Foreign Accent, Comprehensibility, and Intelligibility in the Speech of Second Language Learners

One of the chief goals of most second language learners is to be understood in their second language by a wide range of interlocutors in a variety of contexts. Although a nonnative accent can sometimes interfere with this goal, prior to the publication of this study, second language researchers and teachers alike were aware that an accent itself does not necessarily act as a communicative barrier. Nonetheless, there had been very little empirical investigation of how the presence of a nonnative accent affects intelligibility, and the notions of “heavy accent” and “low intelligibility” had often been confounded. Some of the key findings of the study—that even heavily accented speech is sometimes perfectly intelligible and that prosodic errors appear to be a more potent force in the loss of intelligibility than phonetic errors—added support to some common, but weakly substantiated beliefs. The study also provided a framework for a program of research to evaluate the ways in which such factors as intelligibility and comprehensibility are related to a number of other dimensions. The authors have extended and replicated the work begun in this study to include learners representing other L1 backgrounds (Cantonese, Japanese, Polish, Spanish) and different levels of learner proficiency, as well as other discourse types (Derwing & Munro, 1997; Munro & Derwing, 1995). Further support for the notion that accent itself should be regarded as a secondary concern was obtained in a study of processing difficulty (Munro & Derwing, 1995), which revealed that nonnative utterances tend to require more time to process than native-produced speech, but failed to indicate a relationship between strength of accent and processing time. The approach to L2 speech evaluation used in this study has also proved useful in investigations of the benefits of different methods of teaching of pronunciation to ESL learners. In particular, it is now clear that learner assessments are best carried out with attention to the multidimensional nature of L2 speech, rather than with a simple focus on global accentedness. It has been shown, for instance, that some pedagogical methods may be effective in improving intelligibility while others may have an effect only on accentedness (Derwing, Munro, & Wiebe,1998).

[1]  S. Fillenbaum,et al.  Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[2]  W. Lambert,et al.  Evaluational reactions to accented English speech. , 1962, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[3]  H. Lane.  Foreign Accent and Speech Distortion , 1962 .

[4]  W. Lambert,et al.  EVALUATIONAL REACTIONS OF BILINGUAL AND MONOLINGUAL CHILDREN TO SPOKEN LANGUAGES. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[5]  Dean Brodkey,et al.  DICTATION AS A MEASURE OF MUTUAL INTELLIGIBILITY: A PILOT STUDY , 1972 .

[6]  Ellen Bouchard Ryan,et al.  Evaluative reactions of adolescents toward speakers of standard English and Mexican American accented English. , 1975 .

[7]  Robert L. Politzer,et al.  Errors of English Speakers of German As Perceived and Evaluated by German Natives , 1978 .

[8]  Studies of error gravity: Native reactions to errors produced by Swedish learners of English , 1978 .

[9]  Rudolf Kalin,et al.  Discrimination in Evaluative Judgments against Foreign-Accented Job Candidates , 1978 .

[10]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  Birgit Henriksen,et al.  NATIVE SPEAKER REACTIONS TO LEARNERS' SPOKEN INTERLANGUAGE 1 , 1980 .

[12]  Kenneth Chastain.  Native Speaker Reaction to Instructor-Identified Student Second-Language Errors. , 1980 .

[13]  Stephen Krashen,et al.  Research in Second Language Acquisition: Selected Papers of the Los Angeles Second Language Acquisition Research Forum. Issues In Second Language Research. , 1982 .

[14]  Eileen M. Brennan,et al.  Measurements of accent and attitude toward Mexican-American speech , 1981 .

[15]  E. Brennan,et al.  Accent Scaling and Language Attitudes: Reactions to Mexican American English Speech , 1981 .

[16]  Kathleen Y. Ensz.  French Attitudes toward Typical Speech Errors of American Speakers of French. , 1982 .

[17]  S. Gass,et al.  The comprehensibility of non-native speech , 1982, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[18]  Evangeline Marlos Varonis,et al.  The Effect Of Familiarity On The Comprehensibility Of Nonnative Speech , 1984 .

[19]  Comprehension, Irritation and Error Hierarchies , 1985 .

[20]  Joan M. Fayer,et al.  Native and Nonnative Judgments of Intelligibility and Irritation , 1987 .

[21]  M. Pennington,et al.  Comments on Martha C. Pennington and Jack C. Richards's "Pronunciation Revisited". The Authors Respond , 1987 .

[22]  Jenny Cheshire,et al.  English around the world : sociolinguistic perspectives , 1991 .

[23]  J. Morley.  The Pronunciation Component in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages , 1991 .

[24]  Charlene J. Sato.  English around the world: Sociolinguistic variation and language attitudes in Hawaii , 1991 .

[25]  Karen Earline Schairer.  Native Speaker Reaction to Non-Native Speech. , 1992 .

[26]  K. Koehler,et al.  The Relationship Between Native Speaker Judgments of Nonnative Pronunciation and Deviance in Segmentais, Prosody, and Syllable Structure , 1992 .

[27]  C. Koster,et al.  The Evaluation of Accent in the English of Dutchmen , 1993 .

[28]  J. Bochner,et al.  Rating Deaf Speakers’ Comprehensibility , 1993 .

[29]  Tracey M. Derwing,et al.  Evaluations of foreign accent in extemporaneous and read material , 1994 .

[30]  George Yule,et al.  Attempts to Improve English L2 Pronunciation: The Variable Effects of Different Types of Instruction , 1994 .

[31]  Tracey M. Derwing,et al.  Processing Time, Accent, and Comprehensibility in the Perception of Native and Foreign-Accented Speech , 1995, Language and speech.