An Analysis of Audio Lingual Approach

8/12/2019 An Analysis of Audio Lingual Approach

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/an-analysis-of-audio-lingual-approach 1/107

AN A N A L Y S I S O F T H E A U D I O -L I N G U A L A P P RO A C H

AS A P P L I E D T O M E TH OD S O F T E A C H IN G R U S S I A N

by

John Alan W o o d s w o r t h

B . A . The Unive r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 945

T H E S I S S U BM I T T ED I N P A R T I A L FULFILMENT OF

THE R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E OF

M A ST ER O F A R T S

i n t h e D e p a r t m e n t

o f

M o d e r n Languages

J O H N A L A N W O O D S W O R T H 967

S I M O N F R A S E R U N I V E R S I T Y

N o v e m b e r 967



EX MINING COMMITTEE PPROV L

- b L . . . L Y -

enior supervisor

- . a ,-- . w

Examining ommittee



PARTTAL COPYRIGIIT L I C E N S E

h e re b y g r a n t t o Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y t h e r i g h t t o l en d

my t h e s i s o r d i s s e r t a t i o n t h e t i t l e o f w hich i s shown b el o w ) t o u s e r s

o f t h e S imon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , a nd t o make p a r t i a l o r s i n g l e

c o p i e s o n l y f o r s uc h u s e r s o r i n r e sp o ns e t o a r e q u e s t fro m t h e l i b r a r y

o f an y o t h e r u n i v e r s i t y , o r o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n , on i t s own

b e h a l f o r f o r o ne of i t s u s e r s . f u r t h e r a g r ee t h a t p er m is si on f o r

m u l t i p l e c o p y i n g of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y pu rp os es may b e g r a n t e d

by me or t h e Dean o f Gra dua te S t t l d i e s . t i s u n d e rs t o o d t h a t c o p y in g

o r p u b l i c a t io n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t b e a ll ow ed

w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n .

T i t l e of T h e s i s / ~ i s s e r t a t i o n

A u t h o r

s i g n a t u r e

name

d a t e )



ABSTRACT

Prob lem:

The term aud io lingual approach used to denote a specific peda-._ . _ __

gogical orientstion which grew out2f.-lamage-teaching programmes for

. _.

United S t c i t e s military personnel during the Second World War. Its basic

distinction ~ o m he traditional approaches is that language is to be

taught as speech rather than as writing and grammar, as a living vehicle

of comrnunlcation rather than as a fossilized set of printed rules and

paradigms. Language-learning, as defined audio-lingually, involves the

acquisition of skills in speaking and understanding speech, while read-

ing and writing are secondary skills based on the spoken language.

Despite the acknowledged superiority over traditional methods, how-

ever, the new approach has not met with widespread acceptance. Its rad-

ical requirements have brought opposition from grammar-oriented language-

-teachers. Linguists themselves have challenged its effectiveness in

actual classroom experience. Not all textbooks or teaching-methods pur-

ported to be based on the audio-lingual approach apply its principles to

the same degree.

In considering the success of the audio-lingual approach itself we

first examine its basic tenet regarding the primacy of speech and its



claimed significance in the teaching of foreign languages. The specific

challenges to this claim (especially those based on the principles of

gradation and rate of learning) are then discussed as to their validity

and conclusions drawn accordingly. In the next chapter the parallel de-

velopment of uxh hearing and speaking skills is considered, together

with the problem of interference from the learner's native tongue; con-

textual factors such as dialect, style, tempo, and vehicle of presenta-

tion are also taken into account here. Finally we turn our attention to

rhe actual assimilation s language-material by the learner n the class-

room situation. The aim in each case is to de~ermine hat factors are

essential t or desirable in a successful audio-lingual teaching-method,\

The second part of the thesis is devoted to an analysis of four

audio-lingual textbooks for beginning Russian students (Cornyn's Begin-

?ling Rus sian, Modem Russian by Dawson, Bidwell, and Humesky, Basic Con-

versational Russian by Fairbanks and Leed, and the A-LM Russian: Level

One on the basis of the criteria already established in the f i r s t part.

The analysis covers not only the presentation and assimilation of audio-

-lingual skills in general, but also some of the individual difficulties

involved in the mastery of those skills as far as teaching Russian t o

English-speaking students is concerned.

Conclusions:

A comprehensive summary in diagram form compares the treatment of

different items in the audio-lingual approach by the four teaching-mekh-

ods discussed. General conclusions are then divided into two parts:

a) he recommendation that in audio-lingual methods sufficient attention



be given to the learner s age and degree of literacy, his ability to un-

derstand as well as produce fluent speech, and his awareness of the finer

points of contrast between the new language and his own; b) conclusions

as ta how well each of these considerations is treated in the different

textbooks. A further final comment is made as to the success with which

each of the teaching-methods, from an over-all viewpoint, applies the

principles of the audio-lingual approach.



T BLE O ONTENTS

Abstract

Acknowledgment

1. INTRODUCTION

I 1 OBJECTIVES.

.2 HYPOTHESES.

1.21 i r s t hypothesis.

1.22 Second hypothesis.

1 3 TEACHING-METHODS.

1.4 HISTORICAL ORIENTATION.

2. AUDIAL AND GRAPHIC SKILLS

2.1 AUDIO-LINGUAL ASSUMPTIONS.

2.11 Primacy of the spoken language.

2.12 The place of the written language.

2.13 Significance for teaching.

2.14 Summary

2.2 CHALLENGES TO AUDIO-LINGUAL ASSUMPTIONS.

2.21 What is being challenged?

2.22 Challenge to the primacy of speech in teaching.

iii



vii

2.23 Challenge in gradation of skills.

2.24 Challenge in rate of learning.

2.25 Answer to challenges.

2.26 Summary.

3. CTIVE AND P SS IVE SK ILL S

3.1 AUDING AND SPEAKING.

3.11 Differences between native and target language.

3.12 The importance of auditory comprehension.

3.13 Method and order of presentation.

3.14 Treatment of speech production.

3.2 CONTEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS.

3.21 Dialect style and tempo: significance for auding.

3.22 Dialect style and tempo: significance for speaking.

3.23 Choice of vehicle.

3.24 Summary.

4. SSIMIL TION PROCEDURES

4.1 SUB-CONSCIOUS ASSIMILATION.

4.11 Practice in imitation.

4.12 Practice in discrimination

4.2 CONSCIOUS ASSIMILATION.

4.21 Explanation versus imitation.

4.22 The use of contrastive analysis.

4.23 The use of phonetic transcription.

4 -24 Summary.



viii

5. TEXTBOOK ANALYSIS: PRESENTATION

5 1 PRESI:NTA? 30hl 01 flUDIAI, AND GRAPHIC SKILJS

5.11 Pedagogical orientation

5.12 Linguistrc orientation.

5.13 Order of presentation.

5.14 The use of transcription in presentation.

5.2 PRESENTATION OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE SKILLS.

5.21 Context of presentation: choice of vehicle.

5 . 2 2 Context sf presentation: dialect, style, and tempo.

5 - 2 3 Presentation of auding.

5-24 Presentation of speaking.

5.25 Summary

6 TEXTBOOK ANALYSIS: ASSIMILATION

6 1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION.

6 2 ASSIMILATION OF THE RUSSIAN SOUND-SYSTEM.

6 2 1 Phonological difficulties for English-speakers,

6 2 2 Palatalization of consonants.

6 2 3 Changes in vowel quality.

5 24 Consonant clusters.

6 2 5 Stress- and intonation-patterns.

6 2 6 Summary.

7 CONC US I ON ) .

1 ~ : O ~ v 1 I I ~ I : l I ~ N S I V EUMMARY OF TEACHING-METHODS

7 P r e s e n t a t l o n



7 12 Assimilation

7 2 FIRST HYPOTHESIS

7 21 Age and literacy of learner

7 22 Development of active and passive skills

7 23 Interference with similar phonemes

7 3 SECOND HYPOTHESIS

7 31 Provision of visual representation

7 32 Mastery of fluent conversational utterances

7 33 Contrast and conscious assimilation

7 4 FURTHER COMMENTS

Bibliography



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author wishes to acknowledge his

indebtedness to the members of his Ex-

amining Committee Prof. G.F. Holliday

of the Department of Modern Languages

and Prof. D.H. Sullivan of the English

Department. He is especially grateful

to his supervisor Prof. E.R. Colhoun

of the Department of Modern Languages

for his invaluable assistance and con-

structive criticism in the preparation

of this thesis.



INTRODU TION

1 . 1 OBJECTIVES The t h e s i s i s d i v id e d i n t o two p a r t s :

a ) an ex t ens i v e examina ti on o f t h e aud i o - l i ngua l 1 approach t o t h e

t e a c h i n g o f t h e a c t i v e and p a s s i v e a u d i a l s k i l l s 2 o f a sec on d l an gu ag e

w i th r eg a rd t o e s t a b l i s h i n g o b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i a f o r t h e e v a lu a t io n o f

audio- l ingual methods

b) an example o f s uch eva l ua t i on embodied i n a c r i t i c a l ana l ys i s o f

t h e p r e s en t a t i on and a s s i mi l a t i o n o f aud i a l s k il l s- i nc l udi ng i nd i v i d -

u a l d i f f i c u l t i e s i n vo lv ed i n t h e m as te ry o f t h e s e sk i ll s -- a s t r e a t e d

i n fo ur methods of teach ing Russ ian which a re zcknowledged t o be based

on th e audio - l ingu al approach .

''The terms audio lingual and aural oral r e f e r t o any approach bas ed

pr i mar i l y on t he audial a s p e c t s o f l an gu ag e ( i . e . a s t i s heard

and spoken) , wi th only secondary emphasis on the graphic a s p e c t s ,

o r wr i t t en r ep r es en t a t i o n o f l anguage . An e s se n t ia l component of

t h e aud i o - l i ngua l appr oach i s t h e i m i t a t i o n o f t h e s p on ta n eo u s,

everyday speech of na t iv e s peak er s , r a th er tha n memoriza tion of

w r i t t e n r u l e s an d pa rad ig ms c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a p-

p r oach , which concen t r a t e s on t h e g r aph i c a s pec t s a l one .

*'The au di a l and graphic as pe c t s of a l anguage each involve an ac t iv e

and a p a ss iv e s k i l l . G ra ph ic s k i l l s a r e w r i t i n g a nd r e a d in g r e s -

p e c ti v el y . Speaking i s t h e a c t i v e a u d ia l s k i l l ; f o r i t s pa ss iv e

c o u n t e rp a r t s h a l l u se t h e r e c e n t t er m auding ( c f . M ue ll er 185 ,t o i n d i c a t e no t j u s t l i s t e n i n g , b u t a u d i t o ry d i sc r i m i n at i o n an d

comprehension.

3 ~ h eerm method i s u se d i n t h i s t h e s i s t o d e no te t h e o r g a n iz a ti o n o f

t each i ng ma t e r i a l s i n t o a un i f i ed programme o f p r e s e n t a t i o n , i . e . ,

an audio - l ingu al method co ns i s t s of th e embodiment of th e pr i nc ip le s

o f t h e a u d i o - l i n g u a l approach i n t o t e a ch i n g materiaZs ( t ex t book ,

t a p e - re c o r d i ng s , t e a c h i n g m an ua l, e t c . ) .



1,2 HYPOTHESES.

1.21 First hypothesis The audial skills of a language are most ef-

fectively and efficiently taught by audio-lingual methods which give

sufficient consideration to the following important points:

1.211 The age and literacy of the learner and the visual orientation

of his educational experience as an asset or a hindrance to audio-lin-

gual learning;

1,212 Parallel development of both active and passive skills with em-

phasis on the comprehension and production of fluent utterances in nos-

mal conversational context;

1,213 The learner s ability to discriminate between closely related

sounds of the new language, as well as the interference from similar

sounds in his native language.

1.22 Second hypothesis. With regard to their procedures for presen-

tation and assimilation of audial skills, including individual diffi-

culties involved in the mastery of these skills, not all audio-lingual

methods publicized as such are equally successful in satisfying the

criteria outlined in the first hypothesis.



1 . 3 TEACHING METHODS. Four audio- l ing ual methods f o r teac hin g Russian

a r e a n a ly se d i n t h e s econ d p a r t o f t h i s t h e s i s . They a r e s e t f o r t h i n

the fol lowing textbooks and manuals:

Cornyn, William S., Beginning Russian 1961).

Dawson, Clayton L./Bidwell, Charles E./Humesky, Assya,

Modern Russian ( 2 volumes 1964165); also Instructor sManual 1964).

Fairbanks, Gordon H./Leed, Richard L., Basic Conversationaz

Russian 1964); also Teacher s ManuaZ 1966).

Modern Language Materials Development Center Staff, A-LM

Russian: Level One 1961); also Teacher s ManucZ 1961).

1 . 4 HISTORICAL ORIENTATION. Although t i s m ai nl y d u r in g t h e p a s t

two decades th a t aud io- l in gu al methods, so -c al le d, have become popu-

l a r i n North American schoo l s , t h e r oo t s o f an au r a l - o r a l b as i s f o r

l anguage - i ns t r uc t i on r each f a r back i n t o European h i s t o r y . s e a r l y

a s 1632 t h e Czech e du ca to r Jan KomenskT (Comenius) pu bl ish ed h i s Di-

dactica magna, a work which a t t ack ed the t r a d i t io na l sead i ng - t r ans -

l a t i on methods based on grammatica l s tud ies of c l as s i ca l La t in and

Greek (c f . Mackey 142, Brooks 138 ). In st ea d of r u l e s , Comenius used

i m i t a t i o n , r e p e t i t i o n a nd p l e n t y o f p r a c t i c e i n b o th r e a d in g and

spe aki ng (Mackey 14 2) .

Somewhat more rec en tl y (1899), t h e Br i t is h l i n g u is t Henry Sweet

d ec re e d t h a t a l l s t u dy o f l an gu ag e, w he th er t h e o r e t i c a l o r p r a c t i c a l ,

ought t o be based on th e spoken language (Sweet 49 ). Twenty years

l a t e r h i s c o l l ea g u e H aro ld P alme r a do pt ed a s t h e f i r s t o f h i s n i n e

l anguage - t each i ng p r i nc i p l e s : The i n i t i a l pr e p a ra t i o n of t h e s t u -

d e nt by t h e t r a i n i n g of h i s s po nt an eo us c a p a c i t i e s f o r a s s i m i l a t i n g

t h e spoken language (Palmer 1922,131)



The f i r s t l a n g ua g e- t ea c he r s i n t h e Un it ed S t a t e s t o a do pt an a u r a l -

-o ra l approach were Got tl ie b Heness, a German emigrant, and D r Lambert

Sauveur, a c oll eag ue from France. The us e o f t h e spoken languag e was

popu lar i zed a f t e r 1911 when D r Max Walt er i nt ro du ce d t h e methods of

th e German ph i l o l og is t ViEtor cf . Meras 35-44). The Coleman report4

of 1929 marked a gra dua l s h i f t of emphasis back t o th e reading approach,

which was checked t o some deg re e d ur in g t h e Second World War when

t r a i n e d speakers of fo re ig n languages were i n gr ea t demand. From t h i s

s i tu a t io n grew the aud io- l ingua l approach as t i s known today i n one

form o r ano ther i n th e United S t a t es and o th er coun t r ies : an approach

th a t i n c lu d e s t h e t e a ch in g o f r e a d in g and w r i t i n g , b u t g iv e s p rim ar y

emphasis t o th e language as t i s h ea rd and s po ke n. I t i s t h i s a p-

p ro ac h, a s d i s t i n c t from t h e t r a d i t i o n a l e mp has is on t h e g r ap h i c s k i l l s

a l o n e , t h a t i s s u b j e c t t o o ur ex am in at io n i n t h i s t h e s i s .

p r o f . Algernon Coleman, The Teaching of Modern Foreign Languages i n

the United States--see M ras 46 47.



2. A U D I A L A N D G R A P H I C SKILLS

2.1 AUDIO LINGUAL ASSUMPTIONS.

2.11 Primacy o the spoken language Dr. Herman Rapper of the Univer-

sity of Halle once summarized ViEtor's principles in part as follows:

~ a n ~ u a ~ eonsists not of letters but of sounds.. Not through the

eye but through the ear the foreign language must come (M6ras 43).

As stated in 1.1, the audio-lingual approach to language-teaching

concentrates primarily on the audial skills: it works from the funda-

mental principle that a language is first of all a system of sounds

for social communication; writing is a secondary derivative system for

the recording of spoken language (Carroll 1063).

Oge of the facts commonly cited in support of this principle is

the manner in which children learn their mother tongue-by hearing and

speaking it: it is not until they have achieved a considerable audial

command that reading and writing are learned. Several others are men-

tioned by Nelson Brooks in his Language and Language Learning (24-25)

-the comparatively short history of the written word and its limited

scope until the invention of the printing-press, the large number of

unwritten languages even today, and the social and psychological pre-

dominance of speech.

In addition to these, Robert A. Hall Jr. (28) points out a physio-

logical factor which is frequently overlooked, namely, silent articula-

lcf. a l s o Huebener 1965 27+8.

2 ~ f l s o H a l l 26.



tion or sub-vocalization in reading and writing:

I t i s commonly though t t h a t we ca n re ad and wr i t e i n comple-,e

s i l e nc e , w i t hou t any speech t ak i ng p l ace . u t neve r t he l e s s ,i n s i d e t h e b r a i n , t h e im pu ls es f o r s pe ec h a r e s t i l l b e i n g s e n t

f o r t h th r ou g h t h e n e r v es , and o nl y t h e a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e s e

i mp ul se s i s b e in g i n h i b i t e d on t h e m us cu la r l e v e l , a s ha s been

shown by numerous experiments

2.12 The place of th e wri tt en language. In spite of its insistence

on the primacy of the spoken language, the audio-lingual approach does

not exclude graphic skills from the teaching programme, nor does it

fail to recognize the important role of reading and writing in the use

of language; it merely assigns them to a secondary position for teach-

ing purposes. This is probably best summarized by Brooks, who distin-

guishes three bands of languagqestural-visual, audio-lingual, and

graphic-material:

The deve lopm en t of t h i s t h i r d [g raph i c -m a t e r i a l ] band has , a s

everyone knows, com pl e te l y t r ans fo rm ed t h e l i f e o f c i v i l i z ed

man, but i t s comple te dependence upon the cen t ra l aud io- l ingua l

band must never be d isr ega rde d.

The proponents of the audio-lingual approach maintain that such a rela-

tionship extends even to the literary and cultural levels of language,

for it is the spoken which is the real source of the literary language.

Every literary language must indeed in its first beginnings be

purely colloquial (Sweet 49-50

3 ~ f . l s o Palm er 1921,21-22.

4 ~ r o o k s 8. A R u ss ia n t e a c h e r i n one o f t h e e t h n i c r e p u b l i c s o f t h e So-

v ie t Union of fe rs p roof o f t h i s dependence ( z av i s i m os t ) a s f o l l o w s :

E C J M C p a B H M T b 0m6m I CO T OP bI e Y y a U M e C R A O l 7y C Ic ar o T B I I H C b M e , T O 3 T a

3aB M C M M O C T b [ I D I c ~ ~ E H H o ~ ~ew O T YCTHO); ?] C T a H e T O ~ I ~ S M A H O ~ ~~ i k o l a e v a

2 5 ) . C f. a l s o F i s h e r 4 2.



2.13 igni f icance or teaching. The primacy of the spoken word has

l ong been r ecogni zed a s s i gn i f i ca n t i n t he t each i ng o f fo re i gn l angua-

ge s. In 1942 Leonard Bloomfield wrote :

h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f a ' r e a d i n g k no wle dg e' i s g r e a t l y de l ay e d

and he r e ad e r ' s unde r s t and i ng r ema ins ve ry i m pe r fec t un l e s s

he has some command of actual speech.

I n c o n t r as t w i t h t h i s , t i s alw ays p o s s i b l e t o s pe ak l a n -

guage w i t hou t r ead i ng conven t i ona l p r i n t e d m a t t e r .

T h is l a s t s t a te m e n t i s borne out by th e la rg e number of languages t h a t

have no convent iona l p r i n t ed mat t e r , a s mentioned i n 2 .11 .But why

sh o u l d s pe ec h f a c i l i t a t e t h e l e a r n i n g o f r e a d in g more t h a n t h e o p p o s i t e

c a s e ?

T he re a r e a t l e a s t two r ea so ns f o r t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . The f i r s t i s

t h e phys i o l og i ca l i n f l ue nce o f speech i n t he form o f sub -voca l i za t i on

w h il e re a d in g o r w r i t i n g ( s e e H a l l ' s q u o t a t i o n i n 2 . 1 1 ) . The second i s

t o b e fo und i n t h e p s yc h o lo g i ca l i n f l u e n c e o f t h e w r it i ng - s ys t e m i t s e l f :

Le p r e s t i g e q u ' a a c q ui s l a page & r i t e e t l e f a i t q ue n o tr e en-

se ignement s ' a pp uie su r des t e x t e s , nous masqiue l a r 6 a l i t 6 ,

La langue , su r to u t c e l l e que nous voulons ense igner aux

dg bu ta nt s, s e pr gs en te d' ab or d comme un moyen de communication

o r a l e . O r on ne peu t pa s dg c r i r e ce sys tsm e o r a l en s e r6f6-r a n t de s normes qu i ne concernent que 1 1 6 c r i t .

Brooks points out s t i l l ano t he r danger i n w r i t i ng - sys t em s :

T h i s sound- to -wr it ing d i r e c t i o n shou l d be i m p l i c i t th roughou t

t h e i n i t i a l s t ag e s of l e ar n i ng t o r e ad and w r i t e . I f

t h i s p ro ce du re i s no t fo l l ow ed, and t h e l e a r ne r i s sudd .en ly p re -

s e n t e d w i t h a t e x t h e h a s no t a l r e a d y l e a r n e d , h e w i l l obviously

te nd t o pronounce th e wr i t te n symbols a s he would pronounce them

i n h i s m ot he r t ongue .

5 ~ l o o m f i e l d . C f a l s o Egger t ' s quota t i on i n Pa lmer 1921,16 .

7 ~ r o o k s 6 5. T h i s would pose a r a t h e r i n t e re s t i n g prob lem i n t h e ca se o f



In view of t he se fa c to rs , then--) t h a t a u d i a l s k i l l s a r e n o t d epen-

den t on g r aph i c s k r l l s , bu t v i ce - ve r sa , and b ) t h a t wr it i ng -sys t ems , bo th

wi t h in themselves and in co nt ras t with each o t he r , may g iv e the l ea rn er

a d i s to r t e d p ic tu re of l anguage as heard and spoken-it has been adopted

as an axiom by t he s t r i c t e s t adhe r en t s of t h e aud i o - l i ngua l app roach t ha t

w ri tt en work should i possible be excluded rom the e ar l i er s tages o

language-study (Palmer l921,3O)

2.14 Swnmary The bas i c t e ne t s o f t h e aud i o - l i ngua l app roach t r e a t ed

thus f a r a r e a s f o ll o w s

2.141 Language co ns i s t s pr im ar i l y o f communication by sound; words are

b u t a g r a p h ic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of sound. Thi s conclus ion s based on the

f o l l owi ng f ac t o r s : a ) c h i l d r e n l ea r n t h e i r mot he r t ongue by hea r i ng and

speaking; b) wr i t i ng i s a compara t ive ly r ece nt phenomenon wi th very l i m

i t e d s co pe u n t i l t h e i n v e n ti o n o f t h e p r i n t i n g - p r e s s ; c) th er e a re many

languages today wi thout a wr i t te n form; d) speech remains th e dominant

f a c t o r I n t h e i n d i v i d u a l i nd ep en de nt o f h i s g r a p h ic a b i l i t i e s ; e ) no

r e ad i n g o r w r i t i n g o c c ur s w it ho u t s u b - v o c a l i z a t i o n .

2.142 Although t p l a y s a n i mp o rt an t r o l e i n s o c i e t y , t h e w r i t t e n l a n -

guage , even t h a t o f l i t e r a t u r e , i s en t i r e l y dependent on t h e spoken

language.

2.143 W r it i ng sys tems do no t sa t i s f ac t o r i l y r ep r es en t speech .

R u ss ie n , a s some l e t t e r s o f t h e C y r i l l i c a l p h ab e t s h a r e d by t h e L a t i n

r e p r e s e n t t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t s ou nd s from t h o s e r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e sane

g r ap h s i n E n g l i s h . For example , Cyr i l l i c rope /g6re/-1'sorrow11-might

b e r e a d a s En g l i s h rope, w h il e t h e c l a s s i c w r i t t e n ex mple i s t h e Rus-

s i a n v e r b noexam / pa j &xaf/- to dr iv e .



2.144 I t f o ll o w s from t h e above p re m is e s t h a t o n ly t h e a u d i a l s k i l l s

o f a l a ng ua ge s h ou ld b e t au g h t a t f i r s t .

2 . 2 CHALLENGES TO AUDIO LING UAL ASSUMPTIONS.

2 2 1 hat i s being challenged I n a r e c e n t a r t i c l e on t h e a u d i o- li n -

gua l approach e n t i t l e d The Danger of Assumption wit hou t Proof Beverly

Bazan (337) warns us t h a t many of th e cu rre nt a s se r t io ns cannot claim

any s t a t u s o t he r than t ha t o f a s sumpt ions . (We have s o been c a l l i n g

them i n t h i s t h e s l s . ) Theodore Huebener (1963,376) r ep or t s th a t a

more sober examination of i t s [ t h e a u d i o- l i n g ua l a p p ro a c h' s ] b a s i c t e n -

e t s and day- to -day app l i ca t i on o f i t s pr ocedures have r evea l ed t h a t

c er t a in ba s i c assumpt ions were not cor rec t1 ' . Most of th e maxims d i s -

cussed thu s f a r in th i s t he s i s8 however--the primacy of speech over

wr i t i n g , t he d i s t o r t i on s o f wr i t i ng systems-, seem t o be suppor t ed by

provable f a c t s . What assumpt ions , then , a re not co r re c t ? What, i n

f a c t , i s b ei ng c h al le n ge d ?

I t may be we l l t o po i n t ou t he r e t h a t t he aud i o - l i ngua l app roach

developed, t o a l a r g e e x t e n t , u nd er t h e w a tc h f ul g ui da n ce of l i n g u i s t i c

s c i e n t i s t s . Ap plie d l i n g u i s t i c s in c lu d es t h e pplic tion t o l anguage-

- t each i ng methods o f t h e d i sc ove r i e s and axioms o f t h e de sc r i p t i ve l i n -

g u i s t s , who, a lt ho u gh t he y h av e g e n e r a l l y l i t t l e i n t e r e s t f o r la ng ua ge -

- t each i ng , were i n f a c t among t h e e a r l i e s t t o make f u l l a p p l i c a t i o n o f

t h e p r i n c i p l e of audial supremacy. And Robert L P o l i t z e r (66) reminds

US

8 ~ m a r l z e d n 2 14



h e r e i s of c o u rs e , n o th i ng i n l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n c e a s s uc h

t h a t t e l l s u s t h a t t h e o r a l a ppraoch i s t h e o nl y v a l i d one

[ f o r l a ng u ag e -t caching I t j u s t h ap pe ns t h a t most l i n g u i s -

t i c s c i e n t i s t s a r e p r im a r i ly c on ce rn ed w i th l an gua ge i n i t s

spoken form, o r d e f in e l a n gu a ge a s a s po ke n r a th e r t h a n a

w r i t t e n means of communication. h e language t ea ch er who

i s b ei ng a d vl se d by t h e l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n t i s t i s mere ly s t a t i n g

p r e f e r e n c es d i c t a t e d b y h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l b a ck gr ou nd .

I n o t he r words, t h e des c r i p t i v e b ranch o f l i ng u i s t i c s must no t be

conf us ed w i t h t he app l i c a t i on o f l i ng u i s t i c t heo r y t o l anguage- t each ing

methods . The former sup pl i e s informat ion i n th e na tu re of provable

f a c t s a bo ut l an gu ag e i t s e l f ; t h e l a t t e r i n f e r s from t h e s e f a c t s c e r t a i n

assumptions about teachin g s tu de nt s how t o use a language. Many teach-

e r s , however , e s pe c i a l l y t hos e accus tomed t o t he t r a d i t i on a l r ead i ng ap -

p ro ac h t o l a ng u ag e -t ea c hi ng , f a i l t o r e c o gn i s e t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n and m is -

t aken l y t r y t o d i s pu t e pr oven f ac t s o f l anguage ( such a s t he p ri macy o f

s pe ec h o v e r w r i t i n g , o r t h e in ad eq ua cy o f w r i t i n g t o g i v e a t r u e p i c -

t u r e o f s peech) . Th is e r r o r i s one of t he ch i e f caus es o f m is under-

s t and i ng be tween t h e app l i ed l i ng u i s t and t he l anguage -t eache r.

The rea l i s su e under d i spu te by Bazan, Huebener , and o t he r s , i s

whet he r t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a ud i a l p ri macy s hou l d be f ol lowed i n teaching

a language, i . e . , t h a t a u d i a l s k i l l s s h ou ld b e ta u g ht b ef o re g ra p hi c

ones-ot whet he r s peech i s p ri mary t o l anguage i t s e l f . I t i s with

t h i s i n mind, t hen , t h a t we s ha l l examine t he i nd i v i du a l po i n t s o f d i s -

agreement i n t h e f i r s t p a r t of t h e t h e s i s .

2.22 Challenge t o the primacy o speech i n teaching s ment ioned i n

2.11, a f a c t o f t en r e f e r r ed t o a s ev i dence o f t he p ri macy o f s peech i s

t h a t c h i l d r e n l e a r n t h e i r m ot he r t on gu e e s s e n t i a l l y t hro ug h t h e a u d i a l

s k i l l s . T h is i s un dou bted ly t r u e i n t h e c h i l d s e a r l y y e a r s, b u t t h e



high-school o r un iv ers i ty s tud en t who beg ins t o l ea rn a second language

i s i n q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n .

F i r s t of a l l , h e i s no longer a ch i l d , and he has a l rea dy mas te red

h i s mother tongue . But more impor tan t , a s a re su l t o f v i s ua l l y o r ien-

te d educ a t iona l p rocess es he has come t o regard read ing and wr i t ing as

h i s primary means o f le ar ni ng anyt hing he does not know (cf. Bazan 342 :

J oh n C a r r o l l s t a t e s t h e pr ob le m a s f o l l o w s :

F e ar h a s be en e x p r e ss e d t h a t t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f f o r e i g n l a n -guage m a t e r i a l s i n a u d i t o ry form may c r e a t e d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r

eye-minded students- eye-mindedness be i ng conce ived o f a s

e i t h e r a r e l a t i v e l y permanent c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t r a i t o r a r e s u l t

o f a p redom i nan tl y v i s ua l emphasis i n t h e i n d i v i du a l ' s s choo l

expe r i ences ,

In o the r words , we f in d tha t i n the aud io- l in gua l approach th e p r i n -

c i p l e of a ud ia l p rimacy i n language i s b ro ug ht i n t o s h a r p c o n f l i c t w i th

the g raph ic o r v i s ua l p redominance o f our educa t iona l system. We have

a l re ady cons idered th e ba s i s fo r th e fo rmer . Let us now b r i e f ly examine

what i s in vol ve d i n t h e l a t t e r .

Two cons ider at io ns ar e evid ent : ease and speed. I t tak es much

l e s s t i m e t o r e a d a t e x t t h an t o l i s t e n t o t h e same t e x t i n spoken fo rm .

And i n t h e l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n , t i s more p r a c t i c a l t o g iv e r e a din g a s -

s ig nm en ts r a t h e r t h a n l i s t e n i n g o ne s . E s p e c i a l l y i n t h e p o s t- e l em e n tar y

stage lack of t ime and mechanical equipment has f o r ce d e d u ca t io n t o r e l y

h e a v i l y on g r a p h i c s k i l l s f o r t ea c h in g t h e s t u d e n t new m a te r i a l o f a ny

k ind , and even the c lassroom lecture i s rather overshadowed by black-

boards , wa l l - char t s , and the t ex tbook .

9 ~ a r r o l l 078.C f

a ls o Bazan 344-345.



These a r e two of th e r easons behind Rebecca Domar1s powerful a t ta ck

on aud i o - l i ngua l m ethods and he r s t ubbo rn de fence o f t he t r ad i t i o na l

read ing approach t o t each ing Russ ian . Her ba s i c a rgum en t i n r ega rd t o

e a s e i s a s f o l l o w s :

Reading i s ea s i e r t h an unde r s t and ing t h e spoken word o f equa l

d i f f i c u l t y , b e ca u se i n re a d in g o ne c an p r oc e ed a t t h e s p e e d

which s u i t s him b e s t , one can re - read t h a t which he d id no t

unde r s t and a t f i r s t r ead i ng , one can l ook up un fam i l i a r w ords .

l l t h i s i s i m poss i b le when l i s t en i n g t o someone t a l k . For

s i m i l a r r e as o ns w r i t i n g i s e a s i e r t h a n s pe ak in g. l o

2.23 C h al le n ge i n g r a d a t i o n of s k i l l s . One o f t h e f a c t o r s t h a t must b e

t a ke n i n t o a cc ou nt i n t h e t e a ch i n g of a ny s u b j e c t o r s k i l l i s t h a t o f

g ra d a t io n , l l which Palmer de f in es as pass ing f~ o m he known t o the un-

known by eas y st ag es , each of which s e rv es as a p e p a r a t i o n f o r t h e n ex t

(Palmer 1922,67) 1 2 I n s u p po r t o f h e r c o n t e n t i o n f o r a r e ad i ng b a s i s ,

Domar c i t e s a s a b a s i c p e da g og ic a l p r i n c i p l e t h a t i n s t u d yi n g a n yt hi ng

one shou l d beg i n w it h t he e a s i e s t a spec t o f t he sub j ec t and g rad ua l l y

proceed t o t he more d i f f i c u l t ones1' (Domar 11) . Palm er a s a l i n gu i s t ,

however, e v i d e n t l y h ad q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t i d e a 0.f e as y s t a g e s 1 ' i n mind,

'O~omar11 ( ~ f . l s o Sweet 51-52) n a r t i c l e s i m i l a r i n t o n e t o Do-

m a r t s i s Nathan Rose n's A ll 's Well That Ends Badly which appeared

i n a 1 96 6 i s s u e o f t h e S l a v i c a n d E a s t E uro pe an J o u r n a l . John Kem-

p e r s ' r es po ns e i n a l a t e r i s su e of t h e same p e r i o d i ca l i s s t i l l

w i t h i n t h e con f i nes o f t h e r ead ing -approach po i n t o f v iew.

111 p r e f e r t h e t e r m g r a d a t i o n t o gr a d i n g ( wh ic h i s sometimes u s e d i n t h i s

sense ) because i t avo i ds con fusi on w i t h t h e g rad ing o f l anguage t e s t s

nd w i th gr a di ng a s a g ram ma tica l term1' ( ~ a c k e ~04) .

1 2 c f . a l s o Ho ck et t ( 1 9 5 0 , 2 6 6 ) ~who desc r i b es p rog re s s i ve p ra c t i c e a s be-

g i nn i ng w i t h t ho se i t em s which a r e e i t h e r m os t un i ve r sa l l y neces sa ry ,

o r a r e e a s i e s t , and go in g on t o more d i f f i c u l t m a t t er s .



f o r a few pages l a t e r (1922,70) he wr i t es : "To l ea rn how t o read and t o

wr i t e a l anguage may poss i b ly be e as ie r than t o lea rn how t o speak i t and

t o unde r s t and t when spoken, bu t t h i s has no bear ing on th e sub je ct of

grada t ion" .

Even i n t h e a u d io - l in g u a l a pp ro ac h i t s e l f t h e r e i s no e vi de nc e t o

in d i ca te how long the t each ing of read ing should be delayed ( see Car r o l l

1078). Most agre e th er e should be som audia l -on ly per iod- for f ea r th a t

" t h e w r i t t e n word, due t o t h e l i t e r a t e c o n d i t i o n o f t h e l e a r n e r , might

l ead i r r evocab ly t o t he i nco r r ec t phono logica l i n t e rp re t a t i o n" (Bazan 343) .

However, William Fr an ci s Mackey p o in ts ou t:

I n t h e s e co nd ar y s c h o o l . . . t h e l e a r n e r i s s o le t t er - b ou n d t h a t a

lo n g d e l a y b etwe en s p ee c h a nd r e a d in g may r e s u l t i n t h e l e a r n e r ' s

forming h i s own id ea of how t h e language must look i n w ri t i ng and

i n d e v i s in g h i s own sy st em o f s p e l l i n g .

Some even advoca te th e teach ing of a l l four s k i l l s s imul taneous ly from th e

beginning . l 4 Vincenzo Ci of fa r i (313) speaks of t h e wr i t te n symbol a s

" f i r s t o f a l l a dependable reminder o f sound" which "serves t o re cr ea te

the cond i t i ons which p roduced the co r r ec t sound i n t h e f i r s t p lace" . "The

written symbol i s permanent, and the spoken sound i s t ransi tory ' , he adds.

Sweet (10) recommended phon et ic t ra ns cr ip t i on as th e most s u i t a bl e

"reminder" , by which one could avoid the dangers of t r a di t i o n al or thogra-

ph i e s ( c f . 2 .13) and ga in t he add i t i ona l advantage o f co r r ec t i ng aud i to ry

impress ions (c f . 4 .2 3 on phone t ic t r an sc r i p t io n) . Bazan (342) goes so f a r

3 ~ a c k e y 34. f a l s o Huebener 1963,377.

1 4 ~ . g . o lovn ikova (132) : "06yseme T O J I b K O Y C T H O B pew 6e3 O A H O B P ~ M ~ H H O ?

p a 6 0 ~ b 1 a A A C b M O M M H a A TeICCTOM , M O Xe T W M B e C T M K TOMY, Y T O I T p M 0 6 p e -

T e H H b I e y % l m C R H a B b W H e 6 y ~ y ~OCT aT OYHO IT pOYHbI , TillC E C K MX H e

6 y ~ e ~PMT eJ IbHOfi 0 i70pb1" .



as t o po i n t ou t ev idence why th e v i s ua l shou ld precede t h e a u d i a l :

I n r e g a r d t o i n t e r f e r i n g s e ns e s t i m u l i , e m p ir i ca l e v id en ce

does sugges t t h a t e t ro ac t i v e seconda ry cues ( e . g . , hea r -

i ng word , t he n see i ng i t w r i t t e n ) seem t o h av e a g r e a t e r r e -

t a r d a t i o n e f f e c t t h a n p r o a c t i ve c ue s ( e . g . s e e in g t w r i t t e n ,

t hen hea r i ng t s p o k e n . . . ) .

We f i n d , t h e n, t h a t i n s p i t e of t h e l o g i c a l r e as o ns f o r ex cl ud in g

t h e g r a ph i c a s p e c t s i n t h e i n i t i a l s t a g e s o f l a ng ua ge -t ea ch in g, t h e r e

seem t o be d e f i n i te a rguments f o r some s o r t of v i s u a l i n s t r u c t i o n a s

we ll . Th is becomes even more no ti ce ab le when we ta ke account of th e

t im e a l l o t t e d f o r a l a ng ua ge t o be t a u g h t , and t h e r e s u l t a n t s pe ed o r

r a t e a t w hich t i s expected t o be l ea rned .

2 2 4 Challenge n ra te o learning Once aga in a co nf l i c t a r i se s be-

tween t h e t r a d i t i o n s o f e d u c a ti o n and t h e p r i n c ip l e s o f a p p l i e d l i n g u i s -

t i c s . School and un ive rs i ty cu r r ic u l a a r e usua l l y d iv ided in t o a number

o f s u b je c t s , e ac h s u b j e c t b e in g a l l o t t e d one o r more h o ur s a t i n t e r v a l s

dur ing th e week. The c lass - t ime per sub jec t be ing very sh or t , r ead ing

and wri t ing ass ignments a r e us ed t o g iv e t h e s t u d e n t t h e n ee de d e x t r a

con tac t wi th each sub jec t .

The a u d io - l i n g ua l a pp ro ac h aims t o t e a c h l a ng ua ge f i r s t o f a l l a s a

s k i l l r a t h e r t ha n a s a s u bj e c t; t tea ch es one how t o use an ins t rument ,

n o t j u s t f a c t s ab ou t i t 5 Fa cts may be gleaned through read ing alon e,

bu t s k i l l i n us ing any ins t rument i s gain ed mainly through long and con-

s t a n t pr ac t i ce . Not only does th i s mean an even gr ea te r number of con-

t a c t - h o u r s t h an i n o t h e r s t u d i e s , b u t , b ec au se o f t h e n a t u r e of t h e s t u dy ,

15 cf . St rev ens 1963,12 and Palmer 1922,140. The analogy of a music al in-

s t rument i s we l l deve loped i n Hocket t 1950 ,266-267 .



n e a r l y a l l t h e c o n t a c t must b e w i th t h e t e a c h e r h i ms e l f. l

But most schools and u ni ve rs it ie s , even th os e equipped with language-

- l a b o r a t o r i e s , a r e re l uc ta n t t o make th e rad ic a l t ime- tab le changes neces -

sa ry t o provid e t he numbers of tea che rs and hours which would be requ ired

t o achieve any aud ia l mastery of a second language by t he le ar ne r . l

Compensation i s recommended i n th e grad e-sch ools by ex tending t h e

number of ye ars of language-st udy. Huebener recommends a t l e a s t a si x-

-year sequence i n jun ior - and senior-high -school . There i s even a move-

ment we l l underway i n th e United St a t es (known as FLES) t o promote t he

teach ing o f fo re ign languages i n the e lementary school ( s e e Brooks 114-119).

I t was repor ted t h a t th e long per i od of s t udy, however , caused a

marked d e l in e i n i n t e r e s t among the students of one school-system and

s o led t he a dm ini s t r a to rs t o cancel th e FLES programme a l t og et he r (see

Page, 139-141). This might po ss ib ly have been due t o ot he r fa c to rs , how-

ever , a l though th e s i tu a t io n was inve s t i ga t ed wi th some thoroughness . In

anot her FLES exper iment the re was evidence t h a t the in t rod uct ion of read-

i n g i n t h e u pp er gr a de s [ t h i r d t o s i x t h ] , a f t e r a f ou n da t io n of o r a l - a u r a l

work, in cr ea se s t h e ef fi ci en cy of lea rni ngr 1 (McRill 367-368).

16 cf . Hocket t (1950,267) The beginner a t a new language does not knowi n advance what th e l anguage sounds l i k e , and so th e bu lk o f h i s p rac -

t i c e , f o r a very long t ime , must be c a r r i ed on i n th e presence o f a

n at iv e spea ker who can check on h i s pro duc tio n . O'Connor and Twadell

(5 ) make t h e observa t ion th a t a model u t t e ra nce can be imi ta ted and

r e p ea t e d o r a l l y f a r o f t e n e r t ha n i n w r i ti n g

1 7 c f . G i l b e r t ( 6 5 ) We a r e a l l a gr e ed i n t h e o r y t h a t t h e aims of lan-

g uag e t e a c h in g i n t h i s c o un t ry [ u K ] a r e t o t r a i n t h e c h i l d t o h ea r,

speak , read and wr i t e th e l anguage. I n p r ac t i ce , however, t he i r s t

two o f t h e s e a im s a r e o f t e n abandoned a f t e r t h e f i r s t y e a r , o r e ven

e a r l i e r .



In a uni ve rs i t y s i tu at io n, where t he whole educat i onal programme i s

l i m it e d t o t h r e e o r f o u r ye a rs , n a t u r a l l y t i simpossible t o compensate

f o r t i m e - t a b l e d i f f i c u l t i e s by e xt en di ng t h e p e r i o d o f s t u d y . Here too

- -a t l ea s t i n th e humani t ies , under which language- ins t ruc t ion i s usua l -

l y c lassif ied- th e emphasis i s even more predominant ly on th e ac qu is i t io n

o f s c h o l a r l y knowledge r a t h e r t h an p r a c t i c a l s k i l l s , and many st ud en ts

spend only enough t ime s tud ying a language i n ord er t o meet adminis t ra-

t i v e requiremen ts . Domar (12) s t a t e s th e case bl un t l y from th e pedagog-

i c a l po in t o f vi ew:

he g r ea t ma jo r i t y o f s tuden t s a r e unable and /or unwi l l i ng

t o devote more than two years t o th e s tud y of Russ ian , and two

yea r s o f co l l ege [un i ve r s i t y ] Russi an a r e no t enough t o l e a rn

t o speak t h e language . Dur ing th es e two ye ar s , Russ ian s one

o f f o u r , f i v e , o r e ven s i x co u rs e s which t h e s t u d e n t i s c a rr y -

i n g , of te n a long wi th a par t - t ime job , and the re f or e he cannot

devote much t ime and e f f or t t o it

From t h i s and ot he r reasons she concludes (13) t h a t reading should be

th e main ob j ec t ive of the f i r s t two years of th e s tudy of Russ ian and

thus a read ing approach should be adopted.

r eading -cou rse i n a l anguage indeed f i t s more e a s i l y i n to t he lit

era ry a tmosphere of a humani t ies - facu l ty th an ins t r uc t i on i n th e mere

s k i l l s o f hea r ing and speak ing (which has no doubt c o n tr i b ut e d t o t h e

fo rmer ' s popu la r i t y t h rough the yea r s ) . With t h i s f i rm v i s ua l ba se , a

l i t t l e aud ia l a c t i v i t y i s e a s i l y added wi thou t be ing consp icuous . Domar

a l so i n s i s t s (13) t h a t s t uden t s should be t augh t co r r ec t p ronunc ia t i on

from th e very f i r s t mee ting of th e c la ss , and th er e should be some con-

ve r sa t ion i n Russi an to en l iven th e c l a s s p rocedure . Such an achieve-

ment appl ied l in gu is t s regard as gene ra l ly imposs ib le wi thout s t ro ng em-



p h a s i s o n t h e dev elop men t of a u d i a l s k i l l s t o t h e v i r t u a l e x c lu s io n o f

r e a d in g , e s p e c i a l l y i f c o r r e c t p r o nu n c ia t i on i s t o i n c lu d e t h e more com-

p l ex f e a t u r e s o f s t r e s s - and in to na t i on-p a t te rns such as one would us e ' i n

normal conversa t ion (c f . 3 .13 , 3 .14) . I t i s a well-known f a c t th a t r ea l

l lconversat io n cannot be produced merely on the ba si s o f re a d in g , o r l e a r -

ning how t o pronounce words , and cor rec t pronuncia t ion i s fa r f rom a t -

ta in ab le without much repeate d pr ac t i ce i n both auding and speaking, usu-

a l l y a t t h e t em po ra ry ex pe nse o f g r a p h ic f a c i l i t y . In informal conversa-

t i o n groups conducted f o r s t ud en ts s tudying Russian by a reading approach,

t h e a u th o r n o t i c e d t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t sound f e a tu r e s n ot f ou nd i n E n gl i s h,

e s p e c i a l l y p a l a t a l i z a t i o n o f c on so na nt s ( c f . 4 .12 , 6 .2 2) , w ere r a r e ly d i s -

t i n gu i s he d w it h a c cu r ac y , a s t h e r e ha d be en l i t t l e a t t e n t i o n g i ve n t o

a u d i a l e x e r c i s e i n t h e c l as s ro o m.

2.25 Answer t o chaZZenges The b e s t an sw er t o r e a din g e n t h u s i a s t s l i k e

Domar and Rosen i s probab ly g iven i n Char les F H o c k e t t l s a r t i c l e Lear-

ning Pron unci atio n (1950). The rea son we re ad ou r own language wi th

e a s e , t i s brought ou t , i s t h a t r e a din g s im ply i nv o lv es a s s o c i a t i n g t h e

wr i t t e n symbols wi th f am i l ia r speech sounds , which i n tu r n g ive us th e

meaning inten ded. Na tu ra ll y t h i s cannot apply i f we do not know what

sounds t h e symbols rep res ent :

Now i f we approach a f ore ign language i n i t s wr i t te n form,

with no advance knowledge and co nt ro l of i t s spoken form,

and t r y t o t r a i n o ur se lv es t o i n t e r p r e t t h e s t r i n g s of

grap hic shapes d i r e c t l y in t o meanings , we ar e t ry in g some-

t h i n g w hich i s c om pl et el y a l i e n t o t h e s t r u c t u r e a nd c a-

p a c i t i e s of t h e human nervous system. The only ef-

f i c i e n t way, i n t h e l on g ru n , t o pu t o n e se l f i n t h e p o s i t i on

t o read wi th maximum unders tand ing ma te r i a l wr i t t e n i n



some foreign language, i s t o g e t a t l e a s t a n e le me nt ar y con-

t r o l o f t h e s pok en form o f t h a t l an gu ag e f i r s t . l

The only exception, according t o Hocke tt , i s m a te r ia l of a s c i e n t i f i c

or t ech n ic a l na tu re , which lends i t s e l f t o r ea dy t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o o ne 's

n a t i v e t on gu e . L i t e r a tu r e i s not so ea s i ly t ra ns la ta b l e , however, and

l i t e r a r y m a te r i a l must b e r e c e iv e d by t h e s t u d e n t i n t h e a c o u s t i c s ha pe

i n which i t was o r i g i n a l l y c a s t , o r some l i t e r a r y va l ue s w l l b e l o s t

(Hockett 1950,264) I9 This corresponds with t he fol lowing obs ervat i on by

Pe te r S t revens :

reading knowledge c n be taugh t i n t h i s way [wi thout aud ia l

s k i l l s ] b ut t h e r e i s no ev idence th a t t each ing t thus i s more

ra p i d o r e f f ec t i ve , and a s t rong body of op in ion ex i s t s which

says t h a t even i f the spoken language i s quickly abandoned, t i s

h igh ly des i r ab le t o have passed th rough an 'o ra l -on ly ' s t a ge , and

the n subsequent ly made th e conversion f rom spoken t o wri t t en .

2.26 Swmnary Chal lenges t o the aud io- l ingua l assumptions h i th e r to d i s -

cus sed may be summarized as fo ll ow s:

2 .261 The co nf l i c t l i e s , no t i n th e in format ion supp l ied by the desc r ip -

t i v e l i n g u i s t a s t o t h e primacy of s pe ec h o ve r w r i t i n g , e t c . , b u t i n t h e

app l ic a t i on o f t h i s in fo rmat ion t o l anguage- teach ing methods.

2.262 The audi a l emphasis of th e audio- l ingua l approach co nf l i c t s wi thI

t h e g r a p h i c o r v i s u a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e s c ho ol -s ys te m .

2.263 Although t h e app l ie d l i ng ui s t advocates temporary exclus ion of

graph ic sk i l l s , th e pedagogical ru le o f g rada t ion recommends t h e i r use

a t l e a s t a s a s u pp o rt .

~ o c k e t t 9 50 ,2 63 .

1 9 c f . a l s o Sw ee t' s q u o t a t io n i n 2.12.



2 2 6 4 Grade-school language-programmes can supp ly th e e x tr a t ime needed

f o r audio- l ingua l t eaching by incr eas i ng t he number o f year s of l anguage-

- s tu d y b u t t h i s h a s n o t p ro ve d s a t i s f a c t o r y i n e ve ry c as e . Reading meth-

ods advocated fo r un iv er s i t i es where a long per iod of s tudy i s imposs ible

canno t e f f ec t i v e l y t each aud i a l s k i l l s from a v i s ua l ba s i s no r can t hey

su cc ee d i n t e ac h in g r ea di ng i t s e l f w i t h t h e f u l l e s t p o s s i b l e b e n e f i t t o

t h e l e a r n e r .



3. C T I V E AND P S S I V E S K I L L S

3.1 AUDING APLID SPEAKING.

3 . 11 Differences between native and target Zanguage. Every year m i l

l i on s of p eople s t a r t l ea rn l ng a second language , wr i t e s Mackey (107) ,

but very few succeed i n master ing i t . Why i s t h i s s o? h e a s k s .

I n 2 . 2 2 t wds shown t h a t th e po s l t lo n of t h e second- language l ea r -

ne r c annot be e qua te d w i th t h a t o f t h e c h i l d l e a r n l ng h f s m o ther t ongue .

The h i gh - sc h oo l o r u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t h as a l r e a d y l e ar n ed h i s f i r s t l a n -

guage, we observed, and through hi s ed uca t io nal ex per ie nce has been ra th -

e r s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n ce d by i t s v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ; h en ce h e f i n d s d i f -

f i c u l t y i n l e a rn m g a u r a l l y .

F a m i l i a r i t y w i th t h e g r a p hi c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f o n e ' s n a t i v e t on gu e

i s no t t h e on ly ob s t a c l e t o one ' s m a s te r y o f a s ec ond , how ever. A s Hoc-

k e t t ( 1950,265) e x p l a i n s, t h e f i r s t s o ur ce o f d i f f i c u l t y i s t h e h a b i t s

we a l re ady have f o r pronouncing our own l a n g ~ a g e . ~

From t h e d i s c o v e r i e s o f l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n t i s t s we h av e l ea r n ed t h a t

unde r ly ing ea ch s poke n l anguage i s a unique s e t o f pa t t e r n s o r h bits

(see Brooks 4 9 - I n f a c t , t h e d i sc o v er y o f t h i s v i t a l pr ob le m, and p r o -

p os ed s o l u t i o n s t o i t , p ro ba bl y c o n s t i t u t e s t h e g r e a t e s t c o n t r i b u ti o n o f

th e appl ied l in g u is t s t o th e improvement of l anguage -teaching me thods . 3

I ~ a r g e tZanguage S a te rm f r e q u e n t l y u se d by a p p l i e d l i n g u i s t s t o i n d i -

c a t e t h e l a ng ua ge b e i ng l e a r n e d , a s o pp osed t o t h e l e a r n e r ' s n a t i v e

tongue

*c f . a l s o Mackey 107-108.

3 ~ o n t r a s t i v e n a ly s ls s ee 4.22 1s hera lded by Guy Capelle 59 as une

d e s i d 6 e s l e s p l u s p r o d u c ti v e s d e l a l i n g u i s t i q u e moderne .



Since no two languages have ide n t ic a l s e t s o f hab i t s , t i s e v id en t t h a t

th e l ea rn er 's thoroughly ingrain ed ha bi ts f o r h i s own language may

p a r t l y he l p , b u t w l l l a l s o p a r t l y I n t e r f e r e w i th , t h e h a b i t s t o b e ac -

qu ir ed fo r t h e new language (Hockett 1950,266)

The sounds, construct ions , and meanings of d i f f e re nt languages are

no t t h e same: t o g e t an easy command of a f or ei gn language one must

l e a r n t o i g n or e t h e f e a t u r e s o f any and a l l o t h e r l an gu ag es , e s p e c i a l l y

of o ne ' s own , we read on the f i r s t page of Bloom fie ld 's Out l ine Guide

fo r th e Pra ct i caZ Stud9 of Foreign Languages ( c f . a l so Palmer 1922,43) .

In p ra c t ic e , however , i t has been found more d i f f i c u l t t o e l i mina te bad

ha b i t s than t o l ea r n good ones (c f . Benson 7 8 ) , a s t h e S o v i e t e d u ca to r

A A Reformatski] expla ins :

The p ro bl em o f n a t iv e - la n g ua g e i n t e r f e r e n c e i s f i r s t e n c ou n te r ed i n

t h e t r a i n i n g o f t h e l e a r n e r ' s auding h a b i t s . A s Palmer (1922,130) no-

t e d , i f h i s e a r - t r a i n i ng i s neg lec ted dur ing the e lementa ry s tage , he

w l l rep l ace fo re lgn sounds by na t ive ones and in s e r t i n t ru s i ve sounds

m t o t he words o f t he l anguage he i s learning . Ca rr ol l (1069-1070) l i s t s

as th e f i r s t o f f our phonolog ica l p roblems th a t o f d i sc riminat ion- I1 i.e . ,

hear ing t h e di f f er en ce between phonemes which a re not d is t in gui she d or

f . a l s o Maekey 1 09.

5 ~ e f o r m a t s k i j C f a ls o Brooks 56-57) What [ t he le ar ne r] does not

know i s t ha t th e sound-system and th e s t ru c t u r a l sys tem of t h e new lan-

g ua ge a r e d i f f e r e n t I n n e a r ly e v er y d e t a i l from th o s e I n h i s mo th er

tongue



used i n one ' s na t i ve l anguage . The r e a l importance of aud i to ry discr im-

i n a t i o n w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d i n 3 .1 2 .

The eventual consequence of ne gle ct o f handl ing nat ive- language in -

ter fe rence--assuming th a t th e l e a rn er con t inues wi th th e l anguage f o r a

number of years ---wi ll be what i s known a s compound biZinguaZism, i n which

cer ta i n fea tu r es of a second language re added t o a l e a r ne r ' s mother

tongue but ar e not s epara ted from i t (Brooks 267) and th e mother tongu e

ontin ues t o accompany--and of cou rse t o d o m i n a t e t h e whole complex

f a b r i c of language behavior (Brooks 9; c f . a l so Fishman 128 and Carr ol l

1085-1086). This i s dis t inc t f rom co-ord ina te b i l ingua l i sm, where the

speaker can make both languages function independently of each other. The

l a t t e r i s t h e o n l y r e a l b a s i s f o r sp ea ki ng t h e l an gu ag e and i s t h e g o a l o f

t h e au di o- li ng ua l approach. Compound bi li ng ua li sm , i n which two languages

co ns t i tu te s imply two d i f fe re n t ways o f encod ing th e same s e t o f re fe r en-

t i a l meanings (Car r o l l 1085) , invo lves cons tan t t r a ns la t i on from and in to

th e l e a r n e r ' s n a t i v e t on gu e and i s g e n e r a l l y a d op te d a s t h e a im of t h e

reading approach.

3.12 The importance of au di to ry comprehension. The gr ea t es t problem f o r

a t r a v e l l e r i n a f o r e ig n c o u n t ry , a cc o rd in g t o Wilga M Rivers , i s n o t h i s

d i f f i c u l t y i n speak ing th e language, bu t ra th e r tha t he cannot unders tand

what i s bel ng s a f d t o him and around him . As a r e s u l t , s h e a d ds , t h e r e

i s no communication and th e t r a v e l l e r ' s speaking sk i l l s cannot be exerc ised

t o g r ea t advantage (Rivers 196) .

This i s p ro ba bl y a l l t o o t r u e . The au thor re ca l l s s i mi la r compla in ts

from t r a v e l l e r s who had been given ample ins t r uc t i on i n corre ct pronunci-



a t i on , b u t wi th l i t t l e o r no t r a i n i n g i n comprehension o f f l u e n t u t t e r -

a n c es ; h e h im s e lf a t o ne t im e f oun d g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t y i n u n de r s ta n d in g

na t i ve speakers than i n being unders tood by them.

Basic t o aud i to ry comprehension i s t h e c a p ac i t y f o r a u d i t o r y d i s -

c r im ina t ion , which, a s we no t iced i n 3 .11 , p la ys an impor tant l i ng u i s t i c

r o l e i n l an g ua g e- l ea r ni n g. I t i s an accep ted fa c t o f l anguage-use t ha t

speaking i s depe'ndent on hear ing , ju s t a s g raph ic s k i l l s depend on aud i a l

ones . This i s supported by Hoc ket t ls obse rvat ion (1958,118) on audi tory

feedback , o r th e heari ng o f on e' s own speech, namely th a t any impairment

o f t h as an a dv e rs e e f f e c t on o ne ' s a b i l i t y t o a r t i c u l a t e so un ds c o r r e c t -

l y . Do n o t a t te m pt t o o b t a i n a p e r f e c t p r o nu n ci a ti o n a t t h e f i r s t l e s -

son , was Franqois Gouin' s adv ice i n t each ing the p r imary sk i l l s o f a l an-

g ua ge . Address t h e e a r t h e n , f i r s t o f a l l , and p r i n c ip a l l y . The

e a r i s t h e pri me m i n i s t e r o f t h e i n t e l l i g e n c e w 7 Brooks (110) states:

Although language sounds or i gi na te i n th e voice-box of th e

th ro at and a r e modulated i n t o rec ogni zabl e speech by move-

ments i n t h e mouth, t i s t h e e a r t h a t d o min ate s t h e l e a r -

ning and use of speech sounds. 8

Like many pr ime min is te rs , however , th e organ of th e e a r has t he

k f . a l s o Lemieux, who s t a t e s t h a t t h e pr ima r y o b j e c t o f t e a c h in g pronun-

c iz t i on i s th e development of comprehension of t h e normal speech of t he

fo re ig n na ti ve . I n communicating wit h for ei gn peoples our own pronun-

c i a t i o n i s a s ec on da ry m a t te r ( ~ e m i e u x 3 5 ) .

7 ~ u o t e d n M6ras 42 Brooks 1 4 4 ) j u s t i f i e s t h i s a ss ig nm en t of r a nk a s

fol l ows: Bnphasis upon hear ing should come f i r s t [of th e au di a l

s k i l l s ] , s i n ce t h e e a r i s t h e key organ i n a l l spe ec h; i t not only

p e r m i t s t h e i n d i v id u a l t o h e a r what i s s a id b u t a l s o c o n t r o l s what h e

says when he a c ts as speaker .

8 ~ f l s o Muel ler 185.



l e a s t p r o c l i v i t y t ow ar d a c c u r a t e di sc er nm en t o f d e t a i l and i s probably

t he most s us ce pt ib le t o f a l s e i ~ n ~ r e s s i o n . ~almer brought out what many

psych ologi s ts ar e recognizing today, t h a t we hear what we expect t o hear

ra the r than wha t i s a c t u a l ly s a i d . There i s a g re a t d i f fe rence , he

say s , between r e a l l y hear i ng and merely imagining t h a t one has heard a

sound o r a suc ces sio n of sounds (Palmer 1922,71).

Yet even methods based on an au di al approach t o langua ge-st udy, a s

P ie r re Leon po in t s ou t , f requ en t ly p resen t the s tude n t with a mass o f a r -

t i c u l a t o r y d e t a i l f o r c or re c t p ro nu nc ia ti on w it ho ut f i r s t t r a i n i n g h i s

ea r in accura t e d i s t in c t io n o f s ign i f ic an t sounds , which , we have seen ,

d i re c t ly con t r o l s the a c t o f speech p roduc tion ( see Leon 57-62) . In such

cas es, accor ding t o Huebener (1965,37), mastery of a ud it or y comprehension

i s cons iderab ly re t a rd ed . Hence Brooks spec i f ie s t ha t the aud io- l ingua l

l e a r n e r is t o he ar much more th an he spe aks , [and] i s t o speak only on

th e ba si s o f what he has heard . l o

Riv ers (204) reminds us of t he need f o r continued emphasis on auding

throu ghout th e l ea rn in g programme:

i s te n i ng comprehension i s no t a s k i l l which can b e mastered

once and f o r a l l and t h en i g n o r e d w h i l e o t h e r s k i l l s a r e d e ve l-

o pe d. T he re must be r e g u l a r p r a c t i c e w ith i n c r e a s in g d i f f i c u l t

m a t e r i a l .

3.13 Method and order of presentation I t was b rought ou t i n 3 .12 t ha t a

9 ~ f eon 7 6 ) When pre se nt in g new ma te ri al , one must remember t h a t . .

t h e most d i f f i c u l t s k i l l t o a c qu i r e i s p ro ba b ly a n a t i v e l i k e a udio-

comprehension .

1 • ‹ ~ r o o k s2. C f . a l s o Mackey (263) As Epict e tu s put i t long ago, na-

t u r e has give n man one tongue and two e ar s t h a t he may hear t wic e a s

much a s he speak s .



number of te ach ing methods, even tho se au di al ly or ie nt ed , overemphasize

th e mechanics of speech-production a t th e expense of needed ear - t ra in in g.

The concern f o r co rr ec t pronu nciat ion has long been proclaimed by l i t

era ry en t hus ias t s a s a fe a t u r e o f the read ing approach ( e .g . Domar 13) ,

although probably more often than not the new sounds were merely approx-

imated in t e rms o f those o f the mother tongue (c f . n o te on t r a ns l i t e ra -

t i o n i n 4 . 2 3 . More re ce nt methods have ex hi bi te d a gre at er degree of

a cc ur a cy i n p r o n u n c i at i o n - t ea c h in g , t h an k s t o p h on o log i c al d e s c r ip t i o n s

p ro v id ed b y l i n g u i s t i c s c i e n t i s t s , b u t few h av e t a ke n t h e e x t r a s t e p s

n e c es s ar y t o d e a l s a t i s f a c t o r i l y w ith t h e p ro bl em o f a u d i t o r y d i sc r im-

ination and comprehension.

A number of l i n g u i s t s , inc lud ing Leon (76), Green (86) , and Belasco

( l a ) , recommend th a t , f o r the sake o f adequate t r a i n i ng i n d i sc r imina-

t i on , th e teaching-programme should conce ntra t e f i r s t of a l l on phonemes,

p roceeding t o th e phone t ic l eve l on ly when a l l obs t ac les t o aud io- l ingua l

comprehension have been overcomef' (Leon 76 1

Others , however, po in t o ut t h a t t h e stu dy of phonemes---or even of

words---alone i s n o t enough t o a ch i e ve a s a t f s f a c to r y a u ding a b i l i t y .

Palmer (1921,18) re fe rs t o the fatal attraction of the false facility

offered by the written word and shows how un r e l i a b l e t h e word i s a s a

speech s igna l . l Mackey (235) f u r t h e r ex pl ai ns

I ~ f . l s o Be lasco 18.

I 2 c f . a l s o R ive r s ( 1 9 6 ) : Even i f t h e n a t i v e s p e ak e r e n u n c i at e s h i s words

s lowly and d i s t i nc t ly , e lements o f s t r e s s , in ton a t ion and word-group-

i n g , o f t e n e xa gg e ra te d i n an e a r n e s t a tt em p t a t c l a r i t y , add t o t h e

confus ion o f the inexper ienced fo re igner .



h e l ea rn er must go beyond th e phoneme i n o rde r t o be ab le

t o unde r s tand a l anguage . So l ong a s he hea r s on l y t h e i nd i v -

id ua l sounds , or even ind iv id ual words and ph ras es , hew l l

n o t u n de rs ta n d t h e l a r g e r s t r u c t u r e s . For the r e l a t ions among

t h e component s of a pa t t e rn must be known bef cre i t s in d iv idu al

members can be unde rstood . Does t h e method th e re fo re

p r e s e n t s ou nd s, w or ds , o r s e n t e n c e s f i r s t ? 1 3

I t would appear t hen t h a t , i f t h e a dv an ta ge s o f t h e a u d i o - l i n g u al

a pp ro ac h a r e t o be f u l l y e x p l o i t e d , a d eq u at e t r a i n i n g i n t h e l l pa s s iv e

s k i l l o f aud ing14 must be g i ven p recedence ove r speak ing ab i l i t y . Time

and e f f o r t a r e r e qu ir ed f o r t r a i n i n g t h e e a r n ot o nl y t o a s s i m i l a t e t h e

su prap ho nem ic p a t t e r n s o f f l u e n t sp ee ch su ch a s s t r e s s , i n t o n a t i o n , e t c . ,

b u t a l s o t o p e r c e i v e s i g n i f i c a n t s o u nd - fe a tu r es which i n t u r n w l l i n f l u - /

ence th e i nd iv id ua l ' s own product ion o f speech sounds . This cannot be

accomplished simpl y by teac hi ng how in di vi du al phonemes o r words a r e

pronounced , b u t by r epe a ted pr es en ta t io n of whole sen te nces and phras es

f o r l i s t e n i n g a nd u n de r s ta n d in g .

The inf l ue nce appa rent ly works i n both d i r e c t io ns , however, accor -

d ing t o Hocket t , who s t a t e s as an undeniable f ac t th a t one cannot even

he r a new l anguage co r r e c t l y un t i l one has l earne d t o pronounce t r e a s -

onab ly we l l onese l f ; hence , he p r oposes , t he na t u r a l and most e f f i c i e n t

3 ~ 6 ~ nv i d en t l y r e a l i ze d t h e i mport ance o f sup raphonemic c ons i d e r a t i o ns

f o r l a t e r on t h e same page (7 6) he recommends: Audiocomprehension

s h o u ld b e t a u g h t by f i r s t t r a i n i n g s t u d e n t s t o u n de rs ta n d c o mp le te

s e n t e n c e s , o r a t l e a s t groups of words, and th en by usi ng minimal

p a i r s i n o rd e r t o t r a i n t h e i r e a r s t o pe r ce i v e im po rta nt a c o u s t ic a l

cues1' .

1 4 s t r i c t l y s p e ak i n g, a s Mackey b r i n g s o u t , p e r ce p t io n o f s p e ec h i s n o t

p a s s i v e . The s k i l l o f l i s t e n i n g t o a f o r e i g n l an gu ag e an d u n de rs ta n -

d i n g what i s s a i d i n v o l v e s 1) he immediate and unconscious recogni-

t i o n o f t s s i g n i f i c a n t e l e m e nt s , a nd ( 2 ) t h e comprehension of th e

meaning which th e combinat ion of th es e elem ents conveys ( ~ a c k e ~61) .



way i s t o deve lop a t one and the same t ime a b i l i t y t o pronounce cor rec t ly

and t o hear cor re c t ly (Hocke t t 1950,264/265) . Th is p r in c i p l e , i f adop-

ted , would p rec lude th e use o f an aud ing-on ly per iod s im i l a r t o th e in -

i t i a l u s e o f a u d i a l s k i l l s b e f o r e t h e i n t ro d uc t i on o f g ra ph i c on es . 15

3.14 Treatment of speech produ ction . The second st ag e of language -lear -

ning i s r e f e r r ed t o i n one a r t i c l e (Banathy e t a l . , 37) a s l e a rn i ng t h e

product ion of th e sound sequences of th e ta rg et language s o th a t i t s na-

t i v e sp eak ers can comprehend them immediately and i d e n t i f y them as accep-

t a b l e . l In ord er t o do t h i s , however , one has t o do more tha n merely

recognize s i gn i f ic an t sound d i s t in c t io ns , a s Mackey (236) exp la ins :

I n d i s t i ng u i s h i ng t h e s ounds o f t h e s poken la nguage , i t i s s uf -

f i c i e n t t o b e a b l e t o t e l l one phoneme f rom a n o t h er ; i n s p e ak i ng

t h e language , however , t h i s i s no t enough. For we cannot speak

i n phonemes; we have t o u t t e r t h e pa r t i c u l a r c om bina ti ons o f a l -

lop hon es which comprise them. Some methods com ple tel y ig no re

t h i s ; o t h e r s g i v e s o much a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d e t a i l s of p ro nu nc i-a t i o n t h a t n o t im e i s l e f t f o r t h e o t h e r e l em en ts of s pe ec h.

These other element^'^, according t o a number of aud io- lin gua l spe-

c i a l i s t s , a r e j u s t a s s i g n i f i c a n t t o sp ee ch p r o du c ti o n , i f n o t more s o ,

than th e a r t i c u l a t io n o f th e sounds themse lves . Most a llophones a re a l -

most never p ronounced i n i s o l a t io n , bu t by t h e i r ve ry na tu r e a s a l lophones

depend on c on ti g uo u s so unds ( i . e . t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n ) f o r t h e i r e x i s t e n c e .

15 cf . Huebener 1965,37. S e p a ra t i on o f a c t i v e a nd p a s s iv e s k i l l s i s o ne o f

t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f wh at i s known a s p r o g r a m e d l a ngua ge - ins t r uc -

t i o n ( c f . F. Rand Morton's ALLP Spa n i s h e xpe r im e n t a s de s c r i be d i n

Valdman 1 4 6 and i s recommended even i n t h e a ud io - l i ngua l a ppr oac h

( c f . B r ooks 1 4 4 .

1 6 c f . a l s o Hocket t (1950,262) who sp ec i f ie s a good pronun c ia t ion a s

one which w i l l n o t draw t h e a t t e n t i o n o f a n a t i v e s p ea k er of t h a t

language away from what we a r e s a y i n g t o t h e way i n which we a r e say-

i n g i t .



This means that allophones should be learned in their respective environ-

ments, as part of sound sequen es (for example, consonants should be

learned not only individually but in clusters as well).

But training in speech production cannot stop with sound-sequences.

Suprasegmental features such as stress, juncture, and intonation, must

also be taken into consideration. Stress is an important phonemic fea-

ture in Russian. Robert Lado (48) gives a pointed illustration of the

significance of juncture: wedonotrealizethatinspeakingwemaynothaveas

cle rlydefinedwordjunctures sthesp cesbetweenwordsinwritingwouldh veus

believe . And E.P. Sedun (13) points out the significance of intonation

in the learning programme:

These other elements, then---sound-sequences, stress, juncture, and

intonation---are important in the learner's own production of speech as

well as his comprehension of utterances, and cannot afford to be neglec-

ted in a successful audio-lingual approach.

1 7 ~ h e umerous factors involved in both auding and speaking are briefly

hinted at in the following statement of Brooks' (57): It must be

explained to [the learner] that in his new circumstance grammar

means the stream of speech issuing from a speaker's lips, the rec-

ognition of the similarities and differences in these sounds, their

complicated forms and arrangements, their intricate relations to

each other and to the things they represent, and his eventual pro-

duction of these sounds in a controlled and meaningful way . Cf.

also Mackey 236.



3.2 CONTEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS

3.21 Dia lect s t y l e and tempo: si gn if ic ance for auding. From t h e be-

ginning, sounds can be learn ed through hear i ng nat ur a l u t t era nce s given

a t th e speed of normal na ti ve speech (MBras 146). We concluded i n 3 .13

th a t one o f th e requ i rements o f t he aud io- l ingua l approach was t ra in in g

i n th e comprehension o f th e f lu en t speech o f na t iv e speakers . What exact-

l y co ns t i tu te s normal na t i ve speech , however , needs t o be more spec if -

i c a l l y d e fin e d f o r t e a c h in g p u rp os e s.

V a r i a t i o n s i n s pe ec h i n v o lv e t h r e e m ajor f a c to r s : d i a l e c t , s t y l e ,

and tempo. St yl e may be inf luenc ed by dia le c t and tempo by both; a l l

t h r e e , ho weve r, a r e s u b j e c t t o e x t e r n a l i n f l u e n c e s , s uc h a s t h e s p e a k e r ' s

so c i a l background, occupa tion , and d i s pos i t i on respe c t i ve l y . Note the

r e l a t i v e d e gr e e s o f permanence o f e ac h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c .

Huebener ( 19 65 ,4 ) d e f in e s a s t h e f i r s t l i n g u i s t i c ( n o n - c ul t u r a l )

ob j ec t ive o f l anguage-teach ing the ab i l i t y to comprehend th e fo re i gn

language when spoken a t normal speed and when concerned wi th or di na ry ,

nontechnical sub je ct mat ter . And Rivers (202) advis es t h a t even i n

t h e v e ry e a r l y s t a g e s f a m i l i a r m a t e r i al can be understood when spoken

a t normal speed . She exp la ins t h i s l a s t phrase as fo l lows:

Normal speed does no t mean ra pi d na t i ve speech, but a speed of

de l i ve ry which would not appear t o a na t i ve s pe a ke r t o be un-

duly labored--a speed which re ta in s normal word groupings , e l i -

s i o n s , l i a s o n s , c on so na nt a s s i m i l a t i o n s , n a t u r a l rhyth m an d i n -

t o n a t i o n . U t t er a n ce s which a r e d e l i v e r e d a t a n unna tu r a l l y s l ow

p ac e a r e i n e v i t a b l y d i s t o r t e d an d t h e a c o u s t i c images s t o r e d b y

t h e s t u de n t w l l not b e immedia te ly us ef ul when he hea rs a na tu-

r a l f or m o f s pe ec h . l



The Russia n ed uc at or V.I . Polov nikova , however, whose main concern

i sp r e p a rin g f o r e ig n s t u d e n t s t o u nd er st an d l e c tu r e s i n R us si an , b e l i e v e s

that the tempo should be graded, c~avaxa o 35, a a ~ e ~O 50--60 CJIOB B

MMHYTY (Polovnikova 135) 9

Not u nr el at ed t o tempo i s what one might c a l l th e information-den-

sity of an ut te ra nc e and t s corres pondi ng redundancy, which, acc ordin g

t o R iv e rs (197), i s what helps us t o p ie ce tog eth er the informat ion we

hear . This i s a r a th e r im po rt an t p o in t , s i n c e t has been an acknowl-

edged p r ac t i ce o f t r ad i t io na l l anguage- tex tbooks t o overload t h e i r ex-

ample- and dr il l- se nt en ce s wit h an abundance of semantic or grammatical

information, and t s p o s s i bl e t h a t t h i s f l a i r has been c a r r i e d on i n

th e d ia logues p rov ided i n the more recen t t e x t s . Na turalness o f speech ,

however , i s an accepted aud io- l ingua l p ropos i t ion .

I t i s s t l l th e na tu ra l speech o f educa ted speakers th a t s d e s i r e d ,

and genera l ly o f a s tandard d i a l ec t in f a i r l y common use .20 I t i s t h e

s t y l e of speech they would use i n dea l in g with ordinary, nontechnical

su bj ec t mat ter , as Huebener put t (se e above qu ot at io n) . Extremes of

l i t e r a r y and c o l l o q u i a l s t y l e a r e n ot c on si de re d s u i t a b l e f o r t e ac hi ng

p u rp o se s , a s C a p e l l e i l l u s t r a t e s w i th F re nc h:

Pr6 sen ter des 612ves br i tan niq ues qui ne poss2dent pas duf r an sa i s ne des c r i p t i on de Balzac ou u d i a l o g u e p r i s s u r

2 0 ~ h e r e ay, o f c o u r s e , b e s p e c i a l r e as o ns f o r c ho os in g a p a r t i c u l a r d i a -

l e c t o r s t y l e of speech , depending upon t h e known needs of t h e l e a r -

n e r ( s e e Mackey 163-164).



l e vi f dans l e s cou l o i r s du met ro par i s i en , ne peu t que semer

l a c on fu si on d an s l e u r e s p r i t ou p l u t e t , c e q u i e s t e n co re

pl us grav e, l e s pou sse r adm ett re to us ces modsles cornrne va-l a b l e s en m8me temps e t s e co ns ti tu er une variEtE nouvel le

e t i n a c c ep t a b l e de f r a n s a i s . 21

Brooks s t re ss es th e importance o f main ta in ing c l a r i t y o f peech

s i g n a l s 52) and a v oid ing s l u r r i n g and c o l l o q u i a l d i s t o r t i o n s . The

l e a r n e r , and espe c ia l ly th e class room le a rn er , i s e n t i t l e d t o he ar l an -

guage c l ea r l y i n focus a s he learns (Brooks 53) .

3 2 2 Dia lect s t y l e and tempo: si gn if ica nc e for speaking. The selec-

t i on o f a speech-var ie ty f o r the l e a r ne r ' s own use appears t o be q u i t e

ano ther ques t i on , however . I s th e l ea rn er to make fa i t h f u l imi ta t ion o f

a l l t ha t he hears i n the way of f l ue n t na t iv e speech a t normal speed ,

which might poss ibly include occasional depar tures f rom the es tabl ished

norm of p ronunc ia t ion fo r the d i a l ec t , e s p e c i a l l y when a number of pos-

s i b l e v a r i a t i o n s e x i s t f o r t h e s ame sound?

A number of those concerned favour some s t an da rd iz at io n. Fa ci l i ty

i n th e use of th e spoken language with acce ptable s tanda rds of pronunci-

a t io n and grammatical correct ness1 ' i s formulated a s Huebener ls second l in -

gu is t i c obj ec t i ve . Faced wi th the cho ice between the un inh i b i ted p ro-

n u n c i at i o n o f t h e man i n t h e s t r e e t and t h a t o f t h e o v er c ar e fu l d i c t i o n

teacher , Leon (61) s ees th e f i n a l ob je ct iv e a s the former f o r audiocom-

prehens ion and th e l a t t e r f o r sound product ion .

Although few app l ied l i ng u i s t s would agree with th e s pe c i f i ca t io n o f

2 1 ~ a p e l l e 8. C f also Sweet 40) Vulgarisms should be avo ide d. sim-

p ly b e ca us e t h e y b e lo ng t o a d i f f e r e n t d i a l e c t .

2 2 ~ u e b e n e r 9 6 5, b.C f

a l so Weins te in29

ugakov 379, Bogorodickij3 3 2



an overcarefu l d i c t io n teacher as a norm fo r everyday conversa t iona l

s t y l e , t he re does seem t o be a gene ra l concern tha t t he l e a rne r avoid

va r i a t io ns i n h i s own pronuncia t ion , a t l e as t u n t i l he knows enough of

the l anguage to u se them in s t i n c t iv e l y . s Sweet put i t 42 ) , his

tex t -books should , as f a r as pos s ib le , g ive a un iform pronuncia t ion , no

mat ter how ar bi t r ar y t he se le ct io n may be .

I n f a c t , Sweet ' s de sc r i p t i on (40) of the medium col loq uia l s t y l e

of pronuncia t ion a t which the le a r ne r should aim i s probably t he bes t

adapted t o the ob jec t iv es of th e audio- l ingua l approach:

t i s pa i n fu l and incongruous t o hea r t h e r ap id p ronunc ia t i on

of c l ip ped speech reproduced i n a s low, solemn, o ra to r i ca l tem-

po. On t h e ot he r hand, t i s much more i r r a t i o n a l t o t e a c h a

fore ig ner pronuncia t ions which never occur i n the c o l l oqu ia l

speech of na t i ve s . The be s t gener a l advice i s t he re fo re : neve r

b e o r a t o r i c a l ; b e c o l l o q u i a l , b u t n ot t o o c o l l o q u i a l.

We may conclude, the n, t h a t in the audio - l ingu al approach mat er i a l

f o r auding should be presented a t a moderate , conve rsat i onal tempo, un-

d i s t o r t e d e i t h e r by e x c e ss i ve sp ee d o r a r t i f i c i a l s lo wn es s, and p o s s i b l y

graded i n t h e i n i t i a l s t a g e s . There should be a natural amount of redun-

dancy t o f a c i l i t a t e comprehension . S t y l e should be th a t normal ly used i n

conversa t ion be tween educa ted speakers of a s tandard d ia le c t , avoid ing

unnecessa ry d i s to r t i o ns and ex tr emes o f e i t he r l i t e r a r y o r vu lga r speech .

Mater ia l p resen ted fo r speaking should no t depa r t from conversa t iona l

s t y l e o r tempo, b u t need no t i nc lude the va r i a t i ons i n pronunc iat i on th a t

the l ea rne r might no t i ce i n auding .

3 2 3 Choice of vehicle In 3 .1 we saw the de s i ra b i l i ty of t each ing audia l

s k i l l s p r imar i l y t h rough the u se o f ph ra se s and sen tences r a th e r t han i so -

la te d sounds o r words. We have a l so conc luded t ha t mate r ia l should be pre -



sented in the normal conversational style and tempo of educated speakers

of a standard dialect without distortions or extremes.

Even within these limits, however, there is still a variety of ve-

hicles in which material may be presented to the learner. By vehicles

we mean forms such as the give-and-take of simple conversational situa-

tions, short sketches or short stories containing a considerable amount

of conversation, and brief reports from fellow-students (which Rivers

[ 2 3 ] lists as suitable for training in auditory comprehension, although

most of them involve active learner-participation as well).

The keynote here is conversation, generally presented in the audio-

-lingual approach by what is known as dialogue. C n o M o q m ma.noro~ ,

writes Polovnikova (134), Y A ~ ~ T C R TIepBbIX AHeR 3aCTaBMTb CTyAeHTa r0

BOPMTb IIO-PYCCICM, WMTOM rO BO PM Tb T T ~ ~ B M J I ~ H O . WO of Brooks' many rea-

sons for the success of the dialogue are its natural and exclusive use

of the audio-lingual skills and the fact that all the elements of the

sound-system appear repeatedly, including the suprasegmental phonemes,

which are often the most difficult for the learner . 3

Yet there are a number of those concerned who question the value of

the dialogue in training the learner's audial habits. In fact, it is pre-

cisely because dialogues do suppose the use of nearly all the complex

abilities of speech , as Mackey (267) observes, that some methods do not

use them

clusions

until these have been mastered . (This would contradict the con-

reached in 3.1 as to the order of presentation of units.) On the

1 4 5 . Cf. also Huebener 1965 l3.



other hand, there are those who think that dialogues are not realistically

complex enough:

In the elaboration of audio-lingual methods we have come to re-

member belatedly that parroting dialogues and performing mechan-

ical pattern drills do not constitute use of language and that

only i student can comprehend and produce sentences he has

never heard before and transfer his skills and knowledge to a

normal communication situation can language learning be said to

have taken place.

This statement nevertheless does not dispute the use of dialogues in the

initial stages, but it does draw our attention to the need for some tran-

sitional link between classroom dialogues and real-life situations. Brooks

proposes to meet this need by introducing an important intermediate step

..called dialogue adaptation, in which the expressions learned in the dia-

logue are, with the aid of the teacher, at once made personal by the stu-

dent (Brooks 145)

The alternative of course is to exclude dialogues altogether and rely

on the give-and-take of simple conversational situations between the

teacher and students, or among the students themselves. This is the solu-

tion recommended by Palmer, who sets forth in the second half of The Oral

Method of Teaching anguages (1921,39-134) a systematized programme of

forms of work . The main part of the programme, following drills in aud-

4~a ld man 56-157. Cf also Anisfeld 113.

25~otivation f the learner is another significant factor here. What

class members seem to resent is that the classroom procedure has be-

come essentially impersonal , writes Horace Dewey (12) in an article

advocating exercises in addition to dialogues. Cf.

also Rivers 200), ho recommends that dialogues be exploited more

fully by recombinations of the material in the current and earlier

dialogues, particularly in the context of actual situations .



ing and fmf ta t fng , involve s th e use of ques t io ns and answers o r commands

and answers ) on the pa r t of both t eache r and l ea rn er . Probably the main

d is ad v an ta g e i n t h i s v e h i c l e i s the extra demands t makes upon the inge-

n u i t y o f t h e t e a c h e r , a nd t h e g r e a t e r da ng er o f l a p s in g i n t o a r t i f i c i a l

s peech pa t t e r ns i n a t t empt s t o c r e a t e va r i ous communication s i t ua t i on s .

S inging s anothe r vehic l e th a t has been somet imes sugges ted fo r use

i n t he aud i o - l i ngua l programme, p a r t i cu l a r l y i n t each i ng p r onunc i a t i on .

I t i s uns ui t a b le i n th e case of Russ ian , however, not only because of t s

l a c k o f i n t o n a t i o n p a t t e r n s , b u t b ec au se o f t h e v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e phono-

logfcal sys tem which ~t i nvo l ves .

The dialogue, then, i s appa r en t l y t he most u s e f u l ve h i c l e f o r p r e s -

en t a t i on o f aud i a l ma t e r i a l i n t he aud i o - l i ngua l appr oach, p r ovi ded t h a t

t i s not a l lowed t o r emain a t th e l e ve l o f a f ix ed passage f o r memoriza-

t i o n , b u t i s f u l l y exp l o i t ed i n t er ms o f r ecombi na t ion and adap t a t i on t o

t h e p e r so n a l e x p e ri e nc e o f t h e l e a r n e r .

3.24 S m a r y The aud io- l i ngu al approach t o auding and speaking and th e

fa ct or s involved th er ei n may be summarized as fol l ows:

3 .241 D i f f e r ences between t he s e t s o f ha b i t s o f t he na t i ve and t a r g e t

l anguages c on s t i t u t e a ma jo r hi ndr ance t o t h e lear n in g of a second l an-

guage , and a r e f i r s t encount e red i n t he p roblem o f a ud i t o r y d i s c r i mi n a t i on .

3.242 S i nc e au di ng h a s a d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e on t h e o t h e r p ri ma ry s k i l l s , t

s ho ul d b e ta ug h t f i r s t , u s i ng l a r g e r u n i t s o f s peech such a s s en tences and

p h r a s e s .

3.243 Speech product ion l ikewise should not be t aught exc lus iv e ly by i s o-

l a te d sounds, but i n sequences and sentences , inc ludin g suprasegmenta l



f e a t u r e s o f s t r e s s , j u n c tu r e , and i n t o n a t io n .

3 2 4 4 Mate r lal fo r auding and speaking should be present ed i n th e normal

conversa t ion al s t y l e and tempo of educated speaker s of a s t an dard d i a l ec t

w i thout d i s t o r t i on s o r ex tr emes; p r onunc i at i on i n s peak ing s hou ld be s t a n -

dard ized . The d ia logue , i f p rop er ly used , i s probably th e most usefu l ve-

h i c l e f o r pres enta t ion of a ud ia l ma ter i a l , bu t should be supplemented by

p e r so n a l a d a p t a ti o n t o t h e l e a r n e r s e x pe ri e nc e .



4 A S S I M I L A T I O N P R O C E D U R E S

4 . 1 SUB CONSCIOUS ASS IMI LA TIO N.

4 .11 P r a c t i ce i n i m i t a t i on . I n t he t each i ng s i t u a t i o n1 ' , wr i t e s Simon

Belasco ( 18) , d r i l l s must be drawn up t o provide t he s t ude nt wi th enough

p r a c t i c e s o t h a t h e c an a c q u i re t h e c o r r e c t h a b i t s n e ce s sa r y f o r s p ea ki ng

and under s t andmg the t a rg e t l anguage . Thi s audio- l ing ual goal i s fu r -

th er c l a r i f i e d by Ca r ro l l (1070) as au tomat ici ty-I1 i .e . , making co r re c t

p r od u ct io n s o h a b i t u a l t h a t it d oe s n o t n ee d t o b e a t t e nd e d t o i n t h e

process of speaking .

In 2.24 it was e s t ab l i she d t ha t i n t he aud i o - l i ngua l app roach l an -

guage i s t au gh t a s a s k i l l , and as such requ i re s a co ns iderab le per iod of

t im e d ev ot ed t o p r a c t i c e i n u s i n g it This a t t i tu d e was fu r t he r endorsed

__ -

t each i ng p r o c e ~ ~ r ~ s ,t l e a s t a s f a r a s t h e spoken language i s concerned,

and i t s p r a i se s have l ong been sung by en t hus i a s t s o f t he o r a l - a u r a l ap-

proach . L f i mi t a ti o n , c l e s t 18 e n e f f e t , l e s e c r e t o uv e rt d e l a bonne

.in 3.11, where we saw t h a t l a n g u v e , f rom th e audio - l ing ual viewpoint ,

c o n s i s t s p r e -e mi ne nt ly o f a s e q o f h a b i t s d i f f e r e n t from t h e l e a r n e r ' s

'

l ~ f . l s o Brooks ' d e f i n i t i o n o f p a t t e r n p r a c t i c e 146).

2 ~ f almer 1922,47): The t e r m i mi t a t i on i s no t adequat e t o exp r ess t he

p r ocess by which [ t h e le ar ne r] should work; what we req ui re i s abso lute

mimicry .

na t i ve s e t . Thus Brooks de f in es languag e- learning (46) as a change i n

per formance th a t occurs under the condi t ion s of pra c t i ce (c f . a l so Ban-

a t hy e t a l . 37)

~ e n c e mi t a t i on , o r mimicry , has become a key word i n au di o- li ng ua l



ac qu is i t io n d 'une langue1 ', wrote Paul Passy half - a-cen tury ago i n h i s

Me thode Directe(quoted i n Palmer 1921 ,3) . More recently a Russian spe-

c i a l i s t h a s c on clud ed :

Expe r ie nce ha s dem onst ra te d t h e va lue o f t ho r ough d r i l l i n g i n

p r o n u n c i a t i o n a t t h e v er y s t a r t o f a l an gu ag e c o u r s e . S i n c e t

i s more d i f f i c u l t t o e l i m i n a t e bad h a b i t s t h a n t o l e a r n g ood

one s , i t appea rs wor thwhile t o begin a course by spending some

t lm e on c onc en t r a t e d p r onunc i a t i on p r a c t i c e .

One or two of tho se concerned have expre ssed th e importance o f con-

s t a n t l y r ev i ew in g m a te r i a l t h a t h a s a l r e a d y b een p r a c t i s e d . I t i s n o t

only th e number of t imes an i tem i s repea ted t h a t counts , wr i t es Mackey

(311), i t i s a l s o how th e s e r e p e t i t i o n s a r e d i s t r i b u t e d t h ro ug h ou t t h e

course . And he adds: An item rep eat ed many times in t h e f i r s t lesso n

may b e e n t i r e ly f o r g o t te n i f t i s ne ve r re pe at ed aga in (311-312) 4

4.12 Practice in discrimination. We saw i n 3.12, however, t h a t speak-

in g i s d i r e c t l y de pe nd en t on o n e ' s a u ding c a p a c i t y , and t h a t t h e l e a r n e r

must h e a r t h e soun ds c o r r e c t l y f i r s t i n o r d e r t o b e a b l e t o r e pr o du ce them

wi th accuracy . Thus, even i f p ronuncia t ion exerc i se s a r e in t roduced a t

th e very s t a r t of a language course and given cont inued emphasis through-

o u t , t h e y w i l l n o t f u l f i l t h e i r p u rp os e u n l e s s t h e y a r e a ccompanied o r

preceded by cor responding d r i l l s i n aud ing .

fav our i te exerc i se f o r bo th aud ing and speaking i s t h e contrastive

drill, i n which c lo se ly related---but nev er t hel ess d is t inct- -phonemes and

phoneme-sequences of th e tar ge t language a r e juxtaposed s o t h a t t he con-

3 ~ e n s o n 8 C f a l s o Bloomf i e l d 12 .

4 ~ f . l s o Mackey 259 (0 .2 . 4 , 1 s t pa ra grap h) .



trast between them becomes more perceptible to the learner. Thus Polov-

nikova (139) recommends y r r p a x ~ e ~ ~ ga P ~ ~ J I M Y ~ H M ~JIOB, I co To pb Ie C T y A e H m

MO rY T W T a T b W M BOCIpMRTMM CO CJ IY Xa ( B CMJry 0 C 0 6 e ~ ~ O C ~ e f il H e ~ M s e C I C o f i

CMCTeMbI P O AH O rO R 3 b m I/LTIM lTO ITOXOXeMy ~ B ~ Y ~ H J * W )

In the opening paragraph of his article, An Introduction to Russian

Pronunciation , Morton Benson acknowledges his emphasis on the systematic

utilization of the basic linguistic notion of contrast (Benson 7 8 ) , and

proposes a series of contrast-drills to help the learner master what is

probably the most difficult sound-distinction for non-Slavonic speakers in

learning Russian, that of palatalization.6 After drilling syllables con-

trasting palatalized and non-palatalized consonants in various positions,

he then turns to the use of minimal pairs , i.e., actual words of the lan-

guage which are identical except for one p h ~ n e m e . ~

Reformatskij (9) goes so far as to say that a palatalized consonant

should never be presented without the contrast of its non-palatalized coun-

terpart, since O I I I I O ~ ~ M M s e p m x PI M R ~ M XC o r J I a c m x C B O ~ ; ~ C T B ~ H ~qem He-

M H O M R3blfCaM; AJIR pyCCIC0Fl X e @H~TMICM TO 0 6 ~ 3 a ~ e J I b ~ b ~ . . . M 0 M e H TByK O BO r O

CTPOR

5 ~ f . lso L6on1s second type of contrast ( ~ 6 o n 0).

6~alatalization, escribed by Reformatski (9) s c a ~ b ~ f iy l u e c ~ s e ~ H b n 20

MeHT 3ByICOBOrO CTP OR, CHOBa PYCCICOR @ ~ H O J I O ~ M Y ~ C K O ~M C T ~ M ~ I ,Con-

sists of arching the front of the tongue against the hard palate while

uttering a consonant. It is to be distinguished from the term paZntcxZ,

which is used in reference to the point of articulation of certain con-

sonacts (e.g. / /2/6/),nvolving the tip of the tongue rather than thefront.

7Minimal pairs are a recognized linguistic means of contrasting phonemes

of a language (cf. Mackey 2 6 5 . Mueller (185) proposes to use them in

testing the learner's mastery of the sound-system in respect to dis-

criminatory ability.



D ic t a t i o n h a s a l s o bee n s ug g es t ed a s a u s e f u l e x e r c i s e f o r a u d i t o r y

dis cr i min at l on. Huebener (1965,77) g ive s l i s t en m g purposeful l y and

di st in gu is hi ng sounds, words, and thought groups as t s f i r s t two as -

s e t s . And Polovnikova (142) acknowledges t h a t A ~ T ~ H T ~ IIOJI~~H~~ AJIR

Although no general concensus i s e v id e nt a s t o t h e g r a d a t io n o f i m

i t a t i o n - a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n - e x e r c i s e s , some in fe r f rom the s ign i f ican t

ro le o f au d i to ry comprehens ion ( see 3 .12) t h a t d r i l l s in sound- recogni-

t i on and ea r - t ra i n in g would come f i r s t ; o th e rs propose th e oppos i te o r -

de r. While Brooks (53) pu ts mimicry bef ore re co gn it io n and disc rim-

in at io n, Palmer (1922,45) has th e l a t t e r two preceded only by a form of

s u b- co n sc iou s v o c a l i z a t i o n i n t h e e a r - t r a in i n g p r oc e s s :

h e t e a c h er a r t i c u l a t e s v a r io u s s ou nd s, e i t h e r s i n g l y o r

i n com bi na ti on w it h o t h e r s ; we l i s t e n t o t he se sounds and

make unconsc ious e f f o r t s t o reproduce them by sa y ing them t oou r se l ves . T h is i s t h e most pa s s i ve and most na t u r a l form

o f e a r - t r a i n i n g

We must t h e n s e e k t o r e c o gn i z e o r i d e n t i f y c e r t a i n s ou nd s

and t o d i s t i ng u i s h t hem f rom o t h e r s .

T h i s s t a g e i s then fol lowed by ar t i cu la t i o n and mimicry.

Hocke tt (1950 ,265) main ta ins t ha t the na tu ra l and most e f f i c i en t

way i s t o develop a t one and th e same t ime a b i l i t y t o pronounce cor r ec t -

l y and t o h e a r c o r r e c t l y ( s ee a l s o 3 . 13 ) , b u t t h i s i s a genera l r u le and

in te rms o f t s ac t ua l app l ica t ion one s k i l l would p robab ly be taugh t a s

dependent upon th e ot h er .

4 .2 CONSCIOUS ASSIMILATION

4 .21 ExpZanation v rsus imitation That pron unci atio n can be le a rn t by

mere im it at io n Sweet reg ard s a s a popu lar fa l l a c y , inasmuch a s the move-



ments of th e tongue i n spe akin g ar e even quick er and more complicated

t h an t ho s e o f t h e f o i l i n fenc ing , and a r e , b es id es , mos tly concea led

from s ig ht (Sweet 5 ; c f . a l s o Jespersen 7 -8). Leon (75) agrees, and

a l so no tes t h a t most ad u l t s tu den ts want t o unders tand what they a re

asked t o imit a te 1 ' , recommending seve ral type s of explanat io n .

Not a l l a u d io - l i n g u a l s p e c i a l i s t s ap pr ov e o f o th e r t h a n s ub -c on -

sc ious means o f a ss i mi la t ion , as might be gathe red from 4.11 . Mackey

s t a t e s t h e p ro bl em a s f o l l o w s :

Theories of learning may be divided into two main categories:

cognitive theories and associative theories. . . . . A cogni-

tive theory sees learning within a central mental organiza-

tion; an associative theory considers it as a chain of re-

sponses.

Bazan (338) main tain s t h a t t h i s st im ulus -res pons e view of language

s tems from a formerly t r ad i t io na l view and t ha t it i s a f a l l a c i o u s

in t e r p r e t a t i o n o f l an gu ag e l e a r n in g t od a y1 ' .

Palmer has sugges ted th a t dur ing the p re - read ing s ta ge o f an

au di al ly based programme th e p up il s1 homework might c on si st o f exer-

c i s e s d e sig ne d t o g iv e t h e p u p i l s ' r i g h t n o t i o n s a b ou t t h e n a tu r e of

language ' (Palmer 1921,32). Elsewhere (1922,78) he s t a t e s t h a t pho-

n et ic s (or phonemics) teaches us th e dif f er en ce between two or more

sounds which resemble each other, and between a given foreign sound and

t s n e a r e s t n a t i v e e q u i v a l e n t 1 ' .

In 4.12 we saw th e need f o r sx er ci se s i n perce pti on of phonemic con-

t r a s t betw een c lo s e ly r e l a t e d s ou nd s i n t h e t a r g e t l an gu ag e. But sure ly

8~ac key 25. Cf also Carroll 1070 Speculation among linguists seems

to run to an almost schizoid indecision s to which of two diametrical-

ly opposed theories to accept . . .



t h i s cannot be done witho ut invol ving some understanding of th e phonolog-

i c a l sys tem of th a t l anguage . Mer le L Perkins (115) makes the following

important observat ion:

E a r ly i n most [ l an g u ag e ] c o u rs e s t h e s t u d e n t i s e xp ec te d t o

le ar n th e sow-ds of t h e new language, bu t i he has no in for -

m a tion a bo ut how th e y a r e i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e f i r s t p la c e , h e

i s t o a g r e a t e x t e n t c a r r y i ng o ut t h e a ssi gnm ent b l i n d l y .

Benson 's con tr a s t -d r i l l s on Russian phonemes ar e t o be preceded by a br i ef ,

c l ea r survey of th e main pe cu l i ar i t i es of Russian sounds (Benson 7 8 ) . Wayne

F i s h e r ( 4 3 ) recommends u s in g t h e f i r s t c l a s s s e s s io n a s a n o r i e n t a t i o n

per iod where the in s t ru c t o r can po in t ou t t he a rea s in which Engl i sh pho-

n a t i o n i s l i k e ly t o i n t e r f e r e w i th R us si an p h on at i on 11 . T h i s , a c c o rd in g

t o Claude P . Lemieux (135), w i l l h e lp t h e l e a r n e r r e t a in t h e a u d in g a n d

speak ing ab i l i t i e s which he has l ea rned . l o

On th e ot he r hand, one who appare nt ly support s th e assoc ia t iv e

theory o f l anguage- lea rn ing expresses th e op in ion th a t the p lace o f l in -

g u i s t i c s i s behind th e c lassroom tea che r . The c lassroom tea che r

s ho u ld know of t h e e x i s t e n c e o f s c i e n t i f i c l i n g u i s t i c s b u t w i th o ut n e c es -

s a r i l y h av in g t o u n de rs ta n d i t , a l t ho u g h t h e same w r i t e r b e l i e v e s t h a t

those who t r a i n teach ers . . .must know th e i r s t u f f i n l i n g u i s t i c s and

9 ~ f . l s o P e r k in s ( 1 1 4 ) , who recommends a di sc us si on of speech eve nts a t

t h e very beginning and infor matio n about pho net ics and phonemics be-

f o r e t h e f i r s t l e sso n abou t the sounds o f th e pa r t i cu la r l anguage .

1 •‹ c f. a l s o Comenius' maxim: A l l l an g ua g es a r e e a s i e r t o l e a r n by p ra c-

t i c e than f rom ru le s . But ru l es a s s i s t and s t reng then th e knowledge

der ived f rom prac t ice J Comenius The Grea t Didac t ic [ ~ i d a c t i c a

~ a ~ n a ] ,r . M W Keat inge, c i t ed i n Brooks 13 8) .



above a l l in phone t ics (S t revens 1962a,73) l l There does seem to be a

gr ea te r volume of wr i t i ng i n s u p po r t o f n o t on l y t h e t e a c h e r ' s l i n g u i s t i c

a wa re ne ss , b u t t h a t o f t h e learners a s w e l l , a t l e a s t a s f a r a s s oun d-d is-

t i n ct io ns and th e phonological sys tem of a language ar e concerned.

4.22 The use of contrastive analysis. In 3 .11 i t was brought out that

n a t iv e - la n g ua g e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n a u d i t o r y d i s c r im in a t i o n o f t a r ge t - la n g ua g e

phonemes c on s t i t u t es a major d i f f i cu l t y f o r the second-language le a rne r .

Moshe An is fe ld (118) comments on th e problem as f ol lo ws :

Often a beginning s tuden t does no t hear a pa r t i c u l a r phoneme i n

th e new language a s d i f fe re n t from a c los e phoneme i n h i s na t ive

t on gu e; i . e . h e c l a s s i f i e s t h e s t i mu l u s i n p ut i n t o t h e wrong c at -

egory. . . . . I t i s t h e r e f o r e im po r ta n t f o r t h e f o r e ig n l an gu ag e

l e a r n e r t o b u i l d up p honemic c a t e g o r i e s a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e new

language.

In ot he r words , th e l ea rn er needs t o be aware th a t th e phonemic system of

the ta r ge t l anguage i s di f f e r en t from t ha t o f h i s own. The log ica l way t o

achieve such awareness, a c co r din g t o t h e a p p l i e d l i n g u i s t s , i s by means o f

a contrastive analysis of th e two systems involved ( c f . Banathy e t a l . 5 5 ) .

This pro ces s, a l s o known a s bi l i ng ua l comparison ( c f . Stre vens 1962b,48)

i s e x t e n s i v e l y t r e a t e d i n L ad o's Linguistics Across Cultures where he

speaks of such comparison as a means of pre di c t in g and descr ibi ng the pro-

nunc ia t i on problems of th e speakers of a g iven language lear nin g another

(Lado 11) 12

Iv A Bogorodickij 3 3 1 ) n o t e s t h a t ~ H ~ K O M C T B O@ I ~ M o J I o ~ ~ ~ ~O M 3 H O I I I e H M R

H e AOJDKHO C W I T a T b C R JIMIIIHMM M AJIR H a q I a J ib H O r O ~ ~ ~ M T ~ J I Ri thou t re fe rence

t o any impar ta t ion o f such knowledge t o th e l ea rn er ; Po lovn ikova ( 137) ,

however, spea ks about ~ ~ H H O C T ~i7eIJMaJlbHbIX YPOICOB IIO ~ H ~ T M I C ~AJIR

Y Y ~ I I J M X C R ] .

12cf . a l s o Reformatsk i j 6 , Polovnikova 133, Pol i tz e r 66-67.



C a p el l e (59) n o t e s t h a t l a p lu p a r t d e s t h e o r i e s l i n g u i s t i q u e s s ou -

l ign en t l ' l nd iv id ua l i t e e t l e s ca ra c t2 r es p ropres de chaque langue . Un-

d e r ly i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e o f c o n t r a s t i v e a n a l y s i s i s t h e r e c o g ni t i on t h a t

the comparison of any two languages w i l l r e v e a l a s e t o f d i f f e r e n c e s u n-

l i k e th a t between any two o th er l anguages , and the re f ore th a t the typ i -

c a l and p e r s i s t e n t d i f f i c u l t i e s o f one gr ou p [ of l e a r n e r s ] may w e l l be

e n t i r e ly d i f f e r e n t from th o s e o f a n o th e r g ro up , depending on t he mother

tongue of t he pupi ls (Strevens l962b ,48)

This co ns t i tu te s something of a problem In the tea chin g of Russian

i n North American universities where a g re at number of st ud en ts who

tak e up t he language come from Slav onic , but n ot n ec es sa r i ly Russian,

f a m i l i e s . D i f f e r e n c e s between c lo s e ly r e l a t e d la ng ua ge s a r e no l e s s

d i f f i c u l t than thos e be tween t o t a l l y unre la te d ones , sometimes even more

s o , s i n c e i t i s t h e v e r y s i m i l a r i t i e s i n s ound t h a t o f t e n c a u s e t h e most

c o nf u sio n ( c f . A n i s f e l d ' s q u o t a t i o n a t t h e b eg inn ing o f 4 .2 2 ) . l 4 For

t h i s reason t he use o f cogna tes i n t each ing sounds 1s gener a l ly frowned

upon (e. g. Lemieux 135), al though a t l e a s t one person (Benson 80) se es

cognates as a us efu l means of con tra s t i ng sound-systems.

3~ . K . KrupskaJa (410--411) d es cr ib es a F ren& -language-programme i n Geneva,Swi tz er l an d , which she a t t ende d i n 1908: O C O ~ ~ H H O C T ~ K ,y p C O B 6bUI AM@

t f E p e ~ M p 0 ~ a H H b ~'IOLtXOA K K a X l i O f i H a u M O H a J I b H O C T M . . . . K p O M e T O r O , Ic a3K AO fi

H aIJM OH aJT bH O? T'pyIlI'Ie ~ 3 b I B a J I O C b , B q e M MMeHHO HeAOCTaTICM I 'lpOM3HOLUeHMR

y A ~ H H O ~ ~a m O H a J I b H O C T M . a J I R ICZWlTOR H a IJ 4O H a JI bH O C T M 6 b m C BO M

~ Y ~ ~ H L / I I C I / I ,bIR CH RIO uM e, B Y e M p a 3 H M y a B C T P J X T Y p e C J IO B , MX C O Y ~ T ~ H M M .

1 4 ~ v e n t ud en ts from R uss ian -speak ing f am i l i e s a r e u su a l l y f am i l i a r w i t h

on l y a r eg i on a l d i a l ec t (o t he r t han t h e Moscow no rm) ; t h i s g r ea t e r s im-

i l a r i t y ca n ad d f u r t h e r t o t h e i n t e r f e r e n c e i n ma s te r in g c o r r e c t s p ee ch

pa t t e rn s . C f . a l s o R e form a tsk i j (12) : ~ J I ~ M ~ H T ~ IXOACTBa-Ie TOX-

A e C TB a -- -C O A ep X aT T a s cM e 3 JI eM e H T bI H e T O X A e C T B a , K O T O p bI e 3 a q a C T y l o T p y A H e e

l 7p e OA O JI eT b , q e M R BHdIe H e T O m e C T B a B 3 a P M H 3 Y y W b I X R~ ~ I I COB



In f a c t , some l i n gu i s t s recommend cons ide rable audi a l pra c t i c e i n

contr sting s i m i l ar phonemes I n th e nat iv e and t a rg e t languages , much

l i k e t h e c o n t r a s t i v e d r i l l s f o r r e l a t e d phonemes w h i th i n t h e t a r g e t

l anguage i t s e l f ( see 4 .12) . Sigmund S . Birkenmayer , i n an ar t i c l e on

R u ss ia n p a t t e r n d r i l l s , d e f i n e s c o n t r a s t i v e d r i l l a s p e rc e iv i ng and

imi ta t in g the d i f f e r en ce between th e e lements of a fo re ig n l anguage and

th o se of our own language (Birkenmayer 43 ). T hi s t yp e of d r i l l , a t

l e a s t a s f a r a s u si ng words t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e c o n t r a s t r a t h e r t h a n s i m

pl y juxtapos ing th e phonemes i n ques t i on, i s de sc ri be d by Leon (71) as

an exc e l l e n t t each i ng dev i ce bu t poor t e s t i n g t echn ique1' s i nc e

the s tud ent no t only has one vowel t o compare with another b ut a l so

many o th e r a co us ti c cues which w i l l enable him qu ickly t o r ecognize

t he Eng l i s h word , even i f he i s unabl e t o ana l yze t he d i f f e r ences be-

tween th e two vowels . I f th i s be the case , however , such b i l i ng ua l

c o n t r a s t - d r i l l s would be more u s e f u l i n t h e l e a r n e r ' s a s s i m i l a t i o n of

phonemic sequences and suprasegmental fe at ur es ( c f . 3 .13, 3.14) ra th er

than i n h i s l ear n ing of ind iv id ual phonemes.

We may conclude , then , t ha t con t ra s t i ve an a l ys i s i s a v a l u a b l e

e lement i n t he cognit ive as pec t of t he aud i o - l i ngua l approach , i . e . ,

i n making th e l ea rne r aware of the d i f f e ren ce s be tween th e phonologica l

system of t he t a rg e t l anguage and th a t of h i s own, and he lp ing t o pre-

v e n t h i s n a t i v e h a b i t s from i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h t h e a s s i m i l a t i o n o f t h o s e

of t h e new langua ge.

4.23 The use of phonetic transcription I n 2. 23 we c on si de re d a nwn-

be r of arguments--stemming ch ie fl y from th e predominantly visual empha-



sis of the learner's educational experiencein favour of some sort of

graphic aid to ease the strain of audial assimilation. Let us see

the problem restated in the following quotation from Hockett:

I n o u r s o c i e t y t h e w r i t t e n word i s em pha size d a t e ve ry t u r n .

Stu den ts consequent ly a r e ap t t o work more eff ic ient ly---even

a t l e a r n i ng pronuncia t ion- if t he y have someth ing t o look at

a s t h e y wo rk , i n s t e a d o f w orking e n t i r e l y t hr o ug h i m i t a t i o n .

U nfo r t una te l y , m ost t r a d i t i on a l w r i t i ng sy s tem s a r e no t s u f -

f i c i e n t l y r e g u l a r t o b e u se d f o r t h i s p ur po se w it ho u t c on fu s-

i n g t h e i s s u e . . I 5

Hockett then suggests Zoc. cit.) that materials for the students to

follow as they practice pronunciation therefore need a transcription-

an invented writing system which represents with absolute regularity

the speech sounds they are to learn to make and recognizetf.6

It may be well to remind ourselves here of the sharp difference be-

tween transcription and transliteration. The former is based on the

sound-system of the language, and involves the use of a symbol for each

phoneme or allophone of the spoken language. Transliteration, on the

other hand, is based on the graphic system of the language, and gener-

ally consists of using the native-language writing-system to give ap-

proximate sound-values to the letters of the target-language alphabet. 7

I6sw eet and Je sp e r se n w ere bo t h a rden t advoca te s o f t r an sc r i p t i o n ( c f .

Sw ee t ' s quo t a t i on i n 2 .2 3 ) . C f . a l s o Mackey (265 ) : If I t h e l e a r -

ne r ] ha s had so much expe r i ence w i t h t h e w r i t t en l anguage a s t o have

t o s e e a word i n w r i t i n g b e f o r e b e i n g a b l e t o p ro no unc e i t phonet i c

no ta t i on may become a n ec es si t y .

1 7 ~ h i s s a most f a m i l i a r s i g h t i n t r a d i t i o n a l R u ss ia n te x t bo o k s , i nc lu d-

in g some of t h e more re ce nt ones. Cf. f o r example Faye r 2-lb, Gronicka

Bates-Yakobson 2--6, Doher ty Markus 6-7 ( a l l of which were pu bl is he d

between 1958 and 1960). Lunt 4 ) u s e s transcription a s w e l l a s t r a n s -

l i t e r a t i o n .



Thus Otto Jespersen advised the use of transcription alone without

concomitant reference to traditional orthography,18 so that the learner

might not confuse the sound-system representation with the irregular or-

thographic system (see Jespersen 168-173).

It is generally recommended today that transcriptions be used on

the phonemic rather than on the purely phonetic level (e.g. see M6ras

54, Brooks 276); Sweet proposed that only significant1' ound-distinc-

tions be recorded. Possibly related to this is the feeling (e.g.

Huebener 1965,30) that the learner need have only a passive acquaintance

with transcription-symbols. Edmond M6ras would impose even further

limits: Except in advanced work in phonetics, the students should not

be expected to write phonetic symbols or to read aloud a text written in

them (MQras 140).

About the only real challenge found to the use of transcription it-

self came from Benson (78), who notes that many teachers feel that be-

ginning with the Russian alphabet offers fewer difficulties in the long

run . It is true that the Cyrillic alphabet, while not regular, at least

manifests some degree of consistency in its irregularity in representing

1 8 ~ s o the length of time transcription should be continued, however,very little indication could be found. Jespersen himself admitted

this to be one of the most difficult questions and could recommend

only as long as po s s i b l e (~espersen 72/173).

''sweet 18 This corresponds to Jespersen's use of transcription, not

o replace, but o support, the teacher's oral instruction in

pronunciation. Even if it misses some of the very finest shades,

it may still be of benefit, Just as a tabie of logarithms can be

very useful even if the numbers are not carried out farther than

to the fourth decimal place (~espersen 66).



the Russian sound-system. The danger is, of course, that the students-

and teachers too---will fail to perceive the nature of the irregularity

and try to deal with non-existent items such as hard and soft vowels1'

(or worse still, with palatalized vowels ) .2 0 The phonological facts

of the language must be made extremely clear to both teacher and learner

right at the beginning of the course and constantly recalled throughout

the teaching-programme if phonemic transcription is to be excluded in

favour of Cyrillic orthography alone.

The transcription itself, however, must not be too heavily empha-

sized. Hockett (1950,269) compares it to a scaffolding, erected to help

the learner gain audial control of the language; as such it must be re-

spected; but as only a scaffolding, it will eventually be torn down (or

be allowed to 'wither away') .

4.24 S m a r y Audio-lingual recommendations regarding both conscious

and unconscious assimilation procedures may be summarized as follows:

4.241 Since language is a set of habits, the use of these habits should

be made as automatic as possible through imitative drills, with constant

review throughout the programme.

4.242 Auditory discrimination is best taught by drills contrasting relat-

ed but distinct phonemes within the target language; another useful means

may be that of dictation.

20~nder he heading Hard and Soft Vowels , Fayer (15) gives the follow-

ing (mis)information: If the tongue is raised against the p a l a t ewhen a, a, 0 or is pronounced, the sound becomes softened or pa la t a l i z e d . s is thus a palatalized a; e, a paltalized ; , a pala-

talized ; nd 10 a palatalized Y .



4.243 Tra in in g in p ronuncia t ion and d i sc r imi na t i on may be f a c i l i t a t e d by

an explana t ion of the new phonological sys tem in co nt r as t t o tha t o f t he

na t ive l anguage .

4.244 The le a r n e r must be made aware---by means of co n tr a s ti v e ana lysi s-

o f t he phono l og i ca l d i f f e ren ces between t he t a r ge t l anguage and h i s na t i ve

t ongue, so t ha t he may p reven t h i s na t i v e hab i t s f rom i n t e r f e r i ng w i th h i s

a s s i m i l a t i on o f t he h ab i t s o f t he new l anguage .

4.245 The need f o r gra phic suppor t see 2 .23) i s probab ly be st met by a

phonemic t r a ns c r i p t i on w i t hou t r e fe re nce t o t r ad i t i o na l or t hog raphy a t

l e a s t i n i t i a l l y ) , a l th o ug h , a s a te mp or ar y a i d , t h e t r a n s c r i p t i o n must n o t

be overemphasized. In the ca se of Russ ian, ext reme ca re must be t aken i f

t h e C y r i l l i c o r t h o g r a p h y i s used alone.



5 T EX T BO O K A N A L Y S I S P R E S E N T A T IO N

5 . 1 PRESENTATION OF AUDIAL AND GRAPHIC SKILLS

5.11 PedagogicaZ or ie nt a t io n. The age-group a t which in s t ru ct io na l ma-

t e r i a l i s di r ec t ed and the l eng th o f t ime expec ted to be devoted t o t

vary somewhat from method t o method. Sin ce t he se a r e fa c t o r s which have

some in f luen ce on the p repa ra t i on o f the t ex tbooks and o the r ma te r ia l s ,

t might be well t o compare them before ev al ua ti ng t h e methods themselves.

William Cornyn s Beginning Russian (COR) con tai nin g t h i r t y - f i v e

l e ss o ns , was s p e c i f i c a l l y w r i t t e n f o r an i n t e n s i v e f i r s t - y e a r R us si an

programme a t Yale U niv ers ity ( see COR In tr od uc ti on ix-x, a l s o Benson 7 8 .

Modem Ru ss ia n, by Clay ton Dawson, C ha rl es Bidw ell, and Assya Humesky ( D B H ) ~

i s a two-volume c o u r se o f t h i r t y - s i x u n i t s i n t e n d e d f o r a u n iv e r s i t y p r o-

gramme la s t i n g two ye ar s (s ee DBH/T 1 ) . Basic ConversationaZ Russian by

Gordon Fair bank s and Richard Leed (FBL) i s div id ed i n t o twelve grammar-

and tw en ty- f ou r c o n ve r s at i o n- u n it s . I t i s aimed a t s t u d e n t s i n e i t h e r

high -sch ool o r un iv er si ty , and may be covered i n anywhere from one semes-

t e r of a f a i r l y i n t e n s i v e c o l l e g e co u rs e t o two y e a rs o f a l e s s i n t e n s i v e

high school course (FBL v i i ) , depending upon th e number of hours av ai la bl e

per week.

The Audio-Lingual M at er ia ls (ALM) co urs e with f ou rt ee n u n i t s , pre par ed

l ~ h r e e - l e t t e r abb rev i a t i ons a r e u sed i n r e fe r ence t o t he methods under d i s -

cuss i on . The l e t t e r T fo l l ow ing an abb rev i a t i on ( excep t C O R r e f e r s

t o t h e t each ing-manual p rovi ded w i t h t h e r e sp ec t i ve t ex t book.

2 ~ i d w e l l s g iv e n a s an a u t h o r f o r t h e f i r s t v olum e, an d a s a c o n s u l t a n t

for the second volume.



by t h e s t a f f of t h e Modern Language Ma te ri al s Development Cent er, may be

used by any beg inn ing c l as s i n the jun io r o r sen io r h lgh school , a l though

i t must be po in t e d o ut t h a t t h e f i r s t - l e v e l c o u rs e h a s be en p re p ar e d f o r

c l as se s beg inn ing fo re ig n language s tudy i n g rades seven , e i gh t , o r n ine

(ALM/T 5 ) . I t i s t o be completed in e i th e r one o r two years , accord ing t o

th e number of c la ss ses s io ns per week.

ALM D B H , and FBL a re provided with supplementary manuals f o r th e

t e a c h e r o r i n s t r ~ c t o r ; ~O R 1 s n o t . Pub l i shers supply tape s and /or d i sc s

f o r l a b o r a to r y u s e w ith a l l b ooks e x ce p t C O R .

5.12 Linguistic orientation. The primary aim of th e methods prese nted i n

a l l f o u r te x tb o ok s , a s s t a t e d o r i m pl ie d i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e i n t r o d u c t i o n s ,

i s a degree of mastery of Russian as a spoken language. Hence a l l fo ur

recognize e i th e r open ly o r im pl ic i t ly th e p rimacy of t he spoken language

over th e wr i t te n . For example , the second paragraph of C O R s i n t r o d u c t i o n

b e g in s a s f o l l o w s :

The method o f t e ach i ng i m p l l ed i n t h e m a t e r i a l o f t h i s book r e s t s

on t h e propo s i t i on t h a t t h e qu ic kes t and most a ccu ra t e means of

a t t a i n i n g f l u e nc y i n a l an gu ag e i s t o b eg fn by s p e a ki ng i t . 4

And i n th e f i r s t p ar ag ra ph o f t h e A L M in t rod uct ion we f i nd :

The pro gram i s b as e d on t h e c o n v i c t io n t h a t l an gu ag e i s f i r s t of

a l l speech , and t h a t t h e a b i l i t y t o communicate by means o f spo-ken words i s o f p r imary impor tance .

3 ~ h eBL Teacher s Manual w as no t pub l i shed un t i l 1966, wo y e a rs a f t e r t h e

tex tbo ok was is su ed . Hence i t shou ld be bo rne i n mind t h a t en l i g h t en i ng

i n fo rm a ti on i n t h i s manua l a s t o t he ap p l i ca t i on o f aud i o - l i ngua l con-

c e p t s t o t h e c o u rs e was n o t available a t f i r s t t o t h e la ng ua ge -te ac he r.

The t ap es were i ssue d i n th e same year a s th e t ex tb ook , however .

COR i x .



FBL i s t h e onl y method which makes a s p e c ia l appe al i n i t s i n t roduc -

t l o n t o t hose s t ud en t s whose i n t e r e s t l i e s more In r ead i ng R ussl an:they

a r e adv i sed t o t r ea t t h i s cou r se exac t l y a s do t hose who wish t o deve lop

ac t i v e con t ro l o f t h e spoken l anguage fo r t he fo ll ow i ng r ea sons :

i r s t , t h e most efficient method of developing thorough and

f l u e n t r e a di n g a b i l l t y i s t o b eg m t h e s t ud y of a l an gu ag e by

l e a r n m g t o speak i t ; s econd , t h e l i t e r a t u r e i n a p a r t i c u l a r

language cannot be appreciated un l e s s one has t h e bu i l t - i n ca-

p a c i ty o f c o n t r as t i n g l ~ t e r a r y t y l e w lt h t h e s t y l e of every-day run of th e m i l l speech

This corres ponds with t he arguments pu t forward by Hockett and St re ve ns

i n 2 2 5 f o r l e a rn i ng l i t e r a t u re t h rough l anguage ( c f . a l so Swee t ' s quo-

t a t i o n i n 2 . 1 2 ) .

5 . 13 Order of presentation The fo llo win g sta te me nt by Nelson Brooks

a pp e ar s i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e LM manual:

In th e audio - lm gua l phase language func t io ns pure ly on i t s own.The v l sua l -graphic phase i s an c i l l a r y t o language and impor tant

t o i t but i t can ea s i l y be fo regone , a s i t i s c on s ta nt ly i n t h e

d a i l y l i f e of e ve ry on e. ll f o u r s k i l l s s ho ul d be t a ug h t i n a

ca re fu l l y p re sc r i bed sequence and proportion of a l i o t t e d t im e .

Al though the introductions t o FBL and COR do imply an aud io-l ingu al

phase bef ore any graph ic ac t iv i ty - - e i the r read ing or wri ting-i s under-

t aken by t he l ea r ne r , ALM and DBH make sp e c i f i c recommendation of i t t h e

former more s t ro ng l y t han t he l a t t e r . A s DBH ( v i i ) e x p l a i n s :

Language l ea rn i n g . . . p rope r i y beg i ns w i t h l i s t en i n g and r epe a t i ng

and on l y l a t e r p roceeds t o pead ing and w r i t i ng . These f i r s t two

6~~~ v . C f a l s o FBL/T ( I ) , where th e purpose of t h e textbook i s acknowi-

edged as being to l a y a foundat ion upon wnlch nay be developed re a l

f l u e n cy i n a l l of t h e l an gu ag e s k i l l s : a u r a l co mp re he ns io n, s p ea ki ng ,

read ing and wr i t ing .



s t a ges a re o f p r im ary i m port ance i f t h e s t uden t s t o ga i n even

a minimum co n t r o l of spoken Rus sian ; f o r t h i s r ea so n w e recommend

s t rong l y t ha t m ost m a t e r i a l be p re sen t ed and p rac t i ce d w i t h books

c l o s e d , - bo th i n c l a s s and i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y .

ALM on t h e o t h e r h and, g oe s s o f a r a s t o p ro p os e t h a t t ex tb o ok d i s t r i b u -

t i o n b e p os tp on ed f o r a p e r i o d of t h r e e months s o t h a t t h e f i r s t t h r e e

o r fo ur un i t s can be mas te red audio l ingua l ly (ALM v i i ) . Three reasons

fo r t em porary exc l u s ion o f a l l g raph i c work a r e c i t e d : a ) a ud ia l s k i l l s

i n vo l ve h a b i t s , and a l l a v a i l a b l e ti m e sh o ul d b e d ev ot ed t o p r a c t i s i n g

t h e s e h a b i t s ; b) w r i t t e n s ymbols i n t e r f e r e w i th t h e l e a r n i n g o f a u d i a l

s k i l l s ; c) a u d i a l fo un da ti on s i m p l i f i e s t h e l e a r n in g of g r a p h ic s k i l l s

A s s i m i l a t i o n o f h a b i t s w i l l be d i scussed i n C hapt e r 6 . Let us see

how int er fe re nc e from wr i t i ng s t r e a t e d i n t h e o t h e r t e xt bo ok s u n de r

c o n s i d e r a t i o n .

5.14 The use of trans cripti on i n presentation In2 2 3

we saw t h e de-

s i r a b i l i t y , from th e pedagogical poi nt o f view, of having some so r t of

v i s ua l suppo r t f o r t he l e t t e r -bound second - language l ea rn e r i n hi gh- schoo l

o r u n i v e r s i t y . In 4 2 3 we concluded t h a t th i s i s best provided by a pho-

nemic t r a n s c r i p t i o n , a s t h e d i s t o r t i o n s o f t r a d i t i o n a l o r th o g ra p h ie s i n -

t e r f e r e w it h l e a r n i n g c o r r e c t a u d i a l h a b i t s . A s n o te d i n 5. 1 1, l e a r n e r s

a r e expect ed t o beg in t h e ALM book before rea chi ng high -sc hoo l , when they

a r e n o t y e t s o l e tt e r- b ou n d a s t o r e q u i r e e x t r a v i s u a l s up p o r t . Hence

ALM can more su cc es s fu l l y promote an aud io- l ing ual phase with th e com-

p l e t e e x c l us i o n of g r a p h ic a c t i v i t y a t t h e b eg in ni ng o f t h e c o u r se ; t h i s

n a t u r a l l y o b v i a t e s t h e need f o r t r a n s c r i p t i o n , a s o nc e t h e l e a r n e r h as a

r e l a t i v e mas te ry of t he Russ ian sound-system, he s n o t s o e a s i l y d i s -

t r a c t e d by o rt h og r ap h ic i r r e g u l a r i t i e s .



The ot he r t hr ee methods, des igned f o r u se a t t he h i gh - schoo l and /o r

un i ve r s i t y l ev e l s , do employ t r a ns c r i p t i o n i n va ry i ng deg r ees . Presum-

abl y DBH's rul in g of most m at er ia l . . . p ac t i c ed wi th books closed would

s t l l p er mi t t h e s t ud e n t l i m i t e d u s e o f h i s e ye s i n t h e i n i t i a l s t a g e s .

OR and FBL both use a phonemic t r an sc r i p t io n ( a l though the two a re

no t i d e n t i ~ a l ) ; ~h a t f ound i n DBH i s p a r t i a l l y a l l op h on ic a s f a r a s t h e

vowels ar e concerned, giv ing [a] as t he non- p r e -t on i c va r i an t o f t he pho-

neme /a/

A l l t h r e e me thods i n t r oduce t he C y r i l l i c o r t hogr aphy a long w i th t he

t r a n s c r i p t i o n from t h e ve ry s t a r t . A ltho ugh t h i s v i o l a t e s J e s p e r s e n l s

p r i n c i p l e o f a t r a n s c r i p t i o n - o n l y p e r i o d ( J e s p e r s e ~ 68-173; c f . 4 . 2 3 ) ,

t h e r e s l e s s dange r of con fus ion i n t he case o f Russ ian because o f t he

cons i de r ab l e d i f f e r en ce bet ween La t i n and C yr i l l i c symbol s, and a l s o be -

8 ~ e v e r t h e l e s s , LM w arn s a g a i n s t i n t e r f e r e n c e d u r i n g t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e p e r-

iod when grap hic symbols a r e in t rod uce d: I n d i f f e r e n t w ay s, b o th t h e

u n f am i l i ar C y r i l l i c l e t t e r s ha pe s and t h o s e t h a t r e se mb le t h e f a m i l i a r

Roman ones w i l l c au se i n t e r f e r e n c e . T e l l t h e s t u d e n t s t w i l l t a k e

t im e t o e a r n t o r e a c t p r op e rl y t o u n fa m il i ar I . e tt e r s . E x p l a i n t h a t

t h ey a r e l i k e l y t o r esp on d i n a t y p i c a l l y E ng li sh f a sh i on t o t h o s e l e t -

t e r s whic h l o ok f a m i l i a r , a nd c a u t io n t hem t o b e on g ua rd a g a in s t this

i n s l s t t h a t t h e p r e se n t main o b j ec t i ve i s s t i l l t o u nd er st an d and s pe ak ,

and t h a t t h e y must c on ti nu e t o t r u s t t h e i r e a r s r a t h e r t h an t h e i r e ye s

ALM v i i ) .

9 ~ h e ain d i f f e r e n c e betw een t h e two t r a n s c r i p t ~ o n s s t h e manner i n which

p a i r e d p a l a t a l i z e d c o ns on an ts a r e r e p r e s e n t e d . FBL ( l i k e DBH) u s e s a

hook below t h e l e t t e r t o i n d i c a t e p a l a t a l i z a t i o n ( e g / q / i / q / COB

p r e f e r s a f o ll o wi n g i n s t e a d ( e .g . l d j /lj m j The l a t t e r , a lt ho ug h

l e n d i n g i t s e l f n i c e l y t o a m or p ho l og i ca l a n a l y s l s o f R u ss ia n v e r b a l con-

j u g a t l o n s ( s e e COR 83 , 1 s a s o u rc e o f c on fu si on t o t h e l e a r n e r ( a n d,

somet imes, t h e tea ch er ) because t might mis lead one t o suppose t h a t

t represents two sounds (consonan t p lus j o d f o r e x am pl e) r a t h e r t h a n

a s i n g l e p a l a t a l i z e d c on so na nt . C f. t h e c o n t r a s t o f /?el/ [ h e] s a t

down1' and /sjel/ [ h e ] a t e . Hence FBL1s and DBH1s u s e o f t h e hook i s

p r e f e r a b l e .



cause , a s men tioned i n 4 .23, t he C yr i l l i c a lphabe t i s a t l e a s t somewhat

c o n s i s t e n t i n ~ t srregularities which t h e l ea rn er would presumably be

ab l e t o de t ec t by compari son w i th t he t r a nsc r ip t i o n . I t shou ld no t be

fo rg ot te n, however , t h a t th e use of Russian or thography from th e beginning

of th e course i s merely a concession t o th e gradua l development o f g rap hic

s k i l l s ; aud i a l s k i l l s t hemselves would probab ly be more e f f ec t i v e ly t augh t

without t he s imultaneous burden of an i r re gu la r wri t ing-sys tem, however

c o n s i s t e n t i t may be.

The th re e methods d i f fe r as t o the leng th o f t ime and th e purpose

f o r w hich t h e t r a n s c r i p t i o n i s used . D H i n t roduces a l l new ma te r i a l i n

t r a n s c r i p t io n f o r th e f i r s t t en u n i t s , and r e t a i n s ~ t th roughout fo r p ro-

n u n c i a t i o n - d r i l l s . FBL on the o the r hand, p rov ides on ly t he f i r s t f ou r

c o n v e r s a t i o n u n i t s i n transcription and the p ronunc i a t i on -d r i l l s i n t he

appendix f o r which i t i s al so used a re expected t o be covered by t he end

of t h e s i x t h c o n v e r s a t i o n - u n i t . C O R employs t r an sc r i p t io n f o r new sen ten-

ce s up t o t he t en th l e s son ( a t which t ime p ronunc i a t ion exe rc i s e s a r e d i s -

cont inued) , and cont inues to use i t f o r w o r d - l i s ts r i g h t t o t h e end o f t h e

book.

None of th e th re e methods req ui re s t h e l e a r n e r t o w r i t e t h e t r a n s c ri p -

t ion-symbols , o r t o use them f or more than a sen ten ce a t a t ime in read ing ;

t h i s would fo l low Meras advice in 4 .23 . I n ea ch c a s e t h e t r a n s c r i p t i o n

i s u sed merely a s a suppor ti ng dev ice t o f a c i l i t a t e mas te ry o f t he sound-

-sys tem. I t does no t rep lace Cy r i l l i c o r thography fo r the development o f

graphic s k i l l s ( cf . DBH/T 16) .



5.2 PRESENTATION OF ACTIVE AND PASSIVE SKILLS

5.21 ontext of presentat ion: choice of veh ic l e Two a l t e r n a t i v e ve-

h i c l es o f p r es en ta t ion were d i scussed in 3 .23 : a ) unconnected sen tenc es ,

and b) t h e dia log ue . The former i s f e a t u r e d i n COR t h e l a t t e r i s adop-

t e d i n t h e o t h e r s . l o None of the methods adv oca tes song a s a ve hi cl e.

ALM and FBL prov ide one d i a logue pe r u n i t , con t a i n i n g about f i f t e en

t o t w ent y u t t e r a nce s each ; a f t e r Lesson 4 , DBH has t wo d i a l ogues pe r un i t ,

w i t h abou t t en u t t e r anc es per d i a l ogu e . l l I n each method th e dialo gue s

s e r v e t o i l l u s t r a t e s p e c i f i c grammatical p o i n t s t o b e p r a c t i s e d t hr ou gh

f o ll o wi n g d r i l l s , and a r e th us a d v i se d t o b e ta k e n b e f o r e o t h e r i te ms i n

t h e u n i t . l 2 DBH precedes a l l d i a logu es wi th a Prepar a t ion f o r Conversa-

1 • ‹ c f DBH/T ( 5 ) which of fe r s th e fo l low ing i n supp or t of t h e use of d ia -

l o g u e : ( 1 ) i t o f f e r s t he b e s t p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r i n t ro d u c in g and

t e a c h i n g sp ok en la ng ua ge p a t t e r n s i n a l l p e r s o n s ; ( 2 )i t

i s t h e eas-i e s t t y p e o f m a t e r i a l t o memorize a nd p r o v i d e s t h e g r e a t e s t o pp or tu -

n i t i e s f o r immediate a p p li ca t i o n i n r e a l l i f e s i t u a t i o n s ; ( 3 ) i t i sa d r am a t ic way o f b r i ng i n g o u t c u l t u r a l s i m i l a r i t i e s an d d i f f e r e n c e s

between So vi et s o ci et y and our own; and 4 ) it p r o v id e s f o r t h e i n t r o -

d u c t i o n of v a r i o u s s t y l e s o f s p ee ch t h a t c o u ld n o t b e s o e a s i l y r e -

f l e c t e d i n p r o se p as sa ge s o r b a s i c s e nt en c es ( c f . 3 . 2 3 ) .

l l l t i s n ot ed , h owever, t h a t i n t h e ALM method each di a l og i s d i v i d e d i n -

t o two r e l a t e d s e c t i o n s of h a l f d i a l o g s u ALM/T 11). This i s a move

toward th e more s t r in ge nt con di t ion s imposed by Brooks 244), who spe-

c i f i e d t h a t if a d ia logu e goes on f o r more th an h a l f a dozen u t te ran -

ces it i s b ro ke n up i n t o p a r t s , e ac h u n i f i e d and conta ining not moret h a n f ou r o r f i v e u t t e r a n c e s ; t h e s e p a r t s a r e l e a r n e d s e p a r a t e l y u .

W hile t h i s may be u n n e c e ss a r i l y r e s t r i c t i v e , t h e a u t h o r , a l o ng w i t h

ot he rs who have worked with th e FBL m a t e r i a l s , h a s c on cl ud ed t h a t un-

i n t e r r u p t e d s t r i n g s of f i f t e e n o r more s e n t e n c e s a r e t o o l o ng f o r

p r a c t i c a l u s e , e i t h e r i n t h e c l as sr oo m o r i n t h e l a n g ua g e- la b or at o ry .

I 2 c f , fo r example DBH/T ( 2 5 ) : It i s i m po rt an t f o r t h e t ea c h er t o r e a l i z e

t h e n e c e s s i t y of p r e s e n t i n g t h e C o n ve rs at io n s d u r in g t h e f i r s t tw o

s e s s i o n s . With t h e e x ce p t io n o f t h e P r o n un c i at i o n p r a c t i c e , which i s

n ot d i r e c t l y t i e d t o t h e l e ss o n v oc ab u la ry , a l l o t h e r m a t e r i a l d epends

on t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e C o n v er s at i o n s, s i n c e t h e y c o n t a i n t h e b a s i c

l e x i c a l a nd s t r u c t u r a l i te ms t o be p r a c ti c e d i n t h e l e s so n .



t io n t o in t r oduc e new vocabulary and s t ru ct ur es , and fol lows them with

Basic Sentence Pa tt er ns which serve as a br idge between the Conversa-

t i o n s and t h e s t r u c t u r a l d r i l l s and p ro vi de c a r e f u l l y o rg an iz ed s e t s

of s e n t e n c e s t h a t i l l u s t r a t e t h e g ra mm at ic al m a te r i a l o f t h e l e s s o n and

t he lex ic al mater ia l o f cu rre nt and pa st le ssons (DBH/T 6 ) . T h i s i n

e f f e c t h e l p s t o f r e e t h e d i al o gu e i t s e l f from h av in g t o i n c or p o ra t e a l l

t h e g ra mm at ic al p o in t s t o b e d r i l l e d , and t h u s a l lo w s a g r e a t e r n a tu r a l -

n e ss of s t y l e .

I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e d i a lo g u e s, ALM s u p pl i e s s e v er a l o f i t s u n i t s wi th

r ec om bina ti on n a r r a t i v e s ( ma in ly f o r l i s t e n in g p u r p o s e s - c f . 5 .2 3 ) ,

in which mate r ia l p rev ious ly p resen ted i s recombined t o form new ut t e r -

ances . In Uni ts and 14 a na rr a t iv e rep lac es th e dia l ogue (c f . ALM/T

26) . ALM s a l s o t h e o nl y method t h a t d e vo t es s p e c i f i c e f f o r t t o t h e

s u b j e c t o f d i a lo g u e a d a p t a t i o n , t h e o b j e c t i v e of which i s t o r e l a t e

t h e d i a l o g s e n te n c es and s i t u a t i o n t o t h e p e rs o n al e x pe r ie n ce o f t h e

s tu den ts and t o a i d memorizationtt (ALM/T 1 4) . This co ns is ts ( i n th e ALM

method) o f q u e s t i o n s aimed a t t h e s t u d e n t , u s ing t h e v o c ab u la r y and s t r u c -

tu r e o f t h e pr e ce d in g d i a lo g u e . Model answers a r e given i n th e book, but

t h e l e a r n e r i s encouraged t o formulate h i s own, w i thi n th e l i m i t s of vo-

c a b ul a r y and s t r u c tu r e a l r e a d y a c q u i r e d .

In OR t h e d i a l og u e i s r ep l ac e d by a s e r i e s o f t w en t y- fi v e t o t h i r t y

s e n t e n c e s i l l u s t r a t i n g a s p e c i f i c gr am ma tic al p o i n t , and fo ll ow ed l a t e r i n

t h e l e ss o n by a re vi ew s e r i e s o f f o r t y t o f i f t y s e nt e nc e s. (These l s t s

1 3 c f . Brooks' second quo ta t ion i n 3.23.



of individual utterances with little or no semantic connection between

them are very similar to those found in Lunt'sFundamentals of Russian.)

As was brought out in 3.23, this calls for greater resourcefulness on the

part of the teacher to put the utterances into the context of an actual

communication situation, without which, according to Albert Valdman, lan-

guage-learning cannot take place (see 3.23).

5.22 Context of presenta tion: di al ec t, st y l e, and tempo. Considera-

tions of dialect, style, and tempo (cf. 3.21, 3.22) are taken into ac-

count by all textbooks except COR. Typical is the statement concerning

the FBL recordings, that the language of the dialogues is typical of

normal, connected speech, not of artificial grammar book examples1' (FBL

vi). Natural speed is a proclaimed feature of the DBH conversation-

-recordings for the listening and comprehension stages (DBH viii--cf.

5.23), and in the Instructor s Manual it is advised that model utter-

ances spoken by the instructor, like those on the tapes, should be de-

livered at a normal conversational speed No concessions should be

made to 'spelling pronunciation ' (DBH/T 15) I 4 Normal speed in both

teacher's and learner's utterances is recommended in the ALM manual (ALM/T

9/11), as well as in laboratory work:

he silent repeat spaces provided [on the tape] have been

carefully calculated and measured. If the student is on his

14cf. the following quotation from D.N. ~ g a k o v 3 7 9 ) : < I I p a ~ m b m >RB

J I R e T C R R 3 b M O ~ P ~ ~ O B ~ H H ~ MO C K B M Y ~ ~ ~ ,AHafCO 6e3 MCKJ'CCTBeHHbM, 6 ~

BeHHb IX r IPOM3HOIIIeHMZ i, B P O A e T 0 BM. lu T 0 K 0 H e H 0 BM.

0 H III H 0 M T . r I . , K O T O P b I e B 0 3 H M K a K )T I p a M O T H H K O B I IO A B J Dl R HM e M

~rnrpacX1MM .



t oe s and r epea t i n g t he m a t e r i a l a t t h e p rope r speed , he can

j u s t make h i s u t t e r a nce i n t he space p rov i ded . Thus he i s

ob l iged t o approach a near -na t ive pace f rom th e beg inn ing .15

I t must be remembered, as Rivers (201) po inte d out , t h a t normal

speed does not mean ra pi d na t i ve speech . l 6 The FBL ta p e s might have

been improved by record ing th e conversa t ions a t a s l i g h t l y s lower nor-

mal speed , and be ing more ca re fu l t o avoid s lu r r in g and o th er d i s t o r -

t ions. Brooks 53) s t r e s s e d t h a t t he l e a r n e r s e n t i t l e d t o h ea r

l anguage c l ea r l y i n focus a s he l ea rns ( s ee 3 .21 ) , and DBH p o i n t s o u t

t h e need f o r s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r c l a r i t y i n a r t i c u l a t i o n t h an t h a t o f i n -

formal spe ech (DBH/T 1 5 ) .

A s t o s t y l e a nd d i a l e c t , a l l fou r methods have adopted th e col -

l oqu i a l o r eve ryday speech o f educat ed speaker s o f a s t anda rd d i a l ec t ,

ap pa re ntl y Muscovite.17 The ALM manual (11) comments on t h i s as fo llo ws :

The language of th e d ia lo gs i s t h e s t a nda rd , au the n t i c , contem-por ary , i n formal l anguage t h a t would be used i n equiva len t c i r -

cumstances by na t i ve speak ers of th e same age s t h e American

s t u d e n t s i n t h e c l a s s . The w r i t e r s h ave t r i e d t o a vo i d o bv io us

r e gi o na l p e c u l i a r i t i e s

In t he ca se o f ALM, however , t he same age re fe rs t o the jun ior -h igh-

1 5 ~ ~ ~ / ~1. The same i s t r u e of th e FBL dialogu e-reco rdings.

' %ee f u l l quo t a t i on i n 3 .21 . C f. a l s o Po lovni kova 's sugges t i on o f t h e

g r ad i ng o f tempo i n t h e i n i t i a l s t a g es ( 3 . 2 1 ) .

1 7 ~ h e r e s some q u e s t io n a s t o t h e p e r i o d and t y p e o f M us co vite d i a l e c t

chosen a s t h e norm fo r t he s e t ex t books , e sp ec i a l l y i n DBH, FBL, and

COR, w here s t r e s sed i and e a r e g iv e n a s c o a l e s c i ng i n t o i] n

u n s t r e s s e d p o s i t i o n , when i n f a c t t h e u n s t r e s s e d v a r i a n t o f /e/ ( a f -

t e r p a l a t a l i z e d c o ns o na n ts ) i s a c t u a l l y c o n s id e re d t o be more o f a n

[ I ] i n p resen t -day Moscow Russ ian , t h e [ i ] be ing regarded as an o lder

form. ALM a t l e a s t recognizes some d i s t inc t ion- uns t ressed e and

th e uns t res sed a r e p ronounced a most a l i k e ALM/T 38; i t a l i c s J . W .

- - wi th o u t s p e c i f y i n g t h e n a t u r e of t h e d i f f e r e n c e .



- school l ev e l (12-15 year s o ld ) , and thu s th e s t y l e o f the d ia logues i s

n o t r e a l l y s u i t a b l e f o r l e a r n e r s o f hi gh - sc h oo l and u n i v e r s i t y a g e .l

The s t y l e s o f DBH and FBL a r e more s u i t ed t o t h e un iv er si ty a tmo-

sphe re . D ia lo gu es i n t h e f or me r c e n t r e m ai nl y a ro un d u n i v e r s i t y l i f e i n

Moscow; t hos e o f t h e l a t t e r a round t he t r av e l s o f an American t o u r i s t i n

the Sovie t Union . DBH l e ans more t ow ards t h e co l l oq u i a l s i d e w it h ex-

p r e s s i o n s s u c h a s A B ~ I O MO ~ ~ ?12) i n s t ea d o f A B ~ IM A E T ~OMOY;?~~,

Bo C K O JI~ IC O ?~ ~198) ins t ead of KOTOP~IPI sac ? ' ' , whi le FBL ge ne ra l ly pre-

f e r s t h e more p o l i t e f orm s, a t l e a s t on f i r s t i n t r o d u c ti o n . l 9 COR, which

u s e s s e n t e n c e s i n s t e a d o f d i a l o g ue s , i s s t i l l more f o rm al on o c c a s i o n, 2 0

a lt ho u gh t h e s t y l e i s b a s i c a l l y t h a t o f c o n ve r s at i an a l s p ee ch . The d i f -

f e r e n c e s i n s t y l e f o r a c t i v e a nd p a s s iv e m a t er i al w i l l be no t ed i n 5 .23 .

5 . 2 3 Presentation of auding. Although none of th e methods dis cu sse d

recommends a s p e c i f i c auding-only period-in app are nt agreement with

Hocket t (1950,265) th a t t he na tu ra l and most e f f i c i e n t way i s t o de-

ve l op a t one and t h e same ti me a b i l i t y t o pronounce co r re c t l y and t o

hear co r r ec t ly ( c f . 3 .13 , 4 .12)-there does seem t o be a gene ra l rec -

o g n i t i o n o f a d i s t i n c t i o n be tw een a u di ng a nd s p ea k in g s k i l l s . For

e xa mple, t h e f o l lo w i ng q u o t a t io n i s i n cl u d ed i n t h e ALM Teacher s Manual

i n r e fe renc e t o t he accom panying t ape - reco rd i ngs :

18~his s true of one or two dialogues in DBH as well, e.g. the Lesson 17

dialogues about children hunting mushrooms 391-392 394-395 )

E. g. Conversation-Unit 10, FBL 109 KyAa BbI M A ~ T ~ ? S f Y H a BOK3aJI.

~ I oxe H a BOKB~JI?Kyza xe B ~ I n e ~ e ? myna. I'

O E ~ Lesson 27, COR 186 KOHCYJI Bac ceasac rrpmeT, e c m KOHCYJI~CTBOHe

3El€Qb1~0



I n t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f l a ng ua ge f o r l e a r n i n g , a d i s t i n c t i o n

i s made between language for li st en in g and language for i m i -

t a t i on i n o r d e r t o a cc om plis h d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t i v e s .

E xce l l en t r eco rded m a t e r i a l s a r e pl anned and execut ed w i t h t he

p r im ary aim of each pas sage , e ach d r i l l , c l ea r l y i n m ind. The

r e s u l t i s t h a t l an gu ag e f o r l i s t e n i n g an d l an gu ag e f o r i m it a -

t i o n a r e neve r con fused, and one i s never u sed i n a p l ace

where t he ot h e r i s a p ~ r o p r i a t e . ~ ~

I t might be ga t he red f rom fu r t he r i n fo rm a ti on i n t h e manual t h a t t he

l anguage fo r i m i t a t i on i s c o nt a in e d i n t h e d i a lo g u e s w h il e t h e l an -

guage fo r l i s t e n i n g t akes t he form o f na r r a t i ve s , w hich i t i s no t

necessary f o r the s tu den t s t o memorize , a t l ea s t no t i n f u l l (ALM/T 2 7 22

A nother app l i c a t i o n of t he d i s t i nc t i on might be t he i n t roduc t i o n o f t he

d i a l ogue on t ape f i r s t fo r l i s t en i n g on l y , w it h no s t uden t re sponse ,

fol lowe d by st ag es f o r im it at io n (ALM/T 31 ).

T h is f e a t u r e i s a l s o found i n t h e FBL dia logue-record ings under th e

t i t l e o f fu l l - speed ve r si on , fo ll owed by a spaced ve r s i on f o r r e pe t i -

t i o n by t h e l e a r n e r . But sp e c i f i ca l l y des igned fo r au d i to ry comprehen-

si on , according t o t he teachin g manual (FBL/T 4 , a r e t h e l i s te n i n g -i n

e x e r c i s e s . These co ns is t of recorded conversat ions-three pe r conversa-

~ A L M / T 30, c i t ed f rom Cr ite ri a for th e Evalua-tion of Materials t o be In-

cluded i n a SsZect ive Lis t of Materials for Use b y Teachers of Modem

Foreign Languages M L A FL Program Research Center) 1961, p. 42 The

two l anguagesT1 r e expla ined i n th e same quota t ion a s fo l l ow s : Re-

corded language for li st en in g h e l p s t o d e ve lo p a s k i l l t h a t h a s beenl i t t l e under s tood and hence ve ry much neg l ec t ed i n fo re i g n l anguage

t each i n g : t h e ab i l i t y of a non-na ti ve t o under s tand ea s i l y when spo-

ken t o by a na t i ve speake r o f t he l anguage . Recorded language for

i m i t a t i on on th e o th er hand, whi l e t may he l p t o deve l op l i s t e n i ng

s k i l l s , h a s a q u i t e d i f f e r e n t main pu rp o se : i t serve s a s a model f o r

t h e s t u de nt ' s own produ ct ion of th e spoken language .

2 2 ~ a r r a t i v e t y l e i s n a t u r a l l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of c on v er sa t i on , and

t h e tempo somewhat s low er. Thi s i s no doubt anot her r eas on why the y

a r e no t i n t ended fo r m em or izat ion ( c f . 5 . 2 2 ) .



t io n- un it -- be tw ee n R us si an sp e ak e rs a t a r a t h e r r a p i d normal ~ p e e d . ' ~

Unless the accompanying Laboratory Manual ( the funct ion of which i s mere-

l y to pro vi de inform atio n on the s p e l l in g of Russiantt---FBL/T 19) i s used,

t he l ea rn e r ha s no oppo r t un i t y o f s ee i ng t he se d i a l ogues i n p r i n t ed form.

His on ly conta c t wi th them be ing th rough h i s e ar , he i s g i ven g rea t e r op -

po r t un i t y and i ncen t i ve t o deve lop h i s aud ing a b i l i t y . (By co n t r a s t , a11

LM na rra ti ves - inc lud ing t hose f o r l i s t en i ng - a re p r i n t ed i n t he s t u -

dent Is textbook .

DBH h as no r ec om bi na ti on m a t e ri a l -- e i th e r n a r r a t i v e o r d i a l o g u e f o r

auding purposes , bu t the two conver sa t ions i n each un i t2 4 a r e g iven spe-

c i a l l i s t e n i n g a nd i m i t a t i n g s t a g e s on t h e t a p e s , as w i t h t h e LM r e c o r -

d i n g s. I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e f i r s t p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r l i s t e n i n g , however,

t h e r e i s a l s o a f o u r t h s t a g e i n which t h e d i a l o g u e i s repea te d a t normal

speed f o r [se man tic] comprehension (s ee DBH/T 6/1 3) .

5 2 4 Presentat ion o f speaking The second s t a ge i n t he recorded d ia logues

on the LM and DBH t ape s co ns i s t s of th e break ing-down of sen tenc es in t o

p a r t i a l u t t e r a n c e s ( p a r t ia l s ) , s t a r t i n g f rom t h e end of t he s en t ence so

a s t o p re se rv e n a t u r a l i n to n a t io n ( a s r e p e a te d l y s t a t e d i n t h e DBH manual

- s e e p p . 6 , 13, 14, 15-16; c f . al s o ALM/T 9 ) . In th e t h i r d st ag e whole

u t t er a n c e s a r e gi ve n f o r r e p e t i t i o n ( c f . ALM/T 31, DBH/T 6 /13 /14) . Only

t h e l a t t e r s t ag e i s prov i ded f o r t he l e a r ne r ' s i m i t a t i on on t he FBL reco r -

d i ngs , alt ho ug h th e FBL manual, pu bli sh ed some two yea rs l a t e r , recommends

2 3 ~ h e r e oes n o t a pp ea r t o be a ny s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n s p ee d o r s t y l e

from t ha t o f t h e un i t -d i a logues ( c f . 5 . 2 2 ) .

2 4 ~ e s s o n s 4 have on ly one conversa t ion each , a s no ted in 5 21



sen tenc e bu i ld -up (s t a r t in g from the end) as a c lassroom technique (see

FBL/T 11-12)

The author has had expe rience using th e FBL Russian t a pe s i n l a b r a -

t o ry -pe r i ods , and has a l s o worked with DBH-type r ec or din gs (wit h th e fo ur-

-s t a ge conversa t ion) i n another l anguage ; 2 6 th us h i s comparison may be

v a l i d t o some e x t e n t . He found th a t where stu de nt s were t o re pe at com-

p l e t e ut ter an ce s (sometimes as many as s ix te en words long27) only once,

t hey found g r ea t d i f f i c u l t y i n r e t a i n i ng and i m i t a t i ng what t hey had

heard. The ra pi d tempo a t which th e dialogu e was spoken ( se e 5 . 2 2 ) d i d

no t he l p t o ea se t h i s p robl em . S t uden t s u s i ng t he fo u r - s t ag e r eco rd i ngs ,

however, where ut t er an ce s were f i r s t broken down i n t o segments bef ore

b ei ng g iv e n f o r r e p e t i t i o n i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y , a ch ie ve d a r e as o na b le d e-

gre e of f luen cy by th e end of the per iod . 2 8

In 3 .1 we took not e of t h e importanc e of going beyond th e phoneme

i n t h e t r a i n i n g o f b ot h a ud in g and s pe ak in g a b i l i t i e s , and t a k i n g i n t o

cons i d e ra t i on such f ac t o r s a s sound- sequences, s t r e s s , and i n t ona t i on .

T he se a r e most f u l l y e x p l o i t e d i n t h e FBL and DBH methods. The Instruc-

t o r s Manual f o r the l a t t e r (15) comments as fo l low s:

2 5 ~ n o t h e r e as on i s o f f e r e d h e r e ( FBL /T 11 f o r beg inn ing f rom the end of

t h e s e n t e n c e : i t i s e a s i e r t o r e p e a t t h e f i r s t p a r t o f what someone

e l s e ha s s a i d t h a n i t i s t o r ep ea t t h e l a s t p a r t ( a t l e a s t i n t h e

case o f fo r e i gn l anguage m a t e r i a l ) I .

2 6 ~ e c o r d i n g s o r Modern French by Ilesberg and Kenan.

2713.~. FBL 135, Sentence 4 .

2 8 ~ a t u r a l l yh e r e were a few except ions among thos e wi th ve ry g re at and

v e ry l i t t l e a p t i t u d e f o r l a n g u ag e -l e ar n in g , b u t t h e s t a te m e n ts made

h e re r e f l e c t t h e o v e r a l l p a t t e r n .



A t t h e v e r y s t a r t of h i s l a ng ua ge l e a r n i n g , t h e s t u d e n t m ust

become accustomed t o hea ri ng Russian spoken naturally---n ot word

by i s o l a t e d word, b u t w i th t h e o rd in a r y p h ra s in g and in to n a t i o n

t h a t c h a r a c t e ri z e the n a t iv e s p e ak e r o f t h e l a n g ua g e .

This advice is well supported throughout the textbook by a considerable

amount of explanation and drill devoted to the features of speech beyond

isolated sounds, especially clusters and intonation (these will be dis-

cussed in 6.24 and 6.25 respectively). FBL pays little attention to

clusters, but includes a number of good drills on intonation, as well

as on the effect of palatalization on stressed and unstressed vowels.29

ALM and COR, on the other hand, concentrate mainly on isolated

sounds. The latter gives an excellent analysis of the allophonic var-

iants of the unstressed vowels, and some consideration to voicing assim-

ilation (see 6.24), but little or no attention to anything else. Even

though ALM prints all its pronunciation-drills in the Teacher's anual

so that the learner cannot see them, there is a rather poor selection by

comparison with DBH and FBL. It is claimed that these drills, while not

focusing on the whole Russian sound system, have isolated the most diffi-

cult problems in pronunciation for an English-speaking person (ALM/T 35)

The claimants fail to recognize, however, that a problem equally diffi-

cult, if not more so, is presented by the suprasegmental features of a

language (cf. 3.13), which can hardly be described as isolated1' in any

significant degree.

2 9 ~ h en f l u e n c e of p a l a t a l i z a t i o n on vowel q u a l i t y i s o ne f e a t u r e r a t h e r

p o or l y t r e a t e d i n DBH ( s e e 6 . 2 3 .

3 0 ~ v e n f p r on u nc i at i on i s i n t e r p r e t e d h e r e i n i t s n ar ro w s en se of s ound-

- a r t i c u l a t i o n , t h e c l a im r em ai ns u n f u l f i l l e d , s i n c e some o f t h e more

d i f f i c u l t p a l a t a l iz a t io n s ( e . g , /Q/ /Y/ :/ a11 vo iced consona n ts )have been omit ted .



I t would appear th a t the LM au thors assume tha t pup i l s of jun io r -

h ig h- s ch oo l a ge would b e s u f f i c i e n t l y u n l e t t e r e d a s t o a s s im i l a t e s uc h

fea tu r es s imply f rom th e t ea ch er s own use o f th e fo re ig n language in th e

c lass room, wi thou t sp ec i f ic exp lana t ion and d r i l l s on them. This could

wel l be th e case under favourab le c i rcumstances ( i . e . , a na t ive speaker

a b l e t o sp ea k w i th c l e a r , w e l l- d e fin ed i n to n a t i o n - p a t t e r n s a nd /or p u p i l s

wi th more than average a b i l i t y i n sound-pa t te rn d i s c r imi na t io n) , bu t i t

shou ld no t be expec ted au tomat ica l ly even i n a major i ty o f c lassroom s i tu -

a t io ns , f o r from about twe lve years on ch i l d re n seem t o f i nd more d i f f i -

cu l t y i n acc ura te repro duct i on of sounds they hea r . Ca rr ol l (1091) com-

ments as fo l lows:

The ev id en ce seems c l e a r t h a t t h e e a r l i e r t h e c h i l d i s i n t r o -

duced t a f o r e i g n l a ng ua ge , t h e b e t t e r h i s p r o n u n c i at i o n w i l l

b e , o t h e r t h i n g s b e i n g e q u a l ; t i s pro bab le t h a t f a c i l i t y na c q u i r i n g good p ro n un c ia ti o n w i t h ou t s p e c i a l i n s t r u c t i o n i s a

d e c r e a s in g f u n c t i o n of a g e a nd l e v e l s o f f a t a b o ut t h e a ge o fp u b e r t y .

5.25 S m a r y The a n a l y s i s o f t h e f o ur methods (ALM, C O R DBH FBL) i n

r e ga r d t o t h e i r p r e s e n t a ti o n o f a u d i a l s k i l l s i n a cc or da nc e w i th t h e

au di o- li ng ua l appro ach may be summarized as fo l lows :

5 .251 Or ien ta t ion : COR and DBH a r e b o th i n te n d ed e x c lu s iv e ly f o r u n iv e r-

s i t y c ou rs e s, FBL f o r u n i v e r s i t y o r h ig h -s ch o ol , and ALM fo r jun io r -h igh-

-school . l l fo ur acknowledge t he primacy of speech i n lang uage-teaching.

5 .252 Audial-graphic re la t i on sh ip : DBH and LM make s p e c i f i c recommenda-

t i o n o f an a u d i a l- o n ly p e r io d b e f o r e g r a p h i c s k i l l s a r e pu r su ed ; FBL and

COR imp ly t h i s b u t do n o t s t a t e i t Except for ALM a l l methods in t ro duce

C y r i l l i c from th e v e ry s t a r t a l o ng wi th a phonemic t r a n s c r i p t i o n f o r p a s s iv e

use on ly .



5.253 Context: l l methods except COR t ak e account o f c on te x t , and use

d i a lo g u e s a s t h e i r c h i e f v e h i c l e o f p r e s e n t a t i o n , a lt ho u gh LM

i st he on l y

o ne g i vi n g s p e c i f i c a t t e n t i o n t o d i a lo g u e - ad a p t at i o n . The s ty l es o f DBH

and FBL ar e more su i t ed t o th e un iv er s i t y a tmosphere ( c f . 5 .251) . FBL

r ec or di ng s a r e s l i g h t l y f a s t e r t h an d e s i r a b le .

5.254 Auding and spe akin g: LM and FBL rec ogn ize t h e di s t i n c t i o n between

a c t i v e and p a s s i v e a u d i a l s k i l l s , a s d oe s DBH t o some ex te nt . FBL has th e

exc e l l e n t f e a t u re o f r ecom bined m a t e r i a l exc l u s i v c l y f o r aud i t o ry compre-

hens ion , whi l e LM and DBH provide s t aged conver sa t ions . These fe a t ur e

se nte nc e buil d-u ps from th e end of th e sen ten ce . FBL and DBH give cons id-

e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n t o s u pr as eg me nt al f e a t u r e s , w h il e LM and COR concen t r a t e

mainly on i solated sounds.



6 TE XT BO OK A N A L Y S I S A S S I M I L A T I O N

6.1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION. All four methods admittedly subscribe

to the audio-lingual concept of language as a system of habits to be ac-,

quired through practice. The fundamental principle that has guided us1',\

say the DBH authors, is that a foreign language is learned not so much

by intellectual effort and analysis as by intensive practice (DBH/T 2).

The FBL manual equates language-learning with acquiring the set of pro-,

nunciation habits and grammatical habits so that the student can apply

them automatically, just as a native speaker does [FBL/T 3). Similar

statements are found in the introductions to ALM [vii) and COR [ix).

The acknowledged emphasis on learning the language by acquiring hab-

its through practice is well borne out by the rather large number of

drills---both phonological and grammatical-included in the textbooks and

manuals, and the recording of these on the tapes provided by the publisher.

Yet only one of the methods (ALM) appears to embrace the associative

theory1 in its entirety. In the others steps are taken to make the lear-

ner aware of what he is learning, rather than let him respond sub-con-

sciously to a series of stimuli.

DBH begins Lesson 1 with a fairly extensive presentation of the Rus-

sian sound-system (by way of transcription), and in the first two lessons

explains its discrepancies with the writing-system (Cyrillic orthography).

Such explanations go hand-in-hand with drills, as is also the case with

the presentation of Russian consonants and clusters in Lessons 5 34. FBL

l ~ f . ackey's quotation in 4.21.



de als wi th soun d-spel l in g co rr el at io n in Grammar-Unit 1 while phonolog-

i c a l e x p l an a t io n s , accompanied by a p p r o p r i a t e d r i l l s , a r e g iv en a l l t o -

g e t h e r i n a s e p a r a t e c h a p t er a t t h e end of t h e book. (The d r i l l s a r e

numbered, however , t o permi t easy re f e re nce i n the t ex t . ) OR exp l a i n s

th e Russ ian sound-sys tem i n an in t r odu c tor y cha pter en t i t l e d Sounds of

R us sia n , and p r o v id e s c or re sp on di ng d r i l l s i n t h e c o u r se of t h e f i r s t

t e n l e s s o n s .

ALM i n te n de d f o r yo un ge r l e a r n e r s , p r e f e r s t o f o r e g o t h e i m p ar ta -

t i o n o f any p h o no l og i ca l i n fo r ma t io n t o t h e l e a r n e r , and r e l i e s s o l e l y

on h i s i m i t a t i ve capac i t y . I t does p rov ide exp l ana t ions o f sound -a r t icu -

l a t i on i n t h e T eache r ' s ManuaZ, however, bu t t he on l y i n s t r uc t i o n f o r

t each ing th e sounds t o th e pu pi l s i s : Model the fo l lowing words , ask ing

f i r s t f o r chora l and then f o r ind iv id ua l response (ALM/T 37-48). I t i s

c o nc e iv a bl e t h a t i n p r a c t i c e t h e t e a c h e r migh t f i n d i t n e ce s sa r y t o u s e

t he exp l ana t i ons i n c l a s s a s w e l l , f o r , a s we have seen ,2 i t i s a t t he

j un io r -h igh - schoo l age (12-15 yea r s o l d ) t ha t t he ch i l d ' s ab i l i t y t o

mimick by ear alone seems t o de cl in e, and more inform ation about how

[sounds] a r e i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e f i r s t p la ce i s needed, o r he w i l l be to

a g r ea t ex t en t ca r ry i ng ou t t he a s s ignm en t b li nd l y .

6 .2 A S S I M I L A T I O N OF THE RU SS IAN SOUND SYSTEM.

6.21 PhonoZogicaZ d i f f ic u l t ie s fo r Engl ish-speakers . In 6 .2 we s h a l l

examine th e tre atm en t by each method of fo ur major problems con fr on tin g

2 ~ f . a r r o l l ' s q uo ta t ion i n 5 . 24 .

3 ~ e r k i n s 1 5; s e e f u l l q uo ta ti on i n 4.21.



English-speaking students in their assimilation of the Russian sound-

-system. These difficulties may be described as follows:

6.211 Russian has a distinctive feature in its consonantal system which

English does not, namely, palatalization;4 palatalized and non-palatal-

ized phonemes contrast in minimal pairs.

6.212 Russian vowels change in quality depending on a) the position of

the vowel in relation to word-stress, and b) whether a preceding or fol-

lowing consonant is palatalized or non-palatalized.

6.213 Russian has a number of consonant-clusters which are not found in

English at all or are not found in the same distribution in English.

6.214 Russian stress- and intonation-patterns are quite unfamiliar to

the English-speaking learner.

6.22 PaZataZization of consonants Palatalization is one of the most

difficult Russian phonemic features for English-speaking learners. The

problem is most fully exploited in DBH and F B L it is treated to a lesser

extent in COR, and rather scantily (even in practice drills) in ALM.

The Pronunciation practice sections of Lessons 5-10 in DBH are de-

voted to teaching the pronunciation of hard (non-palatalized) and soft

(palatalized) consonants, divided into four groups (cf. DBH 3 - 4 . The

first group of twelve pair (those that contrast before any vowel) is treat-

ed in Lessons 5-8 the second group of three consonants (the palatalization

of which depends upon the following vowel) in Lesson 9 and the third and

fourth groups (three palatalized and three non-palatalized consonants) in

4 ~ e e.12 n . 6 f o r d e f i n i t i o n .



Lesson 10. For each consonant or pair the usual Cyrillic spellings are

given along with the phonemic representation, followed by two or three

examples, a brief description of the articulation, and a contrastive sound-

-drill. Everything is clearly set forth in the student's textbook except

the sound-drills, which appear in a special appendix in the Ins t ruc tor s

Manual (40-52); these generally consist of a series of a dozen or so min-

imal or near-minimal pairs contrasting the hard and soft phonemes in ini-

tial, medial, and final positions, or distributional examples of unpaired

consonants (cf. 4.12). A commendable feature is the contrastive drill of

[el with [I] since, it is explained, many students tend to confuse them

(DBH/T 51). A similar drill contrasting another close pair-[g] and [ E ]

(which in the author's opinion would be better represented by [i:])--might

have profitably been added. (A reference to the textbook-page and tape-

-reel number is provided along with each drill in the manual,)

The articulatory explanations (see above) include some mention of

contrast with similar phonemes in EnglishY5 but there might be a slight

danger in comparing the effect of palatalization in Russian to that of

a y-glide in English, even with such a carefully-worded statement as soft

Russian [<]...has the effect on the ear [of an English-speaker] of being

followed by a y-like glide (DBH 68, italics J W ; cf. also 5.14, fn. 9 .

This is balanced, however, by the fairly precise description of its for-

mation by a closure of the front part of the blade of the tongue (not the

tip) against the ridge of the gums (DBH 68).

5 ~ . g . BH 6 8 ) : Nei ther Russ ian hard t] n o r s o f t f ] (no r any o t he r Rus-

s i a n c o ns o na n t, f o r t h a t m a t t e r ) e v e r h a s t h e pu ff of b r e a t h t h a t usu-

a l l y accompanies Engl i sh t . A s i m i l a r n o t e s g iv e n f o r t h e d e s c r i p -

t i o n of a l l o bs t r u en ts .



As mentioned in 6.1, FBL has assembled all its pronunciation-material

into one chapter at the end of the book (FBL 299--321). Here the drills

are set out in a slightly different manner from that of DBH: they are

organized, according to the FBL manual, by grouping in one exercise

sounds that have some feature in common (FBL/T 9 . Thus Drill 1 is de-

voted to the voiceless obstruents /p / t /k / Drill 2 to dentals /t/d/n/,

and Drill 3 to voiced consonants /b/d/g/v/z/i/. Drills 4-43 treat non-

-palatalized consonants /r/ /I/, x/ /c/ and S i respectively, and

Drill 9 is for practice in lip-rounding for consonants before back vowels

/o/u/. Palatalized consonants are taken up in Drills 10-15, grouped ac-

cording to point of articulation (labials, velars, dentals), with / / ,

/6/, and /S6/ treated in separate drills. Although hard and soft con-

sonants are drilled separately from each other, references in the text

itself encourage juxtaposition of drills so that the contrast may be made

clearer. Although examples are included for initial, medial, and final

distribution, there is no attempt to organize the drills so as to result

in minimal (or near-minimal) pairs when contrasted. The only use of min-

imal pairs comes, surprisingly enough, under the heading of Reading E x -

ercise at the end of Grammar-Unit 1 (FBL 19-20). Further sound-drills

are provided in the exercises for Conversation-Units 1 and 2 (6/11), but

these do not include paired palatalized consonants, and are organized

primarily as an introduction to the Cyrillic alphabet, rather than to

give practice in specific Russian phonemes.

6 ~ g BL 5 0 Ex. A; cf. a l s o FBL T 15.



In both the introductory Sounds of Russian chapter (COR 1-3) and

in the pronunciation-section of Lesson 1 8 - 9 ) , COR has Russian conson-

ants properly classified into the same four groups as has DBH (3-5). In

Lesson 1 they are listed in logical order (e.g. /b/bj/p/pj/d/dj/t/tj/

etc.) with one example each and no explanation. The explanation given

in Sounds of Russian has some articulatory description7 but relies

rather heavily on comparison (rather than contrast) to similar phonemes

in English, sometimes with non-linguistic devices as well. Here, too,

the phonemes (in transcription) are simply listed in the order of the Eng-

lish alphabet, without any attempt to show the relationship of phonemes

to each other (except in regard to palatalization). The explanations

of consonants /l/lj /r/rj /t/tj p/pj are repeated in Lessons 7

respectively with a few more examples for each, but even here there

seems to be no attempt to set up any minimal contrasts.

As mentioned above, palatalization receives even scantier attention

in ALM, despite the declaration of its significance beforehand: In Eng-

lish this distinction does not exist, but in Russian it is essential: it

may serve as the only distinction between two words with otherwise iden-

tical phonetic forms (ALM/T 39; cf. also Reformatskij's quotation in 4.12).

The first fifteen drills make a fair beginning: five each are devoted

the pairs /1/$/, /r/q/, and /t/f/, where first the hard, then the soft

7~ g. p like English p in sport, i. . without the puff of breath that

accompanies English p in port (COR 2 .

8 ~ . g . r: like English r in a telephone operator's pronunciation of

thr-r-ree . . . tj: like English t in stew in that pronunciation that

has a y-glide after the t . ( ~ o t e hat COR uses o indicate a pal-

atalized consonant, not the phoneme /j/, which he transcribes as y .



v a r i a n t i s d r i l l e d , f ol lo we d by a c o n t r a s t o f t h e two; t h i s i s a l l done

thr ou gh e xa mp le s, which i n t h e c o n t r a s t - d r i l l s a r e a t l e a s t n ea r- minima l

p a i r s . The f o u r r e ma in ing d r i l l s , h owever, c o ve r o n ly f i v e a d d i t i o n a l

consonants : /p /k / , / S / Z / and /x/ with no fu r t he r mention o f s o f t va -

r i e t i e s . And t h a t i s a l l t h a t i s s t a t e d o r d r i l l e d a s f a r a s p al a ta l:

i z a t io n of Russ ian consonan ts i s concerned.

6 .2 3 Changes n vowel q u a l i t y Changes i n th e q u a l i t y of Russian vow-

e l s , a s no ted i n 6 .21 , depend on two main fa c t o r s : a ) th e pos i t i on of

th e vowel i n r e l a t i o n t o w o r d - s t r e s s, and b) w h e th er a p r e ce d ing o r f s l -

lowing consonant i s p a l a t a l i z e d o r n o n - p a l a t a l i z e d . The c o n t r a s t o f

s t r e s s e d a nd u n s t r e s s e d v owels h a s be en t r e a t e d i n t r a d i t i o n a l R us si an

t e xtb oo k s f o r some t ime ; t h e l a t t e r h a s r e c e iv e d c o mp a ra ti v ely l i t t l e

a t t e n t i o n t o d a te . I n f a c t , t h e i n f l u e n c e of p a l a t a l i z a t i o n on vowel

q u a l i t y i s n ot m entioned a t a l l i n ALM, and DBH d e a l s w i th i t o n ly i n -

d i r e c t l y ; i t i s t r e a t e d f a i r l y e x t e n s i v e l y , however, i n FBL and COR. The

e f f e c t o f s t r e s s on vowel q u a l i t y r e c e iv e s c o n s id e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n from

a l l methods except ALM

The problem of changes i n vowel qua l i t y-- esp eci a l l y i n regard t o un-

s t re ss ed vowels-is most f u l l y exp loi ted by CORY where t he pron uncia t ion

s e c t i o n s o f t h r e e l e s s o n s 4-6) a r e d e vo te d t o i t A good introduct ion

t o t h e s u b j e ct i s giv en i n t h e Sounds of Russian ch ap te r (COR 3--5).

S t r e s s e d vowels a r e d e a l t w it h f i r s t , and a f t e r c ha ng es i n l e n g t h a r e

n o te d ( b e fo r e f i n a l c o ns o na n ts o r c l u s t e r s a s o pp os ed t o s i n g l e m ed ia l

. g . Gronicka Bates-Yakobson 1 4 , a l s o F ay er 22 .



consonant s ) , th e var i a n t s of th e f i v e vowel phonemes according t o preced-

i ng and f o ll owi ng pa l a t a l i za t i o n a r e p r e s en t ed . l o d i sa d va n ta g e i n t h e

p r e s e n t a t i o n i s to o heavy a re l i a n c e on comparison with Engl ish sounds

( c f . a l s o 6 . 2 2 on O R f s t r ea tmen t of pa la ta l i ze d consonant s) 1 T his i s

then fol lowed by an anal ys i s of t he uns t r es sed vowels , c l as s i f i ed accord-

i ng t o f o u r p o s i t i o n s :

1 i n i t i a l , no t p receded by a consonant ;

2 . f i n a l , no t fo l lowed by a consonant ;

3. im me dia te ly b e f o re t h e s t r e s s , b u t n o t i n i t i a l ;4 . e l sewhere , i . two o r more s y l l a b l e s be f o r e t h e s t r e s s bu t

n ot i n i t i a l , o r a f t e r t h e s t r e s s bu t no t f i n a l . 1 2

For t h e vowel phonemes /i/ and a t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n vowel q u a l i t y i s

shown a f t e r pa l a t a l i z ed and non- pa l a t a l i zed cons onan ts i n each pos i t i o n

where app l i ca ble , 13 and one o r two examples a re g iven fo r each va r i e t y .

More examples ar e give n when th e s u bj ec t i s taken up i n Lessons 4 6. l 4

1 • ‹ ~ o w e l se n d t o i n c re a s e i n h e ig h t a nd /o r f r o n tn e s s a c c or di ng t o t h e

number of cont iguous pa la ta l i ze d conson ant s -4 .g . ja i s r e al i z e d a s

[a] etween two non -pa lata l ize d consonants , and as [a] etween two

pa la ta l i ze d consonant s; between pa la ta l i ze d and non-pala ta l i zed con-

sonant s and v ice-ve r sa) t he a l lophone i s approximately midway be-

tween [a] nd [a] Vowels a l s o ten d t o be followe d by a forward-up-

ward g l i d e be f o r e p a l a t a l i z ed consonant s.

I ' E . ~ . u : l i k e t he vowel o f Eng l i s h pu t , oot b u t wi th t h e l i p s s l i g h t l y

prot rud ed, so t h a t th e sound, though s ho r t , r esembles th e vowel of

goose, soup COR 4 ) . This comparison may on ly add t o t h e problem of

na ti ve- l anguage i n t e r f e r e nce ( s e e 3 .1 1 ) .

1 3 ~ sOR po i n t s ou t 4 + ) , / o / d oe s n o t o c cu r i n u n s t r e s s e d s y l l a b l e s a t

a l l ; e i s fo und o n ly i n p o s i t i o n 1; /u/ has approximately the same

q u a l i t y i n a l l u n st r e ss e d p o s it i o n s [ b ut d oes v a r y a cc or di ng t o t h e

pa l a t a l i za t i on of cont iguous cons onant s ] ; a oes not occur i n po-

s i t i o n 3 ( an d o nl y r a r e l y i n p o s i t i o n 4 ) f o l lo w i n g p a l a t a l i z e d and

p a l a t a l c o ns on a nt s.

1 4 ~ o s i t i o n s1 and 2 a r e d r i l l e d i n L esson 4 p o s i t i o n s 3 and 4 i n Lessons

and 6 r e s p e c t i v e l y .



FBLts treatment of changes in vowel quality does not include the

same refinement or distinction as that of COR; for example, it recognizes

only the influence of preceding palatalization on the quality of stressed

vowels /i/a/o/u/, and only that of following palatalization on stressed

e . rills 16-21 are devoted to stressed vowels in the environment of

plain consonants and in final position, and Drills 22-26 to those in

the company of palatalized consonants (FBL 308-311). Once again, how-

ever, text references allow for juxtaposition of drills for sharper con-

trast.15 Drills 27 to 32 treat unstressed vowels in palatalized and non-

palatalized environments, but no more than one position is recognized ex-

cept for /a/ after a non-palatalized consonant, where CORts osition 3 is

distinguished from other possibilities. Like COR, FBL also makes use

of English comparisons, even though a short note appears beforehand (FBL

307) to the effect that these re only meant as approximations and

that the learner should not take them too seriously , since there is a

great deal of dialect variation with respect to English vowels ; the stu-

dent should rather depend upon the instructor or the recordings .

As mentioned at the beginning of 6.23, DBH recognizes the influence

of palatalization on vowel quality only indirectly. This is because its

1 5 ~ . g . FBL 25, EX. A.

1 6 ~ s tated before Drill 28 (FBL 312), this is the vowel for which it is

necessary to introduce the extra variable of pretonic position. In

pretonic position the vowel /a/ is similar to the in English but and

in other unstressed positions it is similar to the a in English soda ,

If this is the only distinction to be made, it might have been more

accurate to include CORts osition 1 together with position 3 (pre-tonic), as initial /a/ is closer to pre-tonic /a/ than to other un

stressed variants. This is in fact done in DBH (see below).



explanations (and drills) are based on the llsound-values f the Cyrillic

vowel-letters rather than on the Russian sound-system itself. Thus in

the two pages devoted to the subject (23-25) DBH treats the variants ac-

cording to palatalization under the corresponding Cyrillic vowel-symbols

0 and etc.); it also deals with stressed and unstressed sound-values

together. Within these limitations, however, at least two unstressed

variants according to position are recognized for o, e, and (for some

reason is not even mentioned).

ALM, the method intended for learners of a younger age, devotes only

one drill to stressed vowels and one to unstressed vowels, both using the

Cyrillic alphabet only (ALM/T 37-38). No distinctions are recognized in

the former (except for the obvious difference of and H .I8 The only

word of explanation in regard to unstressed vowels is that unstressed

and the unstressed a are pronounced alike and that unstressed e and the

unstressed M are pronounced almost alike (ALM/T 38) twelve examples

are provided in all. No variants according to either position or palatal-

ization are recognized.

6 2 4 Consonant cZusters Like the vowel allophones, there is also a need

(as was brought out in 3.14) to give some attention to consonantal variants

in what are known as cZusters The student of Russian who masters the cor-

7 ~ h i s s rather surprising for DBH, which otherwise uses the Russian sound-

-system (in transcription) as the basis of its explanations and drills.

I8~here s as yet no final consensus as to the phonemic or allophonic statusof these two sounds; for one discussion of them see Leed 39-41.

19cf. also 5.22 fn. 17.



r e c t pronun ciat ion of Russian consonants---both pa la ta l i ze d and non-pal-

a t a l i zed-- -wi l l have fu r t he r d i f f i c u l ty when he comes t o u t t e r words and

sen tenc es s imply because of the l a r ge number o f u nfa mi l i a r c lus t e r s -

t h o s e n o t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f E ng li sh a t a l l and t h o s e a pp ea ri ng i n d i f -

f e r e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n s . He has lear ned how t o say th e in di vi du al conson-

an t sounds , bu t he has no t ye t l ea rned how t o use them i n jux t apo s i t io n .

Yet wi th th e excep t ion of th e phonemic al te rn at io n of voiced and unvoiced

consonan ts , t he on l y r e a l t r ea t m en t of c l u s t e r s i s t o be found i n DBH

Af ter ind iv id ua l consonant sounds a r e d r i l l e d i n Lessons 5-10 (c f .

6 . 22 ) , t he P ronunc i at ion p ra c t i c e s ec t i on s o f t h e nex t twenty four

l e s s o n s 2 0 a r e d ev ot ed t o t h e p ro ble ms o f c on so na nt c l u s t e r s i n a l l d i s -

t r i b u t i o n a l p o s i t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y th o s e c l u s t e r s and d i s t r i b u t i o n s

w hich a r e no t ch a r ac t e r i s t i c of t he E ng l ish sound-sys tem . I n i t i a l and

f i n a l c l u s t e r s c o nt a in i ng r o r / / a r e d r i l l e d s e p a r a t e l y i n Lessons

13 and 14 ; tho se co nta in ing /1/ o r / / appea r i n t he fo l l ow i ng l e s son .

Lessons 18 and 19, f or example, de al wi th c l u s te r s beginning with s and

/z/ nd ot he r two-consonant c l u s te r s ar e t r e a te d i n Lessons 21-23. The

pronuncia t ion s ec t io ns of Lessons 24-29 a r e devoted t o c lu s t e r s o f th re e

consonant s , t h a t of Lesson 30 t o four-consonant c l us t e rs (wi th / s t / a s

the two middle consonant s ) . In format ion on c l us t e r - s i mp l i f i ca t i on (where

more consonant s a r e repres en ted or thog rap hica l ly than a r e sounded) i s

given i n Lesson 20, and a d r i l l on double consonant s i s provided in Les-

son 11 Under th e heading of spe cial consonant c l us te rs i n Lesson 2

2 0 ~ x c e p t o r Lesson 17 w hi ch dea l s w i t h vo i c i ng a l t e rna t i on i n fin l

p o s i t i o n .



a r e g i ven such i t ems a s /CS/CC/dS/tc/ The pronuncia t ion sec t ions of

Lessons 31-34 co ns i s t of a fou r -pa r t p re se nta t io n and d r i l l of i n i t i a l

consonant c lu s te r s wi th no p a ra l l e l i n th e Engl i sh sound sys tem , which

i nc lu d es c l u s t e r s l i k e /Jg/vm/gn/mr/. s m entio ned i n 6 .2 2, a l l d r i l l s

(aside f rom a few examples) a r e pr in t ed i n th e t eaching manual r a t he r

t h an i n t h e s t u d e n t ' s t ex tb o ok .

The fe at ur e of al t e rn at io n of voiced and vo ice les s consonants-ot

o nly i n c l u s t e r s , b u t a l s o a t t h e end of words-is d e a l t with i n Lessons

3 16, and 17. t must be remembered, however, t h a t t h i s i s a phonemi

v a r i a t i o n , i n which one phoneme i s r ep l aced by ano t he r , r a t he r than t he

mere a l te r na t io n o f al lophones i n d i ~ t r i b u t i o n . ~ ~owever, since i t i s

a f e a t u r e in vo lv e d ( a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y ) w it h c on so na nt c l u s t e r s , and i s

t r e a t ed t o some ex t en t i n a l l f ou r me thods, i t deserves some discussion

h e r e .

D H g i v e s t h e f o ll o wi n g ad v ic e f o r d e a l i n g w it h v o i ci n g a l t e r n a t i o n :

Since the writing system does not accurately reflect the spo-

ken language, it is essential for the student to know which

consonants are voiced, which are voiceless, and, especially,

which are paired in terms of voice or absence of voice. This

* l ~ h e istinction between Russian voiced and voiceless consonants them-

selves presents a problem for the English-speaking learner. Althoughthere are voiced and unvoiced consonants in English, it is the tense/

lax opposition which is the significant feature, and voicing is merely

a concomitant phenomenon. In Russian, however, voicing is distinctive;

the tense/lax contrast is minimal. Thus the learner s ear, accustomed

to the latter as the distinctive signal, may not always perceive the

voicing opposition without it; similarly a tensellax dominated con-

trast in his own speech will hinder its comprehension by native Rus-

sians: hence the need of special attention. This is given to some

extent in each method along with the introduction of palatalized and

non-palatalized consonants (cf. for example 6.22 fn.5).



is important because, in certain positions, only consonant

sounds of one or the other series are spoken, regardless ofthe spelling.

Accordingly, each method gives a table showing paired and unpaired

consonants (DBH and COR use transcription and so list palatalized con-

sonants separately). COR includes among paired consonants (labelled

mutes-ee COR 5) those unvoiced consonants ( / c / e / x / / ) hich do not

have voiced counterparts operating independently, but only under the

conditions of the voicing alternation in clusters. All four methods

point out the special status of v y in regard to voicing alternation;

all include examples of replacement of voiced consonants by voiceless

ones in clusters, and vice-versa, as well as replacement of voiced con-

sonants in word-final position.

DBH, however, is the only method that includes any specific drills

on the alternation feature: two pages of extensive practice drills are

given in Lesson 3, and further drills appear in the Instructor s Manual

to be used in Lessons 16 and 17, which are also devoted to voicing al-

ternation. Two short drills appear in the ALM manual (48)-in one of

them voiced phonemes are contrasted as to alternation before voiced and

voiceless second-members in a cluster23 but both drills include only

ten examples altogether. No drills on voicing alternation are provided

in either FBL or COR

6.25 Stress and intonation patterns. We observed in 3.1 that stress and

intonation are most significant factors in the comprehension and produc-

~ ~ ~0.

~ similar drill is recommended by Birkenrnayer 48)



t i o n of R us si an s pe ec h ( c f . e s p e c i a l l y Se du n' s q u o t a t i o n i n 3 .1 4 ) . The

f e a t u r e s o f s t r e s s and i n t o n a t i o n a r e g iv e n c o n si d e ra b l e a t t e n t i o n i n DBH

and FBL, v e r y l i t t l e i n ALM and v i r t u a l l y none i n COR.

The most importan t c ha ra c t e r i s t i c o f Russian s tr ss (in comparison

t o t h a t of E n gl i sh ) i s th e absence o f secondary word-s t ress . 2 4 Perhaps

a s a r e s u l t o f t h i s , s t r e s s e d vowels a r e sounded w i th g r e a t e r i n t e n s i t y

th an a r e E n g li s h vo wel s w i th p rima ry s t r e s s , and t h e r e i s a v e ry s t r i k -

ing d i f f e re nce between s t re ss ed and uns t ress ed vowels.25 This much, a t

l e a s t , i s b ro ug ht o u t i n a l l f o u r methods ( c f . DBH 7 , FBL 31 4, ALM/T 36,

COR 3) . Phr ase -s t res s , however , i s t r e a t e d o n l y i n DBH and FBL; i n th e

former t s even ind ica ted i n th e phonemic t ra ns c r ip t i on by a double

acute mark. No s p e c i f i c s t r e s s - d r i l l s a r e p ro vi de d i n DBH, bu t FBL i n -

c ludes two d r i l l s each f o r word- and phr ase -s t res s .

In tona t ion i s des igna ted by th e DBH manual as one of t h e ar ea s most

ne gl ec te d i n Russ ian text book s (DBH/T 9 ) . Pra ct i ce has shown , th e

t e x t c o n t i n u e s , t h a t t h e s t u d e n t u s u a l l y f o c us e s on t h e p r o nu n c ia t i on

o f i n d iv id u a l words a nd , u n l e s s p r o p e r ly d i r e c t e d , f a i l s t o p e r c eiv e and

im it a t e th e in ton at i on of the sentence a s a whole , i n much t he same way

t h a t h e con cen tra tes too much on th e in di vi du al phonemes when try in g t o

mas ter c l us te r s . Hence DBH ha s s e en f i t t o i n c lu d e s p e c i a l s e c t i o n s on

I n to n at i on p r a c t i c e i n s i x o f t s e a r l y l e s s o n s (6-11) i n add i t i on t o

th e r e g u l a r P r on u nc i at i on p r a c t i c e f e a tu r e . L ess on 6 i n t r o d u c e s t h e

2 4 ~ sx p la i ne d i n FBL 315), however , th e r e a r e a f e w compound words

R u ss i an w i th a n o p t i o n a l s e co nd ar y s t r e s s , e . g . x ~ J I ~ ~ H o A o ~ ~ x H ~ I ~ ~ .

250f t h e l a t t e r , t h o s e i n C O R s p o s i t i o n s a n d 3 ( c f . 6 . 2 3 ) t en d t o

s l i g h t l y s t r o n g er t ha n t h e o t h e r s .



learner first of all to falling contours in statements and questions (with

l'question-wordsll); uestions with rising and rising-falling contours (with-

out question-words ) are dealt with in Lessons 7 and 8 respectively, and

emphatic statements with the latter-type curve in Lesson 9 Lessons 10

and 11 contain a review of all contour-types.

Seven drills are allotted to intonation practice in the FBL Pronun-

ciation of Russian chapter (Drills 37--43, FBL 317-321). These cover

three main types of utterances: statement, questions with interrogative

words , and questions without interrogative words . A commendable fea-

ture of FBL1s treatment of intonation is the constant contrast with Eng-

lish intonation-patterns for the same types of utterances. Both FBL and

DBH make good use of diagrams illustrating intonation-patterns.

ALM, on the other hand, has one short drill (eight examples) con-

trasting intonation-patterns in questions and statements; however, there

is little accompanying explanation (and no diagrams), even for the teacher,

who himself might not be entirely familiar with Russian intonation-patterns.

COR makes no mention of intonation whatsoever.

6.26 Summary The analysis of the four methods (ALM, COR, DBH, FBL) in

regard to assimilation of phonological difficulties may be summarized as

follows

6.261 Palatalization: DBH gives the most thorough treatment, especially

with its use of contrastive drills and minimal pairs; FBL is the next rec-

ommended, as a number of drills are devoted to the subject; COR follows

DBH1s classification procedure, but is lacking in coherence and provision



of a d eq ua te d r i l l s ; LM prov ides good d r i l l s on ly f o r a few consonant

p a i r s b ut ne g le c ts a l l th e o t h er s .

6.262 Vowel qu a li t y: COR p r e s e n t s t h e most e x t e n s iv e a n a l y s i s of

c ha ng es i n vowel q u a l i t y u nd er t h e i n f l u e n c e o f p a l a t a l i z a t i o n a nd

s t r e s s bu t FBL prov ides more adequa te d r i l l s and i s p r o b a b l y b e t t e r

s u it e d t o tea chi ng purposes--both however r e l y somewhat on Engl ish

compari sons thus adding t o the in t e r f e re nce p roblem; DBH does not

t r e a t t h e s u bj e ct i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l and ALM hard ly touches t a t

a l l .

6 .2 6 3 C lu s t e r s : DBH s th e on ly method t o g iv e adequa te t rea tment o f

Russian consonan t c l us te r s and i s th e only one which incl udes a su f-

f i c i e n t amount o f d r i l l on v o i ci n g a l t e r n a t i o n ; ALM h a s two s h o r t d r i l l s

bu t does make use o f th e con t r as t p r in c i p l e ; FBL and COR e x p l a i n t h e

phenomenon and prov ide examples bu t no d r i l l s .

6 .264 St re ss : Word- and ph ra se -s t r es s i s b e s t t r e a t e d i n FBL which

i s t h e o n l y method pr o vi d in g s p e c i f i c s t r e s s - d r i l l s ; DBH i n d i c a t e s

p h r a s e - s t r e s s i n i t s t r a n s c r i p t i o n ; ALM and COR dea l wi th word-s t ress

o n ly .

6 .265 Intonat ion: Both DBH and FBL g ive cons iderab le a t t e n t io n t o i n -

tonat ion-pat terns- the former of fe rs a more thorough expl anat ion of th e

a c t u a l c o n t o ur s w h il e t h e l a t t e r f e a t u r e s a c o n t r a s t w it h E n gl i sh i n -

t o n a t i o n - p at t e r n s ; t h e s u b j e c t r e c e iv e s minimal a t t e n t i o n i n ALM and

none i n C O R



7

ON LUSIONS

7

COMPREHENSIVE

OF

7

P

ao

T

A

C

D H

F

N

o

u

s

4 -

E

e

Z

Z

o

L

n

junior-high-school 1

ear

u

1

2

ears

high-school

u

u

Pm

o

sp

r

r

r

r

Po

so

o

a

a

o

yp

t

istri-

b

d

b

c

is

T

o

tra

p

o

u

phonemic;

f c

Z

p

a

p

no

no d

?

/

L

ho

tra

p

o

p

o

10

f

material;

f

ord-lists

1

f

4

f

material;

dialogues;

f

ron.-drills

a

ron.-drills

U

o

C

Z

c

a

f

s

f

s

f

tart

M

nv

ceu

d

s

d

dialogue

N

o

uea

2

f 1

1 20



Oth u

cZ

mae

a

Co

e

u

c

d

a

o

Tm

SyZ

Co

e

o

u

ea

P

o

so

o

a

n

o

yp

P

o

so

o

a

n

P

o

so

o

sp

n

mp

s

n

a

a s

Z

dialogue dapta-

review sentences

tion; ecombination

narratives

recognized

fairly apid

Moscow1

~oscowl

veni

more f

j veni

miscellaneous

narratives; ne

dialogue tage

2 ialogue tages:

sentence-breakdown

full-utterance

repet

isolated sounds

isolated sounds

Conversation

basic sentence

patterns

dialogues

(tape

recognized

recognized

less

more colloquial

university l

fairly apid

Moscow

l

f

travelogue

Preparation for

recombination

whole tterances

whole tterances

two dialogue

stages

recombination

dialogues

(tape

2 ialogue tages:

sentence-breakdown

full-utterance

repetition

one ialogue

stage: full

utterance

l~f 5.22 n 1



ITM

AM

COR

D

F

L

a

a

re

z

re

z

re

z

re

z

s

o

h

s

N

o

e

o

re

z

re

z

re

z

P

o

a

o

d

Z

P

a

za

o

cZ

c

o

P

Z

aZza

o

am

o

d

P

a

za

o

og

za

o

o

d

s

C

n

vwZq

y

ca

c

o

C

nvwZ

q

y

d

s

a

nma

f

1us

moynma

spac

e

f

3us

f

6c

us

4go

ap

4go

ap

foowinpmefoowinpme

1d

so

empeoy

d

snUns

5d

smo

p

oy

ap

nsp

51ap

co

s

mop

o

cac

e

ap

o

ap

o

4nLo79

mop

o

nminmap

nminman

minma n

nminmap

nminmap

-minmap

s

aed

so

paaz n

paazc

l

eaeo

moeev

leeev

fayeev

inCy

coy

teme

fo

teme

w

temeoyo

ue

vasue

vasu

e

va

e

fo/

d

s

empeoy

p

od

s1d

s



ITM

AM

CR

D B

F

C

a V

e n

pe n

c

p

eae

peae

V

sh

d

s

d S

wodeoy

wodeoy

c S

d

I

ty

c

ndaams

I

d

sh

d

N

ba

ocmp

moecmpso

c

isoac

a

thc

a

eev

teme

Uns13

pe n

peae

p o

d

s

wd

pa

e

3y

6 reew;

daams

Uns61

moec

a

thcmpso

pe n

peae

wd

pa

e

4d

s

3y;

daams

7 d

s

ba

ocmp

isoac

a



7.2 FIRST HYPOTHESIS.

The audial skills of a language are most effectively and effi-

ciently taught by audio-lingual methods which give sufficientconsideration to. .

7.21 Age and l i t e rac y o f le arne r Problem: It is acknowledged that

audial skills cannot be taught without complete concentration on audial

learning alone to the exclusion of graphic skills, yet audial assimila-

tion is hindered by the predominantly visual orientation of the learner.

Conclusions:

7.211 The development of audial skills being the primary goal, the spo-

ken language must be maintained as the basis for all audio-lingual teach-

\ing, as well as the chief medium of presentation of the language.

7.212 A visual representation of the spoken language is a useful support

(but only a support) for all except very young pupils in learning the

audial skills of a language.

7.213 Any written representation so employed must be an acemate reflec-

tion of the sound-system of the language without the distortions common

to many traditional orthographies. This purpose is best served by the

use of a phonemic transcription.

7.22 DeveZopment of ac t ive and passive skiZZs Problem: Many foreign-

-language learners have found difficulty in understanding the normal con-

versational speech of native speakers, and in correctly producing more

than isolated sounds or words. Conclusions:

7.221 Attention should be paid to training the learner s ear to recog-

nize significant sound-distinctions, which will also facilitate accurate

production.



7.222 In the development of both auding and speaking skills language

should be presented first in whole utterances with particular emphasis

on stress- and intonation-patterns.

7.223 Naturalness of context is best found, for teaching purposes, in

the average conversational style and tempo of educated speakers of a

standard dialect, and is best presented by means of a dialogue of in-

formal conversation, followed by its adaptation to the learner s own

experience.

7.23 Interference with similar phonemes Problem: It is acknowledged

that the teaching of language as skills requires a considerable amount

of practice in the formation of automatic habits, yet older learners find

difficulty in making unfamiliar sound-distinctions and tend to substitute

native-language phonemes in their attempt at imitation. Conclusions:

7.231 Contrast-drills in which related phonemes are juxtaposed enable

the learner to recognize and produce phonemic distinctions more accurately.

7.232 Perception and production of phonemic contrast can be strengthened

by an awareness of the target-language sound-system.

7.233 Native-language interference should be prevented by making the

learner awarethrough contrastive a n a l y s i s ~ f he differences in the

two phonological systems.

7.3 SECOND HYPOTHESIS.

ot all audio-lingual methods publicized as such are equally

successful in satisfying the criteria outlined in the first

hypothesis.

Four acknowledged audio-lingual methods for the teaching of Russian

have been examined in regard to their satisfaction of the above criteria.



Our conclusions may be set forth as follows:

7.31 Provision of visual representation

7.311 All four methods discussed acknowledge the spoken language as the

basis for all teaching-material.

7.312 Only three of the methods provide a visual representation in the

form of transcription. The other ALM) neglects to include any form of

transcription, and it is questionable whether the age difference and de-

gree of literacy) between senior- and junior-high-school learners is suf-

ficient to warrant its omission.

7.313 The transcriptions used by DBH and FBL are more suitable for peda-

gogical purposes than that found in COR because of their representation

of palatalized consonants by a single symbol.

7.32 Mastery of fluent conversational utterances

7.321 Not all methods recognize a distinction between auding and speaking

material, or the need for training in auditory discrimination. COR makes

no provision for this at all, and DBH only to a limited extent. ALM uses

narratives for training in auditory comprehension, while FBL provides re-

combined material on the tapes after each dialogue for this purpose.

7.322 Only two methods DBH, FBL) emphasize the suprasegmental features

of stress- and intonation-patterns; the others concentrate mainly on iso-

lated sounds.

7.323 A standard dialect of educated speakers is adopted by all methods,

but there are varying shades of style-from more formal COR) to less for-

mal FBL) to more colloquial DBH) to juvenile ALM). Some of the mate-

rial e.g. FBL dialogues) is recorded at slightly too fast a tempo for



teaching purposes. Only three methods use dialogue as the chief vehicle

of presentation--+OR prefers sentences---and only one (ALM) makes any pro-

vision for dialogue-adaptation.

7.33 Contrast and conscious assimilation

7.331 Only two methods (DBH and FBL) apply the principle of phonemic

contrast to any great extent (the former s use of minimal pairs is es-

pecially effective), although ALM provides contrast-drills for isolated

items like voicing alternation in clusters and a few palatalization-paired

consonants.

7.332 One method (ALM) includes no explanation whatsoever for the learner,

and very little even for the teacher. Another (COR) gives a fine analysis

of changes in vowel quality, but little explanatory reference to anything

else. The other two present a more satisfactory explanation of the Rus-

sian sound-system along with fairly extensive drills.

7.333 Very little is brought out in any of the four methods as to the

distinctions between Russian and English phonological systems (DBH prob-

ably does more so than the others). In fact, especially in COR, there

seems to be too great a stress on the similarities of the target- and

native-language sounds rather than on the differences between them.

7.4 FURTHER COfVY\IENTS We may further conclude that two of the methods

discussed are more successful on the whole than are the other two in meet-

ing the criteria established for the audio-lingual approach. While the

ALM method would perhaps be suitable for learners at the elementary-school

level (who are much more responsive to sound-discrimination and -imitation

than are even their junior-high-school counterparts), its practicability



in terms of high-school or university language-courses is severely limited

by its lack of explanatory material and lack of consideration for the vis-

ual needs of older learners. On the other hand, it is chiefly the absence

of sufficient drills that prevents COR from being an effective audio-lin-

gual method per se. Presumably, linguistically trained native or near-

-native speakers of Russian would be able to make compensation in the

classroom, but in the writer s opinion such material as is lacking in the

textbook would be extremely difficult for the average Russian teacher to

improvise.

The DBH and F B L methods, however, seem to be on the whole more suit-

able for high-school and university audio-lingual Russian programmes,

since, with the exceptions already brought out, they both succeed in

meeting the criteria of the audio-lingual approach. Of the two, F B L

probably gives a slightly better over-all treatment, covering more fea-

tures, while certain features (e.g., palatalization and especially clus-

ters) are presented in sharper focus by DBH We may conclude, neverthe-

less, that these two methods--out of those discussed--are the best rep-

resentatives of the audio-lingual approach.



BIBLIOGR PHY

JOURN LS

LL Language Learning (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan).

ML Modern Languages (London: Modern Language Association).

ML Modern Language JournaZ (St. Louis: National Federation ofModern Language Teachers Associations).

SEEJ SZavic and East European JournaZ (Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin).

BOOKS ND RTICLES

Anisfeld, Moshe, tfPsycholinguistic erspectives on Language Learning .In A. Valdman (ed.), Trends in Language Teaching (New York: McGrawHill) 1966. Pp. 107-119.

Banathy, B./Trager, E.C./Waddle, C.D., The Use of Contrastive Data inForeign Language Course Development . In A. Valdman (ed.), Trends i n

Language Teaching (New York: McGraw Hill) 1966. Pp. 35-36.

Bazan, Beverly M., The Danger of Assumption without Prooftt.MLJ 48(1964) 337-346.

Belasco, Simon, General Section. In Belasco (ed.), Manual and AnthoZogy

of Applied Linguistics (Washington: U.S. Office of Education) 1960.Pp. 1-59.

Benson, Morton, An Introduction to Russian Pronunciation . ML 41(1957) : 78-80.

Birkenmayer, Sigmund, Pattern Drills in the Teaching of Russian: Theoryand Practice . SEEJ NS 7 (1963) 43-50.

Bloomfield, Leonard, OutZine Guide for the PracticaZ Study of Foreign

Languages (Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America) 1942.

tuxin (ed. M e T o ~ m rpeI-IoAaBamR pycCIcoro Rabnm. (Moscow ~sI-Ie,riis

1960. Pp. 331-332.



Brooks, Nelson, Language and Language Learning. (New York: H ar co ur t,

Brace World) 2nd e d i t i o n 1964.

Ca pe lle , Guy, Lin gui st iq ue Appliqu6e e t Enseignement des Langues . ML

45 (1964) : 57--60.

C a r r o l l , J o h n B . Research on Teaching F ore ign Languages . In N . Gage

( e d . ) , Handbook of ~ e s e a r c h n Language ~ e a c h i n g . (Chicago: Rand

McNally) 1963 . Pp. 1060-1100.

C io ff ar i , Vincenzo, The Importance of th e Pr in te d Word i n th e Learning

of a F ore ign Language . MLJ 46 (1 96 2) : 312-314.

Cornyn, Will iam S . , Beginning Russian. (Newhaven: Yale Un iv er si ty ) 1961.

Dawson, Cl ay to n L./ Bid wel l, Ch ar le s E./Humesky, Assya, Modern Russian

(Volumes 1 /1 1 ) . (New York: Ha rc ou rt , Brace World) 1964 /65.

Ins t ruc tor s Manual, Modern Russian. (New York: Ha rc ou rt , Brace

World) 1964.

Desberg, Dan/Kenan, Lu ce tt e R . Modern French. (New York: Ha rc ou rt ,

Brace 6 World) 1964.

Dewey, Horace W . Persona l i zed Exerc i ses f o r S tuden t s o f E lementary Rus-

s i an . MLJ 50 (1966) 12-15.

Doherty, Jose ph C./Markus, Robe rta L . Fi rs t Course i n Russian. (Boston:

D . C . Heath) 1960.

Domar, Rebecca A . Can Ru ss ian Cours es Be Saved? MLJ 42 (1 95 8) : 11-17.

Fai rba nks , Gordon H./Leed, Richard L . Basic Conversational Russian. (New

York: Ho lt , Rin eha rt Winston) 1964.

Teacher s Manual, Basic ConversationaZ Russian. (New York: H ol t,

Rin eha rt Winston) 1966.

Laboratory ~anua Basic Conversational Russian. ( ~ e w o rk :

Ho lt , Rin eha rt Winston) 1966.

Fayer, Mischa H . Basic Russian. (New York: Pitm an) 1959 .

Fisher, Wayne D . High School Russian: No En glis h from th e F i r s t Day

( P a r t s 1 / 1 1 ) . SEEJ NS 5 (1961): 41--45, 141-145.

Fishman, Joshua A . The Im pl ic at i ons of Bi l ing ual i sm f o r Language Teaching

and Language Lear ning . In A . Valdman (ed.), Trends i n Language Teach-

ing. (New York: McGraw H i l l ) 196 6. Pp. 121-132.



G i l b e r t , M . "Some Problems of Language Teaching". ML 42 (1961) : 65-71.

Green, Eugene, "On Grading Phonetic In te rf er en ce ". LL 13 (1963) : 8 5 4 6 .

Gronicka, A.v./Bates-Yakobson, H . ~ s s e n t i a z s f Russian. (Englewood

C l i f f s : P ren t i ce -H a l l ) 3rd ed i t i on 1958.

Hal l , Robert A . , J r . New Ways t o Learn a Foreign Language. (New York:

Bantam Books) 1966.

Hocket t , Charles F . , "Learning Pronunciat ion". MLJ 34 (1 95 0) : 261-269.

, Course i n Modern L in gu is ti cs . (New York: MacMillan) 195 8.

Huebener , Th eo do re , "The New Key i s Now Off-Key " ML 47 (1 96 3) : 375-377.

, How t o Teach Foreign Languages Ef Se ct iv el y. (New York: New York

Universi ty) 1965.

J e s p e r s e n , O t t o , How t o Teach a Foreign Language. (London: All en Unwin)

1904 [12th impression 19611.

Kempers, ~ o h n , The Teaching of Russian: A Response t o Nathan Rosen".

SEEJ NS 11 (1967): 71-74.

Krupskaj a , N . K , "0 rrpenonasamm pyccIcoro ~ 3 b n c aB Hepycc mx ru~co~rax" I n

M . Lapatuxin (ed. , M~ToAMI~~rpenonasamm pyccIcoro ~ 3 b m . (MOSCOW:Y ~ n e ~ r m )960. Pp. 410-411.

\ Lado, Robert, Lin gui st i cs Across Cultures. (Ann Arbor: Un iv er si t y of/

1 Michigan) 1957.

Leed, Richard L . A Note on th e Phonemic S t a t u s o f Ru ssia n High Unrounded

Vowels1'. SEEJ NS 7 (1963) : 39-41.

Lemieux, C laude P . , "Improving Our Ru ss ian Textbooks" . MLJ 37 (1953):

134-1 38.

~ G o n ,Pi er re , "Teaching Pronunciat ion". In A . Valdman (ed.), Trends nLanguage Teaching. (New York: McGraw H i l l ) 1 966. Pp. 57-79.

Lunt, Horace G . Fundamentals of Russian. (New York, Norton) 1958.

Mackey, William Francis, Language Teaching Analysis. (London: Longmans

Green) 1965.

McRil l , Paul C . , "FLES i n Di s t r i c t R - 1 . MLJ 45 (1961) : 366-370.

Mgras, Edmond A . , Language T ea ch er s Guide. (New York: Harper Row)

2nd edi t ion 1962.



Modern Language Materials Development Center Staff, A-LM Russian: Level

One. (New York: Ha rc ou rt , Brace World) 1961.

T e ~ c h e r ~anual, A-LM Russian: Level One. (New York: Ha rc ou rt

Brace World) 1961.

Mue ller , Theodore, Auding Tes ts . MLJ 43 (1959) : 185-187.

O'Connor,P. /Twadell , W.F., Inte nsiv e t r a in in g f o r an o r a l approach i n

language teaching . MLJ 44 (1960) : Supplement 1-42.

Page, Mary M . We Dropped FLESH. MLJ 50 (1 96 6) : 139-141.

Palmer, Harold E . , The Oral Method o f Teaching Languages. (Cambridge:

W . H ef fe r 6 Sons) 1921 16th impr ess ion 19651.

The Principles o f Language Study. (London: George Har rap Co. )

1922. Rep rint ed (London: Oxford Un ive rs i ty ) 1964.

Perk ins , Mer le L . , General Language Study and th e Teaching o f Languages .

ML 40 (1956) 113-119.

P o l i t z e r , R o b e r t L . , I1On th e R ela t io n o f Li ng ui st ic s t o Language Teaching .

MLJ 42 (1958) 6 5 4 8 .

Polovnikova, V . I . , H ~ K o T o ~ ~ I ~OIlPOCbI MeTO.IWIU4 p a 6 0 ~ b 1 70 Pa3BMTMX) P e r M

C T Y A ~ H T O B - M H O C T ~ ~ H L J ~ B . In L . B az il ev iE e t a l . ( e d s . ) , PyCCKZ?i; ; R3bK

gTIR CTYAeHTOB-MHOCTpXtIqeB. (MOSCOW:B ~ I C I I I ~ RUECoJIa 1965. Pp. 129-147.

Reformatski ] , A . A . , 0 HeKOTOpbK TPYAHOCTRX 0 6 y Y e H M ~ T~OMBHOU~HMX) . In

A . Reformat sk i j (ed . ) , PyCCKMfi R3 b E AJIR C TYAeHTOB -MHOCT pameB. (Mos-

cow B b i c m ~moxa) 1961 Pp 5-1 2

Rivers, Wilga M . l lL ist en ing comprehension . ML J 50 (1966) : 196-204.

Rosen, Nathan, A l l ' s Well Tha t Ends Badly . SEEJ NS 10 ( 19 66 ): 4 6 4 5 .

Sedun, E . P . , 06yseme PMTMI'IYeCKOMY I $ P ~ ~ o B o M YY A a p e W C p eA CT By MHTC-

HaLlMOHHOrO YJIeHemR B p y C C m ~ 3 b M e . I n A . Reformatski j (ed. ye

CK3/lpi R3bIEC AJIR CTYAeHTOB-MHOCTPXtIqeB (MOSCOW Bbic i i~a s I JKox~) 1961.

Pp. 13-27.



S t r e v e n s , P e t e r D . Lin gui s t i cs i n Language Teaching Again: a Bri t i sh

Point of Viewu. I n The English Leaflet (Boston: New England As so ci -

at io n of Teachers of English) 61 (1962)a. Repri nted i nR .

MackinP . S t r e v e n s ( e d s . ) , Papers i n Language and Language Teaching (Lon-

don: Oxford Un iv er si ty ) 1965. Pp. 66-73.

Phonetic St ud ie s i n Language Teaching . M 12 (19 62) b. Re-

p r i n t e d i n Papers i n Language and Language Teaching Pp. 42-56.

Li ng ui st ic Research and Language Teaching . In New Trends i n

Linguistic Research (St ras bou rg: Council of Europe) 1963. Repri n-

t e d i n Papers i n Language and Language Teaching Pp. 1-22.

Phone tics, Applied Li ng ui st ic s, and ot he r Components of Lan-

guage Teaching . In Volume i n Honour of Daniel Jones (London:Longmans Green) 1964a. Re pr in te d i n Papers i n Language and Language

Teaching Pp. 57-65.

The Teach ing of Fore ign Languages t o Ad ul ts : 'The Problem i n

Perspec t ive . In The Teaching of Foreign Languages t o Adul ts (Lon-

don: Pergamon) 1964b. Rep rin ted i n Papers i n Language and Language

Teaching Pp. 25-41.

Sweet, Henry, The Practical Study of Languages (London: J . M . Dent

Sons) 1899. Rep rin ted (London: Oxford Un iv er si ty ) 1964.

~ g a k o v ,D . N . i lperroaasam e W H ~ T ~O~I@ ~II I / IMB m o ~ ~ e . n M . Lapa-tux in (ed M e T o m a r r p e n o z a n a m f i p y c m o r o s 3 b m a . (MOSCOW~ u n e ~ r m )1960 . Pp . 378-381.

Valdman, Al be r t, Programmed In s t r u c t i o n and For eig n Language Teaching .

I n A . Valdman (ed.), Trends i n Language Teaching (New York: McGraw

H i l l ) 1966. Pp. 133-158.

An Analysis of Audio Lingual Approach

Documents

Transcript of An Analysis of Audio Lingual Approach