CONFLUENCE
24 -25 February 2012
The need to teach the Comprehension of Spoken English
Dr. S.B. Urhekar
Associate Professor and Head Department of English
Samarth Mahavidyalay, Lakhani, Distt. Bhandara. 441804 (M.S.)
Abstract
Due to most available English Language Teaching courses and with the development of oral
fluency, it has been easy to assume that the teaching of spoken English naturally developed the learners
listening competence. The assumption is not warranted, partly because of the lack of identity between the
slow formal delivery of the pronunciation drill and the wide range of pronunciation styles encountered by
native listeners to English language speaker, and partly because of the emphasis on mastery of the
phonological code has been of the expanse of relating auditory signals to the message structure of the
discourse. If we take with this the usual practice of transferring to listening exercises the kind of post hoc
question appropriate for reading comprehension rather than questions designed to move the students
towards hearing what he expects, not what has been said, it becomes apparent that ‘The need to teach the
comprehension of Spoken English’ has an important current task to perform in making plain to the teacher
what ‘learning to listen like a native speaker’ entails.
Books about the phonetic of spoken English are concerned with the teaching of English
pronunciation. Here we are less concerned with teaching pronunciation. We are worried that most of the
students are unable to understand the English spoken by their instructors. It seems to be a high time that
the comprehension of spoken English should be an integral part of ‘Teaching English’.
Introduction:During the first and second half of the previous century the emphasis in English language
teaching was laid on the teaching of written language and especially of literary language. Few people, of
course, insisted that the spoken language should be taught as well. During the last few years this view has
prevailed and become widely accepted. Many students now get some training in spoken English, but this
fact cannot be ignored that the hard-pressed teachers of English do not find any place for it in the syllabus
and the time-table for teaching comprehension of spoken English. A curious imbalance has persisted in
the teaching of spoken English. Entire emphasis has been laid on the teaching of the pronunciation of
ISSN:2250-138X
Page 289
CONFLUENCE
24 -25 February 2012
English. Why don’t we give importance to teaching comprehension of spoken English? There exist fine
descriptions of the pronunciation of English but there are only few courses available which are concerned
with teaching comprehension of spoken English.
The Problem:It has been easy to assume that the teaching of spoken English naturally developed the learner’s
listening competence. The assumption is not warranted, partly because of the lack of identity between the
slow formal delivery of the pronunciation drill and the wide range of pronunciation styles encountered by
the listeners and partly because the emphasis on mastery of the phonological has been at the expense of
relating auditory signals to the message structure of the discourse. This is a time of enormous
international mobility. Many students speak English reasonably but they cannot understand it. They
cannot understand the lectures on the courses they have joined to follow. This problem exists in all
centers of higher education. In many cases it takes the student few months to be able to understand his
lectures and by that time he has lost the basic background of the course. Students suffer from the
disadvantage of working in a English language.
The students are already exposed to slow formal style of English prior to higher education. Then
wherein does the failure lie? Probably it lies in a number of related facts.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
One is that sort of extremely slow, clear spoken English called ‘Slow Colloquial’.
Style of pronunciation described in many pronunciation courses.
The wrong assumption that normal conversational speech is exactly like slow colloquial only
spoken faster.
The expectation that informal English would be understandable like formal situations like
English lectures.
There has been a quite rapid change in the style.
Earlier there was a strong tradition of ‘stylishness’ in public speaking. ‘BBC’ was the role model
of people. Today, however, the situation has radically changed. The formal rhetorical style of public
address has almost disappeared from public life. Public speakers adopt an informal, ‘chatty’ style.
Speaker attempts to be friendly with the listener. Even the newsreaders of reputed channels finish the
news bulletins with a joke and a smile! As a consequence the old slow colloquial is very rarely heard.
We have seen why it is that the students find it difficult to understand his lectures. It is because
of his less exposure to the style. There is however a further reason why he finds this modern informal
English difficult to understand. This is that the prevailing fashion of articulation has changed. Some
English speakers ‘swallow their words’ and ‘mumble’. This rather ‘throw-away’ style of articulation
is very fashionable now.’ It fits very well with the chatty, informal approach. Some scholars may
object that this is a ‘degenerate’ and ‘slovenly’ form of English. The answer to this objection is that
the situation exists. A difficulty is that many English teachers have a very idealistic impression of
how English is spoken. Most literate people find it very difficult to disassociate knowledge of how
ISSN:2250-138X
Page 290
CONFLUENCE
24 -25 February 2012
word is spelt from how it is pronounced. Although such a person may be quite aware that the spoken
forms of the word pale and pail are identical, there nonetheless persists an aura of difference because
of the different spelling. We need to teach the student that how every spoken word retains its own
identity – a complex audio-visual identity – even when it is very distinctly pronounced. Clearly most
of the time anyone is listening to English being spoken, he is listening for the meaning of the message
– not how the message is being spoken. Indeed if you listen to how words are spoken it is very
unlikely that you can simultaneously understand what it is that is being said. On the whole people do
not listen critically to the way the message is pronounced. The odd glottal stop or unusual
pronunciation of a word may strike the listener, but most of the time he is busy abstracting the
meaning of the message, and preparing his own mental comments on it. This is why most people are
quite unaware of how English is actually spoken. If asked to listen carefully and critically, with all
their phonetic sophistication, they are usually astonished, and often shocked, to notice how the
speaker is speaking. Until one listens to how the message is being spoken, rather than to what is
being said, it is perfectly reasonable to have a very idealistic and starry-eyed view of how English is
pronounced by public speakers.
Teachers use slow colloquial to teach correct pronunciation to their students. This paper does not
make any attempt to suggest any more suitable model than this for teaching the production of spoken
English. On the contrary, it is presumed that slow colloquial is the only practicable model for
production of spoken English. Having said this is a good model for teaching pronunciation, we
should be quite clear that this does not mean it is the only ‘correct’ or ‘acceptable’ style of spoken
English. It is clear that in a normal English context the notion of ‘correctness’ needs to be replaced
by a notion of ‘appropriateness.’ If native speaker of English can communicate perfectly efficiently
in informal English which is far removed from slow colloquial there is no reasonable sense in which
such English may be described as ‘incorrect’. There is also nothing to be gained by describing it in
such emotionally charged words as ‘slipshod’ and ‘careless’. If this style of pronunciation provides
an efficient mode of communication and, at the same time, by the fact that all the members of a group
are using the same style of speech, reaffirms their sense of being members of a group, we have to
recognize this style as being as appropriate one efficient as other.
The teachers often tell a child to ‘speak up’ or to talk more clearly, even if he has understood
what the child has said. The reason here seems to partly be that the teacher values highly the child
who looks him in the eye and answers clearly and partly that the teacher is encouraging the child to
speak appropriately in a given situation. There is a difference in a spoken form of public situation
and in private conversation with friends. The students need to be trained to comprehend even a
whisper. They should be able to listen appropriately in the everyday situations that arise outside the
classroom. In countries like India where English is not the first language there is a danger that
students may never develop the ability to comprehend in such situation. What is very unfortunate that
such students are not given any opportunity to learn to understand an informal style of speech.
Suggested Remedies:-
ISSN:2250-138X
Page 291
CONFLUENCE
24 -25 February 2012
Students need to be given a systematic training of comprehension of spoken English.
1. Some groups of native English speakers and students from different states need to be formed.
2. There should be good interaction within this group.
3. We can then add other people to this group who may speak with a different accent, members of a
different social group, and people from a different background.
4. With each of these variables and utterances must become more explicit – and if one of the
members of the group differs from the others in all these variables the others will have to make a
considerable effort to make clear what they are saying.
5. Even in the context of small group discussion we can expect several different styles of speech.
6. To vary the context, the group members should be exchanged.
7. Including a very distinguished individual will be like going a step ahead.
8. Students should be exposed to speakers of public meetings and private formal meetings.
9. The informal meeting will obviously have many shades within it.
10. The style comprehended through this drill will be a homogeneous style.
11. Situational Vocabularies should be carefully built.
12. Special courses should be designed for listening and comprehending variety of English at school
level and college level.
13. The comprehension of normal, informally pronounced English should be taught in the same
serious way as the pronunciation of spoken English and the comprehension of written English.
However in order to be able to teach the comprehension of informally spoken English we
must first be prepared to listen carefully to how this informal style is actually pronounced.
Individuals vary in their speed of speech. The same individual may use an informal form in one
sentence but fail to use the same form in the following sentence. This thing can be described as
tendencies. Certain tendencies are so general in informal speech that it certainly seems
worthwhile to try to describe them. The major problem the learner may encounter that the
informal speech is characteristically rapid and difficult to catch. To sum up, despite these
obvious hindrances it should be clear that before embarking on the teaching of the comprehension
of spoken English we need –
a) a description of the fullest form of spoken English – slow colloquial or formal
English and
b) a description of informal spoken English.
A part of syllabus needs to contain:i)
‘Ideal’ segments, syllables and words
ii)
The function of rhythm
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
Patterns of simplification in formal speech.
The function of intonation
Verbal ‘fillers’ in speech.
Paralinguistic features.
(adapted from Gillian Brown, 12,42,53,84,107,125)
Following activities may be undertaken:i)
Older students should be exposed to suitable material and news items.
ISSN:2250-138X
Page 292
CONFLUENCE
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
24 -25 February 2012
Regular listening to news broadcast will build up familiarity with well specified areas of
vocabulary.
Well-equipped established with audio-visual aids can be used for films made for English
classroom.
Many examples of phonetic simplification should be provided.
Students should be exposed to English speech spoken by different individuals in natural
situation.
Students should be trained to listen and watch for indications of stress placement, the
nodding of head, twitching of any part of anatomy, louder and longer syllables.
If the speaker is in front of the students, they should look for the facial signals of the
segments-for the lips approaching each other, the amount of movement of jaw, the
protrusion or rounding lips.
Teach the students to listen to final ‘voiced’ fricatives and to recognize the length of the
preceding vowel and the shortness of the fricatives.
Conclusion:Ideally we need to produce courses which present ‘real’ utterances which are graded in
difficulty and which have questions which are helpful in the unraveling of each particular
utterance. As time goes on the students can be exposed to longer and more difficult extracts and
eventually, to extracts spoken in different native English dialect. Hence, comprehension of
spoken English must be made an integral part of ‘Teaching English’.
References
Brown, Gillian, 1977. Listening to Spoken English: London: Longman Group Limited.
Garcia, Ofelia, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas and Maria E. Torres-Guzman (eds.)2006. Imagining
School: Language in Education and Globalization. Clevedon, UK: Maltilungual Matters.
Jessner. 2006. Linguistic Awareness in Multilinguals: English as a Third Language. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Tickoo, M. L.. 2003. Teaching and Learning English – A Sourcebook for Teachers and TeacherTrainers. Hyderabad: Orient Longman.
ISSN:2250-138X
Page 293