Cover not available
Part of
Learner Corpora and Language Teaching
Edited by Sandra Götz and Joybrato Mukherjee
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 92] 2019
► pp. 191–217

English intonation of advanced learners

A contrastive interlanguage analysis

| Justus Liebig University Giessen
Adopting a corpus-based approach within the autosegmental-framework, this paper reports on a study on L2 learners’ intonational deviances of edge tones within intonational units in spontaneous speech in monologues and dialogues derived from a “Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis” (CIA) (cf. Granger 1996, 2015). The analysis reveals that German, Spanish, and British speakers of English deviate from each other in their intonational phrasing and pitch heights in utterance-final and -medial position. The learners break their utterances into considerably more intonation phrases (IP) and intermediate phrases (ip) than native-speakers. While the British native-speakers (n = 10) mainly stick to the usage of falls within IPs and ips, the German learners (n = 10) frequently use rising tones and the Spanish learners (n = 10) frequently use falling tones.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Prosody and learner corpus linguistics
    • 2.1The form of intonation
    • 2.2Previous research on L2 prosody
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Corpus data
    • 3.2The learner profiles
    • 3.3Linguistic and non-linguistic variables
    • 3.4Prosodic annotation of the corpora
    • 3.5Statistical tests
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 6 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.92.10pug
References (94)
References
Aguilar, Lourdes, de-la-Mota, Carme & Prieto, Pilar. 2015. Sp_ToBI. Training material: Boundary tones. <[URL]> (20 August 2015).
Altenberg, Bengt. 1987. Prosodic Patterns in Spoken English: Studies in the Correlation between Prosody and Grammar for Text-to-speech Conversation. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Backman, Nancy. 1979. Intonation errors in second-language pronunciation of eight Spanish-speaking adults learning English. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 4: 239–265.Google Scholar
Barron, Anne. 2002. Acquisition in Interlanguage Pragmatics: Learning how to Do Things with Words in a Study Abroad Context [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 108]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckman, Mary E. & Ayers Elam, Gayle. 1997. Guidelines for ToBI Labelling, version 3. The Ohio State University Research Foundation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Beckman, Mary E. & Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1986. Intonational structure in English and Japanese. Phonology Yearbook 3: 255–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, Silvia. 2004. Corpora in the classroom: an overview and some reflections on future developments. In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 12], John Sinclair (ed.), 15–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Best, Catherine T. 1995. A direct-realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Winifred Strange (ed.), 171–204. Timonium MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2015. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. (Version: 5.3.69). [Computer Software]. <[URL]> (15 March 2015).
Brand, Christiane & Kämmerer, Susanne. 2006. The Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage (LINDSEI): Compiling the German component. In Corpus Technology and Language Pedagogy. New Resources, New Tools, New Methods, Sabine Braun, Kurt Kohn & Joybrato Mukherjee (eds), 127–140. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Brown, Gillian. 1977. Listening to Spoken English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Canepàri, Luciano. 2010. The Pronunciation of English around the World: Geo-Social Applications of the Natural Phonetics & Tonetics Method. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
. 2005. A Handbook of Phonetics. Natural Phonetics: Articulatory, Auditory & Functional. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1987. Cognitive constraints on information flow. In Coherence and Grounding in Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 11], Russell S. Tomlin (ed.), 21–51. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cucchiarini, Catia, Strik, Helmer & Boves, Lou. 2002. Quantitative assessment of second language learners’ fluency: Comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111 (6): 2862–2873. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cock, Sylvie. 2004. Preferred sequences of words in NS and NNS speech. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures (BELL) New Series 2: 225–246.Google Scholar
Diáz-Campos, Manuel. 2004. Context of learning in the acquisition of Spanish second language phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26(2): 249–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Draxler, Christoph. 2008. Korpusbasierte Sprachverarbeitung: Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Esser, Jürgen. 1992. Englische Prosodie: Eine Einführung, 3rd edn. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
. 1978. Contrastive intonation of German and English. Phonetica 35: 41–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, James E. 1995. Second language speech learning: Theory, findings and problems. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues, Winifred Strange (ed.), 233–277. Timonium MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Fox, Anthony. 1984. German Intonation: An Outline. Oxford. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Fall-rise intonations in German and English. In Contrastive aspects of English and German, Charles V. J. Russ (ed.), 55–72. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar
Freed, Barbara F. 1995. What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In Second Language Acquisition in a Study Abroad Context [Studies in Bilingualism 9], Barbara F. Freed (ed.), 123–148. Philadelphia PA: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, Christoph, Meisenburg, Trudel & Selig, Maria. 2013. Spanisch: Phonetik und Phonologie. Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, De Cock, Sylvie & Granger, Sylviane (eds). 2010. LINDSEI: Louvain International Database of Spoken English Interlanguage, handbook and CD-ROM. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Götz, Dieter. 1986. Intonation an der Hochschule. Die Neuen Sprachen 85 (5–6): 465–477.Google Scholar
Götz, Sandra & Mukherjee Joybrato. 2018. The effect of the study abroad variable in spoken learner language: A pseudo-longitudinal study on spoken German learner English. In Learner Corpus Research: New Perspectives and Applications, Vaclav Brezina & Lynne Flowerdew (eds), 47–65. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Grabe, Esther. 1998. Comparative Intonational Phonology: English and German. Proceedings of the ESCA Workshop on Intonation: Theory, Models, and Applications. Athens, Greece, 157–160.Google Scholar
Grabe, Esther, Post, Brechtje, Nolan, Francis & Farrar, Kimberley. 2000. Pitch accent realization in four varieties of British English. Journal of Phonetics 28: 161–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, Sylviane. 1996. From CA to CIA and back: An integrated approach to computerized bilingual and learner corpora. In Languages in Contrast: Text-Based Cross-Linguistic Studies, Karin Aijmer, Bengt Altenberg & Mats Johansson (eds), 37–51. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
. 2015. Contrastive interlanguage analysis: A reappraisal. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 1(1): 7–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, Dagneaux Estelle & Meunier, Fanny. 2002. International Corpus of Learner English. Louvain: UCL.Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, Dagneaux, Estelle, Meunier, Fanny & Paquot, Magali. (eds). 2009. International Corpus of Learner English, Version 2, handbook + CD-ROM. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine & Bauman, Stefan. 2007. An introduction to intonation – Functions and models. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 25–51. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan T. 2009. Statistics for Linguistics with R. Trends in Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grover, Cynthia, Jamieson, Donald G. & Dobrovolsky, Michael B. 1987. Intonation in English, French and German: Perception and production. Language and Speech 30: 277–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gut, Ulrike. 2010. The LeaP corpus. A phonetically annotated corpus of non-native speech. <[URL]> (10 August 2015).
. 2009. Non-Native Speech: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Phonological and Phonetic Properties of L2 English and German. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Learner corpora in second language prosody research and teaching. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 145–167. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gut, Ulrike, Trouvain, Jürgen & Barry, William J. 2007. Bridging research on phonetic descriptions with knowledge from teaching practice – The case of prosody in non-native speech. In Non-Native Prosody, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 3–21. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirschfeld, Ulla & Trouvain, Jürgen. 2007. Teaching prosody in German as foreign language. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 171–187. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hirschfeld, Ulla. 2003. Phonologie und Phonetik in Deutsch als Fremdsprache. In Deutsch als Fremdsprache: Wissenschaftsanspruch – Teilbereiche – Bezugsdisziplinen, Claus Altmayer & Roland Forster (eds), 189–233. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hirst, Daniel, De Looze, Céline, Auran, Cyril, & Bouzon, Caroline. 2010. Aix-MARSEC database. <[URL]> (12 January 2016).
Hothorn, Torsten & Zeileis, Achim. 2015. partykit: A Modular Toolkit for Recursive Partytioning in R. Journal of Machine Learning Research 16: 3905–3909. <[URL]> (12 January 2016).
Hothorn, Torsten, Hornik, Kurt & Zeileis, Achim. 2006. Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15(3): 651–674. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hualde, José I. 2005. The Sounds of Spanish. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2002. Intonation in Spanish and the other Ibero-Romance Languages: Overview and Status Quaestionis. In Romance Phonology and Variation [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 217], Caroline Wiltshire & Joaquim Camps (eds), 101–115. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenner, Bryan R. A. 1976. Interlanguage and foreign accent. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 1: 166–195.Google Scholar
Jilka, Matthias. 2007. Different manifestations and perceptions of foreign accent in intonation. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 77–96. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2000. The Contribution of Intonation to the Perception of Foreign Accent. PhD dissertation, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Johns, Tim. 1994. From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. In Perspectives on Pedagogical Grammar, Terence Odlin (ed.), 27–45. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele. 1981. Pragmatische Aspekte in der Interimsprache. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Keller-Cohen, Deborah. 1979. Systematicity and variation in the non-native child’s acquisition of conversational skills. Language Learning 29: 27–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang & Perdue, Clive. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research 13: 301–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics across Cultures. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lafford, Barbara A. 2004. The effect of the context of learning on the use of communication strategies by learners of Spanish as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26(2): 201–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1997. Teaching and language corpora: A convergence. In Teaching and Language Corpora, Anne Wichmann, Steven Fligelstone, Tony McEnery & Gerald Knowles (eds), 1–23. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Li, Aike & Post, Brechtje. 2014. L2 Acquisition of prosodic properties of speech rhythm – Evidence from L1 Mandarin and German Learners of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36(2): 223–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loveday, Leo J. 1982. The Sociolinguistics of Learning and Using a Non-Native Language. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Mehlhorn, Grit. 2007. Individual pronunciation coaching and prosody. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 211–236. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mennen, Ineke & de Leeuw, Esther. 2014. Beyond segments: Prosody in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36: 183–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mennen, Ineke. 2007. Phonological and phonetic influences in non-native intonation. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 53–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2004. Bi-directional interference in the intonation of Dutch speakers of Greek. Journal of Phonetics 32: 543–563. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mennen, Ineke, Schaeffler, Felix & Dickie, Catherine. 2014. Second language acquisition of pitch range in German learners of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36: 303–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Missaglia, Federica. 2007. Prosodic training for adult Italian learners of German: The Contrastive Prosody Method. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürgen Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 237–258. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mora, Joan C. & Valls-Ferrer, Margalida. 2012. Oral fluency, accuracy, and complexity in formal instruction and study abroad learning contexts. TESOL Quarterly 46(4): 610–41.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2001. Form und Funktion prosodisch-syntaktischer Präsentationsstrukturen im gesprochenen Englisch. PhD dissertation, University of Bonn.Google Scholar
. 2002. Korpuslinguistik und Englischunterricht: Eine Einführung. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2009. Anglistische Korpuslinguistik: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Schmidt.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1992. Intonation and discourse type. Text 12: 397–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 1989. Language transfer: cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Paredes, Pascual. 2010. The death of the adverb revisited: Attested uses of adverbs in native and non-native comparable corpora of spoken English. In Exploring New Paths in Language Pedagogy. Lexis and Corpus-Based Language Teaching, Maria Moreno Jaén, Fernando Serrano Valverde & Maria Calzada Pérez (eds), 157–172. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Pickering, Lucy. 2004. The structure and function of intonational paragraphs in native and nonnative speaker instructional discourse. English for Specific Purposes 23: 19–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1980. The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Puga, Karin. In progress. English Prosody of Advanced Learners: A Contrastive Interlanguage Analysis with Language-pedagogical Implications. PhD dissertation, University of Giessen.
Pürschel, Heiner. 1975. Pause und Kadenz: Interferenzerscheinungen bei der englischen Intonation deutscher Sprecher. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Version 3.2.3 <[URL]> (5 January 2016).
Raith, Joachim. 1986. Prosodie: Englisch als Fremdsprache, Deutsch als Basissprache. Die Neueren Sprachen 85: 478–496.Google Scholar
Ramírez Verdugo, Dolores. 2002. Non-native interlanguage intonation systems: A study based on a computerized corpus of Spanish learners of English. ICAME Journal 26: 115–132.Google Scholar
Roach, Peter J. 2009 [1991]. English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Rogers, Henry. 2000. The Sounds of Language: An Introduction to Phonetics. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Rüdiger, Sofia. 2016. Cuppa coffee? Challenges and opportunities of compiling a conversational English corpus in an Expanding Circle setting. In Selected Contributions from the Methods and Linguistic Theories Symposium A Blend of MaLT 2015, Hanna Christ, Daniel Klenovšak, Lukas Sönning & Valentin Werner (eds), 49–71. Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press.Google Scholar
Scuffil, Michael. 1982. Experiments in Comparative Intonation: A Case-Study of English and German. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverman, Kim, Beckman, Mary E., Pitrelli, John F., Ostendorf, Maria, Wightman, Colin, Price, Patti, Pierrehumbert, Janet & Hirschberg, Julia. 1992. ToBI: A standard scheme for labeling prosody. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Banff, 867–879.Google Scholar
Svartvik, Jan (ed.). 1990. The London Corpus of Spoken English: Description and Research [Lund Studies in English 82]. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Towell, Richard. 2002. Relative degrees of fluency. A comparative case study of advanced learners of French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 40(2): 117–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, Pavel & Baker, Wendy. 2007. Learning prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech: The effect of experience on child learners’ acquisition of five suprasegmentals. Applied Psycholinguistics 28: 251–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Els, Theo & de Bot, Kees. 1987. The role of intonation in foreign accent. Modern Language journal 71: 147–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wells, John C. 2006. English Intonation: An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Willems, Nico. 1982. English Intonation from a Dutch Point of View. Ambach: Intercontinental Graphics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa. 1976. Speech events and natural speech: Some implications for sociolinguistic methodology. Language in Society 5(2): 189–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wrembel, Magdalena. 2007. Metacompetence-based approach to the teaching of L2 prosody: practical implications. In Non-Native Prosody – Phonetic Description and Teaching Practice, Jürge Trouvain & Ulrike Gut (eds), 189–209. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.