Suprasegmental Measures of Accentedness and Judgments of Language Learner Proficiency in Oral English

• Published in: The Modern language journal (Boulder, Colo.) Vol. 94; no. 4; pp. 554 - 566
• Main Authors: KANG, OKIM, RUBIN, DON, PICKERING, LUCY
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Malden, USA Blackwell Publishing Inc 01-12-2010; Wiley Subscription Services; Blackwell Publishing Ltd
• Subjects: English as a second language; English Language Learners; Intonation; Language; Language fluency; Language proficiency; Lexical stress; Listening; Monolingualism; Multiple Regression Analysis; Oral English; Phonological intonation; Phonology; Regional dialects; Solmization; Speech; Suprasegmentals; Tone of voice; Undergraduate Students; Vowels
• ISSN: 0026-7902; 1540-4781
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01091.x

In high-stakes oral proficiency testing as well as in everyday encounters, accent is the most salient aspect of nonnative speech. Prior studies of English language learners' (ELLs') pronunciation have focused on single parameters of English, such as vowel duration, fundamental frequency as related to intonation, or temporal measures of speech production. The present study addresses a constellation of suprasegmental characteristics of nonnative speakers of accented English, combining indices of speech rate, pause, and intonation. It examines relations between those acoustic measures of accentedness and listeners' impressions of second-language oral proficiency. Twenty-six speech samples elicited from iBT TOEFL ® examinees were analyzed using a KayPENTAX Computerized Speech Laboratory. Monolingual U.S. undergraduates (n = 188) judged the speakers' oral proficiency and comprehensibility. A multiple regression analysis revealed the individual and joint predictiveness of each of the suprasegmental measures. The innovative aspect of this study lies in the fact that the multiple features of accentedness were measured via instrumentation rather than being rated by judges who may, themselves, be subject to rating biases. The suprasegmental measures collectively accounted for 50% of the variance in oral proficiency and comprehensibility ratings, even without taking into consideration other aspects of oral performance or of rater predilections.