Auditory and Visual Training on Mandarin Tones: A Pilot Study on Phrases and Sentences

Beginning level Mandarin learners with different L1 backgrounds received six hours of Mandarin tone training using phrases and sentences produced by multiple native Mandarin speakers. Using Kay Elementric’s Sona Speech II software with real time display of pitch contours along with speech output on a PC computer, the trainees had both auditory and visual input when they recorded and compared their own productions with the training stimuli during the training. The trainees’ productions of Mandarin tones were judged by native Mandarin listeners to be significantly better at post test than at pretest. Such improvement was not matched by a control group that received the same classroom instruction but did not take the training. The trainees also reported very positive experience with the training. The findings suggest that the training is effective for learning Mandarin tones in a larger linguistic context beyond isolated syllables. DOI: 10.4018/ijcallt.2012040102 International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 16-29, April-June 2012 17 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. visual input, or after taking perception training with auditory input only (Wang, 2008; Wang et al., 1999, 2003). However, perception and production of Mandarin tones in larger linguistic units such as phrases and sentences still poses significant challenges to learners who have made progress in isolated syllables. This study explored the effects of production training using auditory and visual input for learning Mandarin tones in larger linguistic units at phrase and sentence levels. TRAINING AND L2 SPEECH LEARNING Previous research has shown that intensive laboratory based training is effective in modifying adult speakers’ L2 speech perception and production in both segmental and suprasegmental aspects of spoken language (Bradlow et al., 1997; Flege et al., 2004; Hardison, 2003, 2004; Jamieson & Morosan, 1989, 1992; Kingston, 2003; Lively et al., 1993, 1994; Logan et al., 1991, 1993; Logan & Pruitt, 1995; Wang & Munro, 2004). Training studies on L2 segments have shown that after weeks of perception training, trainees improved significantly in perceptual accuracy of target L2 consonant contrasts (Jamieson & Morosan, 1986, 1989; Lively et al., 1993, 1994) and L2 vowel contrasts (Wang & Munro, 1999, 2004). Perceptual learning also transferred to production (better production of the target contrast) without undergoing any training in production (Bradlow et al., 1997). Though still very limited, perceptual training for learning L2 lexical tones has also been reported (Wang, 2008; Wang et al., 1999, 2003; Wayland & Guion, 2003, 2004). For example, Wang et al. (1999) used natural stimuli produced by multiple Mandarin speakers to train native English listeners on Mandarin lexical tones. The trainees’ identification scores increased significantly after two weeks of training. Perceptual learning also spread to the production mode without training in production (Wang et al., 2003). Recent studies on tones also compared the influence of the learners’ L1 prosodic background (So, 2005, So & Best, 2010), or the effectiveness of different training procedures (such as auditory input only versus auditory and visual input), on learning lexical tones (Wang, 2008). Previous studies have also developed and advanced different training methodologies. In terms of training stimuli, some studies evaluated the impact of training using synthesized stimuli (Strange & Dittmann, 1984; Wang & Munro, 1999), and tested whether learning with synthesized tokens transferred to natural speech (Jamieson & Morosan, 1986, 1989; Rochet, 1995). Other studies used naturally produced stimuli by multiple speakers, the High Variability Paradigm (Logan et al., 1991, 1993), and a combination of synthesized and natural stimuli (Wang, 2002; Wang & Munro, 2004). With regard to training procedures, some studies tested the use of discrimination training tasks such as requiring the trainees to tell whether the first sounds are the same or different when hearing two stimuli such as “right” and “light” (Strange & Dittmann, 1984; Wayland & Guion, 2003, 2004). Other studies used forced choice identification tasks such as requiring listeners to choose between /l/ and /r/ when hearing a single stimulus such as “right” (Jamieson & Rvachew, 1992; Logan & Pruitt, 1995). Still other studies evaluated a “fading technique” in which the key phonetic/acoustic features that distinguish the target contrasts such as the English /ɵ/-/ ð/ contrast (Jamieson & Morosan 1986, 1989) or English tense and lax vowel pairs /i/-/I/, /u/-/℧/, and /ε/-/æ/ (Wang, 2002) were expanded and contracted along a synthetic continuum to direct learners’ attention to the most relevant acoustic cues of the target phonetic contrasts for category formation. Regarding types of input, most training studies involved perceptual training with auditory input only. By comparison, production training studies on L2 speech learning are still limited. One production training study on lexical tones (Leather, 1990, 1997) tested whether visual input of pitch contour change only without auditory input was sufficient to learn nonnative lexical tones. Though effective, 12 more pages are available in the full version of this document, which may be purchased using the "Add to Cart" button on the product's webpage: www.igi-global.com/article/auditory-visual-training-mandarintones/67123?camid=4v1 This title is available in InfoSci-Journals, InfoSci-Journal Disciplines Library Science, Information Studies, and Education. Recommend this product to your librarian: www.igi-global.com/e-resources/libraryrecommendation/?id=2