The essential question is how to use that resource systematically, especially so that those learners who are less "haptic" in nature are also "moved" by the method. Most language instructors intuitively use a great deal of movement and tactile anchoring in the classroom. In theory, the underlying principles can be applied to teaching the sound system of any language. Using Kachru's "Inner, expanding and outer circles" model to characterize the breadth of Englishes and speakers of those, HIPoeces (now HICP) systems focus on developing haptically-centered pedagogical models and methods which can be adapted for teaching the pronunciation of various Englishes as they are spoken and taught by "owners" of those varieties. This blog was formerly named: HIPoeces (pronounced 'hI-pƏ-cIs), basically an approach to teaching English pronunciation to speakers of "outer and expanding" circle Englishes (including that population commonly termed: non-native speakers) but also compatible with the use of local models other than simply Standard" American" or RP. Gesture-enhanced recasts have limited effects: A case of the regular past tense, Language Teaching Research (11)1-29. What then is the "right" embodied and contextualized way to use gesture in teaching? Thought you were never going to ask! See Part 2, The right (haptic) way to use gesture in (at least) pronunciation teaching.
Something of a “How not to” guide of sorts. This is an important study, however, in that it represents quite accurately, I think, the way in which many researchers and practitioners view the place of gesture in language teaching, or even human communication for that matter: "add ons" that can be understood out of context and disembodied (not demanding a corresponding physical response in the body and mind of the other-the learner, as if gesture can be understood independent of the meaningful interaction in which it occurs.) So, "pointing out" a basically ineffectual recast with a disembodied gesture is supposed to make it more effective? It didn't. The research on the use of simple recasts, as Nakatsukasa points out, is pretty clear that they are, for the most part, not worth wasting your time on. Not requiring at least some minimal "embodied" verbal response to such a gesture seems about as disembodying as you can get! Apparently, it was. Present study, to keep the flow of interaction and the saliency of feedback as equal as Modify their output however, production of modified output was not enforced in the "In all the instances, learners had the opportunity to How could you provide anything close to effective, meaningful feedback without stressing the part of the defective sentence or phrase that is being corrected? Researcher tried not to stress any part of the recast in either condition to keep consistency." Now, does that (standing motionless w/hands at sides) sound like anything close to natural teacher behavior/gesture? Really? I have got to see a video of that! In fact, I’d really have to see a video of everything that went on, to make sense of the study. "For the VR condition (verbal recast w/o gesture), the researcher provided recast only verbally, putting her hands down next to the side of her body to avoid gesturing." Now that, in principle, sounds like a pretty good signalling technique, one which I have seen used "repeatedly" over the years by teachers (Hudson, 2011). The researcher consistently provided recasts with or without gestures (pointing back over shoulder with thumb) immediately following the participants’ utterances, depending on learners’ assigned conditions." Your browser does not support the audio element."When the participants did not use the past tense in the obligatory context in two tasks, Ü – make the sound “ee” and then purse your lips as if you are whistling ĮR - w ih n ER - w ih n hurt win it no What does this mean?.Ö – make the sound “ê” and purse your lips into an O shape.Ä – make the sound “eh” or “ê” without gliding into the sound “ey”.How is Ö pronounced? In summary, the three German umlauts are pronounced as follows:
If one particle interacts with another, it has been "observed". The cat is not in a super-position of live-dead just because the decay (or absence of a decay) hasn't been observed by a human. Schrodinger's cat is a flawed thought experiment. THURSDAY, Ma- It has spread across the globe in just a few short months, sickening hundreds of thousands, but the new coronavirus has the dubious distinction of not really being a living organism, biologists say.Ī Cat Without a State Schrödinger was pointing out that if that particle were in a state of superposition, simultaneously decaying and not decaying as long as no one looked, the cat would be both dead and alive until someone opened the box. Coronavirus Isn't Even 'Alive,' But Expert Explains How It Can Harm.