrect placement of lexical stress is quite small: affecting only around 80/o of content words if every word were misstressed. It may be concluded that lexical stress should be an area of concern for teachers though perhaps not a top prlonty.

4.2.3 Global lntelligibility

Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 have discussed comfortable intelligibility and mutual intelligibility respectively. Comfortab}e intelligibility is required for interaction between NSs and NNSs while mutual intelligibility is required for interaction among NNSs. However, these types of intelligibility cannot

accommodate the current situation, that is, globalisation. EFL learners

really need global intelligibility, that is, intelligibility required for the

interaction between NSs and NNSs as well as for the interaction among

NNSs. Assuming that global intelligibility is the new goal of pronunciation

teaching for EFL learners, the important question to answer is: MZhat

aspects ofpronuneiation determine global inteUigr'bility of EFL iearners'

speeeh2

A preliminary study (Moedjito, 2008b) of 37 junior high school EFL

teaehers' perceptions of the priorities in pronunciation teaching conducted by the present author has revealed that it is necessary for language teachers

to consider the balance treatment of both segmental and suprasegmental

features in pronunciation teachng. All the teachers agreed that segmental and suprasegrnental features should be the priority in pronunciation teachng.

However, when the interviewees were asked a further question MZZti'eh segznental

and suprasegmental features should be eonsidered more in pronuneiation

teaehing2, all of them preferred segmental features (vowels and consonants) as their priority. [IIhis is because they found that there was a significant diEference between the system of English pronunciation and that of learners' mother tongue (the Sasak language of Lombok Island, Indonesia). This implies that Indonesian EFL teachers are stil1 more concerned with the segmental features (consonants

and vowels) than with the suprasegmental ones.

This fuiding notably eontrasts with the present trend of pronunciation instruction for ESUEFL learners. Numerous applied lirLguists (e.g. Bowen, Madsen, & Hilferty, 1985; Morez, 1998; Power, 2003; Wong, 1987) propose the suprasegmental features as the priority of pronunciation instruction rather than the segmental features. Bowen et al. (1985) claim that the priority order of pronunciation teachng should be fluency, word stress, rhythm and intonation,

and vowels and consonants. Morez (1998) argues that the suprasegrnental

features are more prominent in pronunciation instruction. Wong (1987) also supports the idea that the most relevant components ofpronunciation that play a greater role in English communication are rhythn and intonation. In Indonesia context, this fuiding supports the results of the previous study which reveals the remarkable reasons for learners' (lificulty in English pronuneiation: (1) the absence of English sounds in learners' native language and (2) the different distribution ofthe same or similar sounds in the phonetic structure of English and that of their Ll (Mcedjjto, 2oo6a). Thus, the absence of English sounds and the dilferent distribution of the same or similar sounds in Ll and L2 prompt Indonesian EFL teachers to consider consonants and vowels as the priority of pronunciation instruction in lndonesian classrooms.

However, referring to the mean scores of the collected data which were all greater than the median, the fuidings of the present study are consonant with

some studies on the importance ef the balanee of the segrnental and

suprasegmental features (e.g., Amity, 2003; Goodwin, 2001; Jenlcins, 2000;

MoedjjtD, 2oo6c; Ufomata, 1996). Jenlcins (2000) proposes Iingua Franca Core (LFC) that requires the balanee between the segmental features (consonants,

consonant clusters, and vowels) and the suprasegmental features (particularly, nuclear stress or prominence). Moreover, Ufomata (1996) claims that vowels and consonants are the essential features of pronunciation along with sounds in combination, stress, and intonation. Taking these findings into consideration, it

may be concluded that Indonesian EFIJ teachers qualitatively have the same view ofthe inclusion ofboth segmentals and suprasegmenta]s ofEnglish pronun(tation although they quantitatively have different opmions ofthese features. As the data of the study was collected by using the questionnaire distributed to the teacher respondents and the interviews, the fudmgs of the study need to be just ified by conducting other studies utilising EFL learners' speech.

4.3 Summary and Issues for Further Investigation

Fo}lowing Chapter III which describes the current status of globalisation and the reasons for the necessary shift of native"like or

localised pronunciation to inteMgibility, this chapter describes the definition of intelligibility and its types, particularly comfortable intelligibility and

rnutual intelligibility, with some related important research. From the

literature review, it may be concluded that recently ESL/EFL researchers and practitioners have begun to reappraise the importance of intelligible

pronunciation, particularly global intelligibility, because mastering

comfortable or mutual intelligibility alone is insufficient for EFL speakers in globalisation era. However, studies on intelligibility are relatively few compared with studies on other topic interests (e.g., four language skills,

grammar, and vocabulary). Therefore, more research should be conducted

on intelligibility "to establish the most effective ways of assessing it and to identify the factors that contribute to it" (Derwing & Munro, 2005, p. 391).

To be more specific, in the context of English as a global language, we need more specific information on global intelligibility, more specifically about:

(1) the factors determining global intelligibility for EFL Iearners;

(2) the relationship among EFL learners' knowledge ofpronunciation, their oral performance, and intelligibility; and

(3) the features of English pronunciation are important for EFL learners to

learn.

In order to provide such missing information, a series of experiment have been conducted and will be described in the following three chapters.

Factors

Chapter V

Determining Intelligibility

of EFL Learners

Chapters II, III, and IV have provided a literature review of

pronunciation teaching in English language education, globalisation, and previous studies on intelligibility. One of the crucial points is the fact that intelligibility should be the main goal of English as a global language (EGL) instruction. Such being the case, EFL teachers should be aware of factors determining global intelligibility. This chapter describes two parallel studies which investigated the factors determining global intelligibility of EFL learners' speech.

ドキュメント内 A Study on Factors Determining Global Intelligibility of EFL Learners' Speech (ページ 96-101)