Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

153172-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
ABSTRACT

The absence of the consonant sound /p/ in Libyan Arabic leads Libyan speakers of English to pronounce /p/ as /b/. This study examines how Libyan Arabic speakers distinguish the English /p/ and /b/ in their production of L2 English. The study also examines the effect of the production contexts

ABSTRACT

The absence of the consonant sound /p/ in Libyan Arabic leads Libyan speakers of English to pronounce /p/ as /b/. This study examines how Libyan Arabic speakers distinguish the English /p/ and /b/ in their production of L2 English. The study also examines the effect of the production contexts and the learning environment on two groups of Libyan Arabic speakers' attainment of the English /p/ in the USA and Libya. The study collected voice recordings of word-initial /p/ and /b/ in isolated-words, minimal pairs, and sentences in English from both Libyan Arabic speakers and American English speakers. The study also collected Libyan Arabic stop consonants /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, and /g/ from the Libyan participants. The voice recording data were collected using the WhatsApp mobile application from all participants and the Libyan Arabic participants were also asked to fill an online survey. Using voice onset time (VOT) as a measurement tool, this study measured the English and Libyan Arabic data through Praat software. The findings show that most Libyan Arabic participants distinguish between /p/ and /b/, but they did not have as high VOT averages as the American participants' /p/. It also reveals that the production context, especially in minimal pairs and sentence contexts, has an effect on their participants' production. However, the learning environment does not have an effect on the Libyan participants' pronunciation of /p/ in this study.
ContributorsGarib, Ali A. A (Author) / Pruitt, Kathryn (Thesis advisor) / Renaud, Claire (Committee member) / González López, Verónica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
154197-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Studies in Second Language Acquisition and Neurolinguistics have argued that adult learners when dealing with certain phonological features of L2, such as segmental and suprasegmental ones, face problems of articulatory placement (Esling, 2006; Abercrombie, 1967) and somatosensory stimulation (Guenther, Ghosh, & Tourville, 2006; Waldron, 2010). These studies have argued that

Studies in Second Language Acquisition and Neurolinguistics have argued that adult learners when dealing with certain phonological features of L2, such as segmental and suprasegmental ones, face problems of articulatory placement (Esling, 2006; Abercrombie, 1967) and somatosensory stimulation (Guenther, Ghosh, & Tourville, 2006; Waldron, 2010). These studies have argued that adult phonological acquisition is a complex matter that needs to be informed by a specialized sensorimotor theory of speech acquisition. They further suggested that traditional pronunciation pedagogy needs to be enhanced by an approach to learning offering learners fundamental and practical sensorimotor tools to advance the quality of L2 speech acquisition.



This foundational study designs a sensorimotor approach to pronunciation pedagogy and tests its effect on the L2 speech of five adult (late) learners of American English. Throughout an eight week classroom experiment, participants from different first language backgrounds received instruction on Articulatory Settings (Honickman, 1964) and the sensorimotor mechanism of speech acquisition (Waldron 2010; Guenther et al., 2006). In addition, they attended five adapted lessons of the Feldenkrais technique (Feldenkrais, 1972) designed to develop sensorimotor awareness of the vocal apparatus and improve the quality of L2 speech movement. I hypothesize that such sensorimotor learning triggers overall positive changes in the way L2 learners deal with speech articulators for L2 and that over time they develop better pronunciation.

After approximately eight hours of intervention, analysis of results shows participants’ improvement in speech rate, degree of accentedness, and speaking confidence, but mixed changes in word intelligibility and vowel space area. Albeit not statistically significant (p >.05), these results suggest that such a sensorimotor approach to L2 phonological acquisition warrants further consideration and investigation for use in the L2 classroom.
ContributorsLima, J. Alberto S., Jr (Author) / Pruitt, Kathryn (Thesis advisor) / Gelderen, Elly van (Thesis advisor) / Liss, Julie (Committee member) / James, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015