The effect of prosodic intervention on incidental L2 phrase learning Shusaku KIDA (Doshisha University) Kazuhito YAMATO (Kansai University) Takamichi ISODA (Ryukoku University) 1 RELC 59th International Conference 18/03/2025 Room 506/507/508 14:55〜15:25

Acknowledgment 2 •This study is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP22K00761. slides •This slide (pdf format) is available from the QR code →

Outline of the presentation 3 Purpose The purpose of this presentation is to investigate the effect of prosodic intervention on incidental L2 phrase learning through a reading-aloud task. Twenty four university students participated in this experiment and engaged in two different tasks. One task is to read a phrase as naturally as possible, and the other is to pay attention to rhythm while reading a phrase. Outline 1. Introduction 2. Previous studies: Importance of being integrated 3. Classroom practice 4. Experimental study 5. Discussion and Implications

1. Introduction 4

1. Introduction • Communication in English involves the integration of various types of knowledge and skills. • Authors argues the importance of integration of prosody instruction with various types of knowledge and skills. • In the current study, firstly, Prof. Isoda (3rd author) will report on the classroom practice aiming at integrating prosody instruction with vocabulary knowledge and will raise some issues from the results. • Secondly, Prof. Kida (1st author) set up an experiment based on the issue raised from the classroom practice and will report the results drawing some pedagogical implications. 5

2. Previous Studies: Importance of being integrated 6

2.1 Vocabulary Instruction • Research on vocabulary instruction and learning: • 2 approaches § breath: teaching the form (spelling and pronunciation) and meaning of individual words § depth: teaching various aspects of vocabulary such as word associations, collocations, and registers (Nation, 2013) • Emphasis not only on the “breadth” but also on the “depth” of vocabulary knowledge (Hatch & Brown, 1995; Nation, 2001, 2013; Schmitt, 2010） 7

2.1 Vocabulary Instruction • Research on vocabulary instruction and learning: • Integrating four skills activities promotes further learning and depth of previously learned words and phrases (Schmitt & Schmitt, 2020)\ • introducing word combinations (phrasal verbs, collocations, idioms) is necessary (Kasahara, 2011; Lewis, 2002) • contextual learning/repetition in different contexts (Schmitt & Schmitt, 2020; Toomer et al., 2024; Suzuki et al., 2022) 8

2.2 Integration of Pronunciation and Vocabulary Instruction • “Pronunciation, perhaps receiving the least attention in vocabulary research, is also one of the important aspects of speaking proficiency (Uchihara, 2021, p.122).” • Integrating pronunciation instruction into the teaching of other skills: • Celce-Murcia et al. (2010) “teachers must balance the needs of their students within a somewhat fixed curriculum. If this is the case, pronunciation is not always explicitly included even in a speaking course, and teachers need to find ways to integrate pronunciation into existing curriculum and textbook materials (p.281).” • Sicola & Darcy (2015) “Making pronunciation targets an inherent part of every lesson could represent an effective solution to carryover and automaticity issues (p.427).” • Communicative framework for teaching pronunciation (Celce-Murcia et al., 2010) 9

2.2 Integration of Pronunciation and Vocabulary Instruction • Integrating pronunciation instruction with vocabulary: • Learning multi-layered vocab knowledge such as word stress and collocations • “learners tend to ignore stress patterns when they learn vocabulary. … After all, if learners have failed to learn the stress pattern for a new word, they may also fail to recognize that word when it occurs in spoken form (Gilbert, 2008, p.6)” • Collocation, co-text, words combinations (Lewis, 2002; Webb & Nation, 2017; Schmitt & Schmitt, 2020) 10

2.3 Summary & issues • Reconfirming the importance of the integration of prosody instruction with vocabulary knowledge, o we first attempted to teach English vocabulary in phrases with attention to prosody in the classroom; o we then set up an experiment based on the issue raised from the classroom practice; o we finally will draw some pedagogical implications from the results. 11

3. Classroom Practice 12

3.1 Instructional Procedure • Objectives: integrating English prosody with the depth of vocabulary knowledge • Participants: Required English class for 1st year university students (instructor 2nd author) • Activities: introducing vocabulary in phrases, reading aloud with attention to rhythm, retelling • 12 Weeks of teaching practice based on previous studies 13

3.1 Instructional Procedure • Material: Self-created material based on a certain amount of English passage (ALC, 2008) • Procedure: One unit every two weeks • Week 3-4: prosody instruction provided • Week 5-6: prosody instruction provided • Week 7-8: no prosody instruction • Week 9-10: no prosody instruction • Week 11-12: prosody instruction provided 14

3.1 Instructional Procedure • Procedure: • 1st Week (yellow involves prosody instruction) • comprehension task (guessing blanks) • searching key phrases in the passage • explanation on vocab/gram, reading aloud • pair work (practicing key phrases) • 2nd Week (orange involves achievement test) • reviewing key phrases (Japanese → English) • reading aloud; retelling activity 15

• Worksheet and test sheet 16

3.2 Results & Issues • The intervention phase (with prosody instruction) shows a higher average number and percentage of correct words. • With prosody instruction, the goal becomes clear, allowing learners to adjust their actions toward it and increasing the amount of practice, while in the non- intervention phase, the method for memorization is unclear, resulting in less effective practice. 17

3.2 Results & Issues • Issues • From this practice, prosody instruction works. • Reading aloud key phrases rhythmically, i.e. paying attention to prosody, would enforce learners’ memory of vocabulary items. • What’s behind? • An experimental study using an incidental learning paradigm is the next step: simple reading aloud vs. reading aloud rhythmically. 18

4. Experimental Study 19

4.1 RQs • Research Question • Do Japanese EFL learners remember target phrases better in rhythmically-read-aloud condition than in simple-read-aloud condition? 20

4.2 Methodology (overview) • Participants: 24 university students • Materials: 26 target phrases used in the classroom practice • Procedure: Participants simply read aloud and rhythmically read aloud the target phrases. They completed a surprise vocabulary test. 21

4.2 Methodology • Participants: 24 university students Mean SD Minimum Maximam Age 20.39 0.87 19 23 Listening 3.57 1.25 1 6 Speaking 3.17 1.24 2 6 Reading 3.83 1.13 2 6 Writing 3.13 1.15 1 5 Vocabulary 3.57 1.10 2 5 Grammar 3.39 1.09 1 5 Pronunciation 3.74 1.26 2 6 Beginning Age 9.78 3.24 1 13 Years of Formal Instruction 4.96 2.97 1 10 22

4.2 Methodology • Number of words o clean up your room (4) • Length (number of letters) o clean (5) up (2) your (4) room (4) o (3.75 = 15/4) • Frequency o Clean (121.24) up (3,670.00) your (6,445.39) room (439.1) o (2669.035 = 10,726.63 / 4) Number Length Frequency Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Phrase 01 - 13 4.62 1.50 4.38 0.96 7891.00 6879.66 Phrase 14 - 26 4.69 1.20 4.35 1.25 7000.84 4025.13 23

4.2 Methodology • Design: 4 counter-balanced conditions • Post-test: o L1 translations --> L2 phrases Condition 1 Phrase 01 – 13: Rhythm Phrase 14 – 26: Simple Condition 2 Phrase 01 – 13: Simple Phrase 14 – 26: Rhythm Condition 3 Phrase 14 – 26: Rhythm Phrase 01 –13: Simple Condition 4 Phrase 14 – 26: Simple Phrase 01 – 13: Rhythm 24

4.2 Methodology • Simple read aloud: “Please read aloud each phrase as naturally as possible, as you would normally read English.” 25

4.2 Methodology • Rhythmically read aloud: “Please read aloud each phrase, paying attention to the rhythm so that the bolded parts of the presented English are read aloud with even timing.” 26

4.3 Data Analysis & Results • Data analysis: the average number of words correctly retrieved and the percentages o e.g., “clean up your room” § clean up your room: 4 (100%) § clean up room: 3 (75%) § crean room: 2 (50%) § : 0 (0%) 27

4.3 Data Analysis & Results • simple read-aloud > rhythmically read-aloud • Paying attention to prosodic features while reading aloud impedes learners’ later retrieval of phrases. 28

5. Discussion & Implication 29

5.1 Discussion: RQ1 • RQ • Do Japanese EFL learners remember target phrases better in rhythmically-read-aloud condition than in simple-read-aloud condition? 30

5.1 Discussion: RQ1 • No, but this contradicts the results of classroom practice. Why? • Rhythmically-read-aloud alone does NOT work. • Other factors in classroom practice are the key. Teaching practice Experiment 31

5.2 Implications from these results • The results of the experiment illustrate that paying attention to prosodic features while learners read aloud the target phrases places an extra burden on them. • Combining with the results from the classroom practice, these results indicate that an explicit instruction in prosodic features is beneficial. 32

5.2 Implications from these results • To extend this interpretation to Celce- Murcia et al. (2010)’s “communicative framework of pronunciation teaching”, it can be argued that both “guided practice” and “communicative practice” require learners to be well-equipped with knowledge of prosodic features. 33

•Communicative Framework for pronunciation teaching (Celce-Murcia et al, 2020) 34 1 Description and Analysis oral and written illustrations of how the feature is produced and when it occurs within spoken discourse 2 Listening Discrimination focused listening practice with feedback on learners' ability to correctly discriminate the feature 3 Controlled Practice oral reading of minimal-pair sentences, short dialogues, etc., with special attention paid to the highlighted feature in order to raise learner consciousness 4 Guided Practice structured communication exercises, such as information-gap activities or cued dialogues, that enable the learner to monitor for the specified feature 5 Communicative Practice less structured, fluency-building activities (e.g., role play, problem solving) that require the learner to attend to both form and content of the utterances

5.2 Implications from these results • In order to implement guided practice and communicative practice, implicit instruction presupposes the explicit explanation of prosodic knowledge. • In the guided practice and communicative practice phases, learners focus on both form and content of their utterances. For these activities to be effective, they should first receive explicit instruction on prosodic features. • In other words, teachers need to take systematic approach to match with learners’ developmental stage in prosody. 35

36 Kida, S., Yamato, K., & Isoda, T. (2025). The effect of prosodic intervention on incidental L2 phrase learning. The pdf file of this slide is from the link below or QR code! https://bit.ly/KYI_RELC2025 • Classroom practice has shown that prosody instruction improves vocabulary retention. • However, the experimental study using an incidental learning paradigm revealed that merely focusing on prosody can be counterproductive. • This implies that either learners must develop an integrated understanding of vocabulary and prosodic features, or prosody must be explicitly taught alongside vocabulary. Take-home messages

37 Reference w ΞϧΫग़൛ฤू෦ʢฤʣʢʣʰڀۃͷӳޠϦεχϯάWPMʱΞϧΫ • Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (2005). Teaching pronunciation: A course book and reference guide (2nd Ed.). Cambridge University Press. • Gilbert, J. B. (2008). Teaching pronunciation: Using the prosody pyramid. NY: Cambridge University Press. • Grant, L. (Ed.). (2014). Pronunciation myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MH: University of Michigan Press. • Hatch, E., & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. Cambridge University Press. • Kasahara, K. (2011). The effect of known-and-unknown word combinations on intentional vocabulary learning. System, 39, 491-499. • Jones, T. (Ed.). (2016). Pronunciation in the classroom: The overlooked essential. TESOL Press.

38 Reference • Lewis, M. (2002). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Thomson-Heinle. • Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. • Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan. • Schmitt, N & Schmitt, D (2020). Vocabulary in language teaching (2nd ed). Cambridge University Press. • Suzuki, Y., Eguchi, M., & De Jong, N. (2022). Does the reuse of constructions promote fluency development in task repetition? A usage-based perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 56(4), 1290-1319.

39 Reference • Toomer, M., Elgort, I., & Coxhead, A. (2024). Contextual learning of L2 lexical and grammatical collocations with and without typographic enhancement. System, 121, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103235. • Thomson, I., & Derwing, T. M. (2014). Effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 326-344. • Uchihara, T. (2021). Vocabulary and speaking – current research, tools, and practices. In J. Clenton & P. Booth (Eds.), Vocabulary and the four skills: Pedagogy, practice, and implications for teaching vocabulary (pp. 121–125). New York, NY: Routledge. • Webb, S. & Nation, P. (2017). How vocabulary is learned. Oxford University Press. w େ࿨஌࢙ɾүాوಓ ʰϓϩισΟΛॏࢹͨ͠ӳޠԻ੠ࢦಋೖ໳ɿࢦ ಋͷ࿮૊ͱڭՊॻͷ׆༻๏ʱᕡਫࣾ