Authentic Communication: Proceedings of the 5th Annual JALT Pan-SIG Conference.
May 13-14, 2006. Shizuoka, Japan: Tokai University College of Marine Science. (p. 13 - 24).

Authentic communication: Whyzit importan' ta teach reduced forms?

by James Dean Brown (University of Hawai'i at Manoa)



This paper focuses on the evolution of my awareness of the importance of teaching connected speech forms in ESL/EFL classrooms. It also includes my recent efforts to compile the literature on the topic and formulate the rules underlying continuous speech forms including such concepts as word stress, utterance stress and timing, elisions, reductions, insertions, intrusions, simple transitions, assimilations, contractions, and combinations of all of the above.
My quest began when I was teaching in the People's Republic of China back in 1980. One day a student came up to me after class and asked me why it was that he could understand me when I spoke to the class, but could not when I spoke to other Americans. I discussed that question over lunch with my nine American colleagues. We decided that the issue was probably related to the way we enunciated very clearly when teaching, but used more relaxed pronunciation, which we began calling "reduced forms", when talking to each other. We decided to collect as many samples of reduced forms as we could by listening carefully to each other and to ourselves when we spoke, jotting down any forms that we noticed.
Table 1 shows an edited list of the reduced forms that we collected. In order to be included in this list, all nine of us had to agree that we produced a given reduced form in our respective dialects of North American English (from California, New York City, Boston, and the Midwest).
In addition, we agreed to teach these reduced forms for 5-10 minutes in each of the 50 intermediate speaking classes that students took over the course of their ten week term.

Table 1. Connected speech forms taught at an EFL program in China (Adapted from Brown & Hilferty, 1982, 1995)
Greetings Other Combined Words Question Forms
Howarya (How are you?) c'mon (come on) Howza (How is the)
Howdy (How do you do?) g'won (go on) How d'ya (How do you)
gedouda (get out of) How'd ja (How did you)
Farewells wadda (what a) How'ja (How would you)
G'bye (Goodbye) Jawanna (Do you want to)
'bye (Goodbye) Shortened Words Yawanna (Do you want to)
Seeya (See you) 'bout (about) Whaddya (What do you)
S'long (So long) 'nother (another) Whatduzzee (What does he)
'round (around) Whaja (What did you)
Modals + TO 'cause (because) Whaja (What would you)
goin'ta (going to) in' (-ing) Whad'll (What will)
gonna (going to) jus' (just) Whatser (What is her)
gotta (got to) ol' (old) Whatsiz (What is his)
hafta (have to) yu (you) Wheraya (Where are you)
otta (ought to) yer (your) When d'ya (When do you)
wanna (want to) Where j'eat (Where did you eat?)
Words + OF J'eat jet (Did you eat yet?)
Modals + HAVE kinda (kind of) J'ev (Did you have)
coulda (could have) sorta (sort of) J'ever (Did you ever)
mighta (might have) type-a (type of) Wouldja (Would you)
shoulda (should have) a lotta (a lot of)
in fruna (in front of)
Negative Modals ouda (out of)
/wõ/ [nasalized o] (won't)
/dõ/ [nasalized o] (don't) Contractions
duzn (doesn't) N(or PN) + be(present)
havn (haven't) N(or PN) + be(future)
N(or PN) + would
N(or PN) + will
N(or PN) + have(present)
N(or PN) + have(past)
Let + PN
there + be
there + have
here + be

[ p. 13 ]


In addition to teaching these reduced forms daily, once a week we administered a dictation that included a sampling of the reduced forms they had learned up to that point. Table 2 shows an example of one such reduced forms dictation. During the dictation, students were instructed to write the full forms of the words that represented what they were hearing and were told to expect to hear the dictation read three times at natural speed — "once fast, once fast, and once fast" (that always got a nervous laugh). Pauses were provided between each reading to give students time to write. The scoring was done by counting up the number of underlined full-form words the students had managed to write down (for more on reduced forms dictations, see Brown & Hilferty, 1989, 1995, 1998).

Table 2. Connected speech forms dictation example from GELC (Adapted from Brown & Hilferty, 1982, 1998)
As it was read:
Brian: Whenerya goin' ta Peking?
Jim: I'm gonna go on Sunday.
Brian: Boy! I wish I were gettin' ouda here fer awhile. Ya gotcher plane ticket?
Jim: No. I've gotta gedit tomorrow.
Brian: Whaddya hafta do in Peking?
Jim: I've gotta giv'em some lectures, but I also wanna do some sightseeing.
Brian: Where'll ya go?
Jim: I wanna gedouda Peking 'n see the Great Wall.
Brian: Okay, hav' a good time.
Jim: Okay, g'bye.
As it was scored:
Brian: When are you going to Peking?
Jim: I am going to go on Sunday.
Brian: Boy! I wish I were getting out of here for awhile. You got your plane ticket?
Jim: No. I have got to get it tomorrow.
Brian: What do you have to do in Peking?
Jim: I have got to give them some lectures, but I also want to do some sightseeing.
Brian: Where will you go?
Jim: I want to get out of Peking and see the Great Wall.
Brian: Okay, have a good time.
Jim: Okay, goodbye.
Reduced forms: 46 (counting underlined words only).


In the end, we felt that these lessons helped the students a great deal with their comprehension of natural native-speaker speech. Indeed, when we did a four week experiment (reported in Brown & Hilferty, 1982, 1986a, 1986b), which compared pretest and posttest scores on reduced forms dictations (two forms counterbalanced to help control the practice effect). The results indicated that, in four weeks, student comprehension of reduced form sentences had improved from 35% to 61%.
We were quite happy to find a way to help students better understand native-speaker output.

[ p. 14 ]

Years later, as I continued pondering the issues related to reduced forms (and collecting them), I realized that I was thinking about them in the wrong way. By collecting them in the way I was, I was lexicalizing them and thinking about them as individual units. I soon realized that what was needed, to teach them more effectively, was an understanding of the processes underlying these reduced forms. A great deal of reading, study, and thinking naturally let me to think about connected speech.

What is connected speech?

Crystal (1980, p. 81) defines connected speech as:
A term used by linguists to refer to spoken language when analysed as a continuous sequence, as in normal utterances and conversations. Its significance lies in the contrast implied with studies of linguistic units seen in isolation, such as an individual sound, word or phrase, which were the subject matter of traditional linguistic enquiry. It is now realized that important changes happen to these units when they are used in connected speech, as demonstrated by such processes as assimilation and elision, e.g. and becoming /n/ in such phrases as boys and girls.

Crystal's definition works well for the purposes of this paper, except that I will expand the list of processes involved to include word stress, sentence stress and timing, reduction, strong and weak forms of words, elision, intrusion, assimilation, transition (juncture), liaison, and contraction.
It is also important to recognize that connected speech is part of a larger system of contextual constraints that affect our choices of linguistic tools through the rules of pragmatics that govern any particular language. Table 3 shows these contextual constraints and linguistic tools and how they are related to each other through pragmatic rules. I have written elsewhere about these constraints and tools (see, for instance, Brown, 1995, 1996), so will not waste space here going over them again. The features of connected speech are outlined in Table 3.

Table 3. Proposed features of oral proficiency
Table 3

What processes underlie connected speech?

The nine processes that I have identified as underlying connected speech are: word stress, sentence stress and timing, reduction, citation and weak forms of words, elision, intrusion, assimilation, juncture, and contraction. Let's consider each of these briefly in turn.

[ p. 15 ]

Word stress. Crystal (2003, p. 435) defines the stress in word stress as:
A term used in phonetics to refer to the degree of force used in producing a syllable. The usual distinction is between stressed and unstressed syllables, the former being more prominent than the latter . . .

In other words, this can be defined as the way the stressed syllables in a word (which is in turn, the smallest distinctive unit that can stand on its own in speaking or writing) are organized in terms of their relative prominence.

Sentence stress and timing. By extension, sentence stress can be defined simply as the pattern of stress groups in a sentence (or utterance, since they are typically oral). Then, sentence timing can be defined as the pattern of stress or syllable timing in the stress groups in a sentence (or utterance) of the language. Some linguists categorize languages into two groups:
Syllable timed languages tend to produce each syllable with approximately the same prominence. Japanese is one such language. In Japanese, arigato gozaimasu [thank you very much] contains ten syllables, or mora1, of approximately equal weight, broken up as follows: a ri ga to o go za i ma su. French is also syllable-timed. Thus, an utterance like Il est très fatigué [He is very tired] is pronounced in six equally weighted syllables as follows: Il est très fa ti gué.

Stress timed languages tend to produce each stress group with approximately the same prominence. English is stress timed. Hence, an utterance like, "When'll ¦ Tom be coming ¦ back?" is timed in two stress groups: "When'll ¦ Tom" and "be coming ¦ back".

Notice that I am careful in these definitions of syllable and stress timed languages to use the word tend to qualify my definitions. I do this because these definitions are only true under certain conditions and because the definitions are not necessarily the same for all languages that are labeled as one or the other (for more on this topic, see Dauer, 1983; Crystal, 2003, p. 436).

Reduction. This is one of the processes that occur in connected speech, wherein the phonemes of a language are changed, minimized, or eliminated in order to make pronunciation easier. For instance, in North American English (NAE), the vowels found in unstressed syllables are most often reduced to schwa /ə/ or incorporated into a syllabic consonant like /ŋ/. Consider the word television, which would be pronounced very clearly something like te le vi zhin, but four other alternative pronunciations with varying vowel reduction are acceptable in the connected speech of most dialects: te la vi zhin, te la vi zhun, te la vi zhn, and even a three syllable version tel vi zhn.

Citation and weak forms of words. The pronunciation of words in a language may be different depending on the context in which they are found. A word may be pronounced one way when it is prominent and another way when it isn't. For instance, when a word in English is prominent, as when it is pronounced in isolation, the resulting pronunciation is called the citation form. For instance, the citation form for not is not. However, the same word may appear in a weak form in addition to the citation form depending on the level of formality, the meaning being expressed, and/or the phonological environment. For instance, the citation from of not in do not go can be contracted as in don't go or even further reduced as don go in connected speech.
Note that the Japanese language is timed by mora rather than by syllable. The mora is generally defined as a CV or V and is thought of as a unit of timing.

[ p. 16 ]

Elision. This connected speech process involves dropping either vowels or consonants that would otherwise be present in the citation form of a word or phrase. For instance, the citation form of chocolate is pronounced in three syllables as something like cha ko lut, but in connected speech, NAE speakers are much more likely to drop the middle vowel in chocolate in a two syllable version pronounced something like chak lut. Elision also occurs at word boundaries. For example, the citation form of old is /old/, but the last consonant is often dropped in connected speech as in He's a good ol' boy. Elision is a very frequent process in connected speech, especially in the weak forms what often turn out to be function words.

Intrusion. This process can be viewed as the opposite to elision because it involves inserting phonemes within or between words rather than dropping them. An example of intrusion in NAE occurs when many native speakers insert a /t/ between /l/ and /s/ as in false /falts/; or they insert a /k/ between /ŋ/ and /st/ as in gangster. In some dialects of NAE, insertion of /r/ between words is common after the vowel a at the end of one word and before a vowel at the beginning of another word. For instance, in some dialects, the phrase China and Japan is pronounced something like Chiner n Japan, with the /a/ in China changed to /ə/ and an intrusive /r/ inserted after the first word.

Assimilation. This is a common connected speech process wherein one phoneme is changed to another due to the influence of a phoneme that is close by. For instance, in NAE, after the voiceless /t/, the pronunciation of s is a voiceless /s/ as in cats, whereas the pronunciation of s is a voiced /z/ when it follows a voiced consonant like /g/ as in dogs. Similarly, the Japanese place name made up of the two words shin and bashi is pronounced Shimbashi. In this case, the alveolar nasal /n/ phoneme changes to the bilabial nasal /m/ because of the influence of the /b/ phoneme that follows it, probably because the lips are preparing to form the bilabial stop /b/.

Transition (juncture). This is a connected speech process that describes how neighboring phonemes are connected. Close transition is the label for pronunciations with a close connection between successive sounds, whereas open transition refers to pronunciations with a slight break between the words. For instance, consider the contrasting pronunciations of nitrate and night rate. The connection between /t/ and /r/ in nitrate demonstrates a close transition, while the connection in night rate shows open transition. Some linguists use the terms open and closed juncture in place of open and closed transition.

[ p. 17 ]

Contraction. This is a written manifestation of a small set of connected speech processes, which are often used in written dialogue to give a spoken flavor. Examples include I'm, don't, she's, they'll, we're, you'd, etc. (for an excellent article on this topic, see Hill and Beebe, 1980).

The stigma of lazy English

". . . connected speech is a very real part of the English language. Indeed, it may be part of all living languages."

I'll bet that most ESL/EFL learners and even most NAE native speakers believe that speaking "good English" or "proper English" is the same as using formal English. Put in terms of connected speech, I'll further wager that many believe that the use of weak forms, reduction, linking, contraction, assimilation, elision, and intrusion is a sign of lazy, sloppy, careless, or even slovenly English. Are people who hold these beliefs right?
Many linguists say these beliefs are wrong. For instance, the well-known phonetician Peter Ladefoged says point-blank that:
There is, of course, nothing slovenly or lazy about using weak forms and assimilations. Only people with artificial notions about what constitutes so-called good speech could use adjectives such as these to label the kind of speech I have been describing. Weak forms and assimilations are common in the speech of every sort of speaker of both Britain and America. Foreigners who make insufficient use of them sound stilted. (Ladefoged, 2000, p. 93)
This mistaken belief about connected speech may occur because many lay people also believe that the use of colloquial speech is a sign of substandard, low-class, or low-status English. Richard, Pratt, and Pratt have countered that claim by stating:
Colloquial speech is not necessarily non-prestige speech and should not be considered substandard. Educated native speakers of a language normally use colloquial speech in informal situations with friends, fellow workers, and members of the family. It is often difficult for language learners to realize that in certain situations colloquial speech is more appropriate than extremely formal speech. (Richards, Pratt, and Pratt, 1993, p. 63)

Research on Connected Speech

Briefly, what does the applied linguistics literature have to offer to date on the topic of connected speech? Unfortunately, there is not as much written about connected speech as there is about many other issues in applied linguistics. Indeed, the literature on connected speech in English can best be characterized as being a collection of a bit here and a bit there over the last fifty years. Some researchers have offered modest efforts to explain a few facets of connected speech and suggested ways to teach them (e.g., Brown and Hilferty, 1989, 1995, 1998; Celce-Murcia, Brinton, and Goodwin, 2004; Dauer, 1993; Gilbert, 1984, 1993; Gimson, 1962, 1970, 1989, 2001; Grant, 1993; Morley, 1987; Pennington, 1996; Sheeler and Markley, 1991).
Most of those authors have only touched on the issues involved in connected speech, and they have typically done so as one relatively small part of learning listening comprehension or pronunciation. However, Griffee and Hough (1986), Griffee (1993), Hagen (2000), Hough (1995), Kobayashi and Linde (1984), Rost and Stratton (1978, 1980), and Weinstein (1982, 2001) have provided more coverage and have focused primarily on connected speech.
Sadly, actual research on connected speech is very hard to find indeed. Studies have been reported by Bowen (1975, 1976, 1977), Coleman (1977), Henrichsen (1984), Brown and Hilferty (1986a, 1986b), Kim (1995), Kweon (2000), Ito (2001), Bley-Vroman and Kweon (2002), and Rosa (2002).

[ p. 18 ]

One new book (Brown and Kondo-Brown, 2006) offers a collection of (mostly) new research papers about connected speech. Table 4 shows the table of contents of this book. Note that the first nine chapters focus mostly on connected speech in ESL/EFL, but also that four chapters (10-14) address the issues involved in connected speech in Japanese. The final chapter on testing connected speech provides examples in English, French, and Japanese.

Table 4. Table of Contents: Brown, J. D., & Kondo-Brown, K. (Eds.). (In press).
Perspectives on teaching connected speech to second language speakers. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press

What do we know so far?
Chapter 1 Introducing connected speech (Brown & Kondo-Brown)
Chapter 2 The significance of reduced forms (Ito)
Chapter 3 What do textbooks have to offer to teachers of connected speech? (Brown)
Does connected speech instruction work?
Chapter 4 The effectiveness of teaching reduced forms for listening comprehension (Brown & Hilferty)
Chapter 5 Comprehension of English reduced forms by Japanese business people and the effectiveness of instruction (Matsuzawa)
Chapter 6 Effect of reduced forms on input-intake process (Ito)
How should connected speech be taught in English?
Chapter 7 Don'cha know? A survey of ESL teachers' perspectives on reduced forms instruction (Rosa)
Chapter 8 eaching reduced interrogative forms to low-level students (Cahill)
Chapter 9 Visualizing English speech reductions using the free phonetic software package WASP (Varden)
How should connected speech be taught in Japanese?
Chapter 10 Categories and instances of reduced forms in connected speech in Japanese (Hasegawa)
Chapter 11 Pedagogical issues related to teaching listening to oral Japanese with a focus on reduced forms (Toda)
Chapter 12 Use of CAI learning materials for teaching sound changes in spoken Japanese (Sakai & Igashima)
Chapter 13 Why second language learners of Japanese need to learn difficult minute sounds in connected speech (Hirata)
How should connected speech be tested?
Chapter 14 Testing students' abilities to understand and used connected speech (Brown & Kondo-Brown)


How should connected speech be tested?

Chapter 15 Testing students' abilities to understand and used connected speech (J. D. Brown & K. Kondo-Brown)
One other book (Brown, in progress) attempts to explain the processes that underlie connected speech and how they combine. Table 5 shows the table of contents of that book.

[ p. 19 ]


Table 5. Table of Contents: Brown, J. D. (In progress). Shaping students' pronunciation: Teaching the connected speech of North American English
PART A BACKGROUND
Chapter 1 Why Teach Continuous Speech Forms?
Chapter 2 Transcribing Speech Sounds
Chapter 3 Word Stress
Chapter 4 Utterance, Stress and Timing
PART B CONTINUOUS SPEECH
Chapter 5 Phoneme Variations
Chapter 6 Simple Transitions
Chapter 7 Dropping Sounds
Chapter 8 Inserting Sounds
Chapter 9 Changing Sounds
PART C PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
Chapter 10 Contractions
Chapter 11 Questions in Continuous Speech
Chapter 12 Combining Multiple Processes

Though it may not be clear from Table 5, all of the following topics are covered in the book: word stress, sentence stress and timing, reduction, strong and weak forms of words, elision, intrusion, assimilation, transition (juncture), liaison, and contraction. It turns out that all of the processes underlying connected speech are rule-based and relatively easy to understand and teach. Each of the processes is explained with many examples and rules are formulated and summarized in each chapter of the book. For example, the following are four of the rules that underlie anticipatory assimilation:
Anticipatory Assimilation A: The /t/ phoneme assimilates to bilabial /p/ when it is found at a syllable or word boundary before bilabial stops or a bilabial nasal such as /p/, /b/, /m/ (e.g., output and hat pin; outbid and that box; and Batman and cut meat.

Anticipatory Assimilation B: The /d/ phoneme assimilates to bilabial /b/ at a syllable or word boundary before bilabial stops or a bilabial nasal such as /p/, /b/, or /m/ (e.g., tadpole and good point; bedbug and good boy and admire and bad mouth.

Anticipatory Assimilation C: The /t/ phoneme assimilates to velar /k/ at a syllable or word boundary before the velar stops /k/ or /g/ (e.g., outcry and what kind; and outgun and cut grass).

Anticipatory Assimilation D: The /d/ phoneme assimilates to velar /g/ at a syllable or word boundary before the velar stop /g/ (e.g., mudguard and good game).
The book also supplies example exercise ideas for teaching each of the processes involved in connected speech.

[ p. 20 ]

Connected speech forms for listening or speaking, or both?
". . . students need to be cautioned about when and where to use the various forms of connected speech."

One issue that teachers often raise is the degree to which connected speech should be taught for listening comprehension only or also for speaking or pronunciation. Some teachers prefer to dissuade students from producing connected speech because they fear that students will end up sounding funny when they used connected speech, or that students may start writing things like gonna and wanna in their English essays. Clearly, this is two-part problem.
Starting with the second part, students may indeed begin using gonna and wanna and similar connected speech forms in their writing if the genre is right. Like any other aspect of ESL/EFL learning, the students need to be cautioned about when and where to use the various forms of connected speech. For example, they need to learn that it is not appropriate to use connected speech forms in formal writing. However, written connected speech does often appear in dialogues, short stories, novels, and other forms of fiction.
The other issue is that, in fact, students who know only one or two forms like gonna or wanna many sound odd using them, especially, if the students do not fully understand them (see for instance the arguments presented by Hill & Beebe, 1980, pp. 322-323; Avery & Ehrlich, 1992, p. 89; Hewings, 1993, p. 54). For instance, students might learn that going to is pronounced gonna and then proceed to say I'm gonna San Francisco for I am going to San Francisco because they were not taught that gonna is only used before infinitive verb forms. That's analogous to teaching students one or two phonemes and then faulting them for not pronouncing them correctly in all phonetic environments. The solution is not to abandon all efforts to teach connected speech, but rather, students must be given a more complete picture of how connected speech works. When they understand connected speech and how to use it, they can steadily grow more comfortable using it. As part of this gradual build-up, certain teachers may prefer to have students focus first on comprehending connected spoken NAE, before having them practice using those forms productively. Naturally, such decisions are best left to the individual teacher.

Should we teach connected speech?

The last issue I will address in this paper is whether or not we should in fact teach connected speech. My answer is a resounding yes. A number of reasons underlie this belief. First of all, connected speech is a very real part of the English language. Indeed, it may be part of all living languages. Students need to be exposed to and taught all seven sets of linguistic tools discussed in this chapter, and connected speech is part of the suprasegmentals that figure into that expanded set of tools. In addition, students need to learn more about grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation than we traditionally teach, and connected speech is part of the new information they need to understand about pronunciation. Students also need to be able to adjust their styles and registers in using language, and the ability to understand and use connected speech is essential for making such adjustments. Students also need to be able to respond to the seven sets of contextual constraints discussed in this chapter, and ability to understand and use connected speech is essential to making such adjustments. As Kelly, (2003, p. 113) pointed out, "In the same way that working on sentence stress and intonation can help students to better understand spoken English, so can working oh the other features of connected speech."
Connected speech is not just a sign of lazy, sloppy, careless, or slovenly English. It is used in all levels of speech (those listed by Hartmann and Stork, 1976, p. 136, after M. Joos, 1966) as well as others, including the most formal sorts of speech. In all of those levels, connected speech may play an important "accentuation" role (as pointed out in Gimson, 2001, p. 249), the understanding of which can help non-native speakers understand oral English and produce comprehensible spoken English. Research studies indicate that non-native speakers have a problem understanding or producing the features of connected speech (Bowen, 1976; Henrichsen, 1984; Brown and Hilferty, 1986a, 1986b; Kim, 1995; Kweon, 2000; Ito, 2001; and Bley-Vroman and Kweon, 2002). Research also indicates that the elements of connected speech can be taught to non-native speakers of English (Brown and Hilferty, 1986a, 1986b). In many cases, the simple awareness of their existence can help enormously in enabling students to better understand the language they hear. Perhaps most important of all, in my experience, students enjoy learning about reduced forms because it is mostly new information that they find interesting.

[ p. 21 ]

References

Avery, P., & Ehrlich, S. (1992). Teaching American English pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bley-Vroman, R., & Kweon, S. O. (2002). Acquisition of the constraints on wanna contraction by advanced second language learners: Universal Grammar and imperfect knowledge. Paper presented in the University of Hawai'i Department of SLS Brownbag Series.

Bowen, J. D. (1975). An experimental integrative test of English grammar. Working Papers in Teaching English as a Second Language, 9, 3-17.

Bowen, J. D. (1976). Current research on an integrative test of English grammar. RELC Journal, 7, 30-37.

Bowen, J. D. (1977). The integrative grammar test: A further note. RELC Journal, 8, 94-95.

Brown, J. D. (avec contributions de LAIRDIL). (1995). Aspects of fluency and accuracy (Conférence no 4). Toulouse, France: Laboratoire Inter-Universitaire de Recherche en Didactique des Langues. [ISSN 1257-1520].

Brown, J. D. (1996). Fluency development. In G. van Troyer (Ed.) JALT '95: Curriculum and evaluation (pp. 174-179). Tokyo: Japan Association for Language Teaching.

Brown, J. D. (In progress). Shaping students' pronunciation: Teaching the connected speech of North American English.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1982). The effectiveness of teaching reduced forms for listening comprehension. Paper presented at the TESOL Convention, Honolulu, Hawai'i.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1986a). Listening for reduced forms. TESOL Quarterly, 20 (4), 759-763.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1986b). The effectiveness of teaching reduced forms for listening comprehension. RELC Journal, 17 (2), 59-70.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1989, January). Teaching reduced forms. Gendai Eigo Kyouiku. [Modern English Teaching]. 26-28.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1995). Understanding reduced forms. In D. Nunan (Ed.) New ways in teaching listening (pp. 124-127). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. G. (1998). Reduced-forms dictations. In J. D. Brown (Ed.) New ways of classroom assessment. Washington, DC: TESOL.

Brown, J. D., & Kondo-Brown, K. (Eds.) (In press). Perspectives on teaching connected speech to second language speakers. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (2004). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Coleman, H. (1977). The integrative grammar test: A comment. RELC Journal, 8, 91-93.

Crystal, D. (1980). A first dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. London: Deutsch.

Crystal, D. (2003). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics (5th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

[ p. 22 ]

Dauer, R. M. (1983). Stress-timing and syllable-timing reanalyzed. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 51-62.

Dauer, R. M. (1993). Accurate English: A complete course in pronunciation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Gilbert, J. B. (1984). Clear speech: Pronunciation and listening comprehension in American English. New York: Cambridge University.

Gilbert, J. B. (1993). Clear speech: Pronunciation and listening comprehension in North American English (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gimson, A. C. (1962). An introduction to the pronunciation of English. London: Arnold.

Gimson, A. C. (1970). An introduction to the pronunciation of English (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.

Gimson, A. C. (revised by Cruttenden, A.) (2001). Gimson's pronunciation of English (6th ed.). London: Arnold.

Gimson, A. C. (revised by Ramsaran, S.) (1989). An introduction to the pronunciation of English (4th ed.). London: Arnold.

Grant, L. (1993). Well said. Boston: Heinle amp; Heinle.

Griffee, D. T. (1993). More HearSay: Interactive listening and speaking. Tokyo: Addison-Wesley Japan.

Griffee, D. T., & Hough, D. (1986). HearSay: Survival listening and speaking. Tokyo: Addison-Wesley Japan.

Hagen, S. A. (2000). Sound advice: A basis for listening. New York: Pearson Education.

Hartmann, R. R. K., & Stork, F. C. (1976). Dictionary of language and linguistics. New York: Wiley.

Henrichsen, L. E. (1984). Sandhi-variation: A filter of input for learners of ESL. Language Learning, 34, 103-126.

Hewings, M. (1993). Pronunciation tasks: A course for pre-intermediate learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hill, C., & Beebe, L. (1980). Contraction and blending: The use of orthographic clues in teaching pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 14 (3), 299-323.

Hough, D. (1995). Before HearSay: Basic listening for the classroom. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Ito, Y. (2001, Fall). Effect of reduced forms on ESL learners' input-intake process. Second Language Studies, 20 (1), 99-124.

Kelly, G. (2003). How to teach pronunciation. London: Longman.

Kim, H. Y. (1995). Intake from the speech stream: Speech elements that L2 learners attend to. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 65-83). Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai'i Press.

Kobayashi, E., amp; Linde, R. (1984). Practice in English reduced forms. Tokyo: Sansyusya.

[ p. 23 ]

Kweon, S. O. (2000). The acquisition of English contraction constraints by advanced Korean learners of English: Experimental studies on wanna contraction and auxiliary contraction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation University of Hawaii at Manao, Honolulu, HI.

Ladefoged, P. (2000). A course in phonetics (4th ed.). New York: Heine and Heinle.

Morley, J. (1987). Improving spoken English: An intensive personalized program in perception, pronunciation, practice in context. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Pennington, M. C. (1996). Phonology in English language teaching. New York: Longman.

Richards, J. C., Platt, J., Platt, H. (1993). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics: New edition. London: Longman.

Rosa, M. (2002). Don'cha know? A survey of ESL teachers' perspectives on reduced forms instruction. Second Language Studies, 21 (1), 49-78.

Rost, M. A., & Stratton, R. K. (1978). Listening in the real world: Clues to English conversation. Tucson, AZ: Lingual House.

Rost, M. A., & Stratton, R. K. (1980). Listening transitions: From listening to speaking. Tucson, AZ: Lingual House.

Sheeler, W. D., & Markley, R. W. (1991). Sound and rhythm: A pronunciation course (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Weinstein, N. (1982). Whaddaya say? Culver City, CA: English Language Services.

Weinstein, N. (2001). Whaddaya say? Guided practice in relaxed speech (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

2006 Pan SIG-Proceedings: Topic Index Author Index Page Index Title Index Main Index
Complete Pan SIG-Proceedings: Topic Index Author Index Page Index Title Index Main Index

[ p. 24 ]
Last Next