that rate’ (1990 326) Griffiths was confirmed his main hypothesis Mean listening comprehension test scores for passages delivered at slow (100 WPM) significantly higher than for passages delivered at a moderately fast rate (200 WPM) as the result was not support his hypothesis that a slower rate (100 WPM) could be more comprehensible than a normal speed (150 WPM) In 1991, Griffiths (1991) reported a similarstudy in which stones used The three speech rates that slow (app 127 WPM), average (app 188 WPM), and fast (app 250WPM) A more significant difference found between comprehension at slow and fast rates However, the positive effects of slower rate on listening comprehension found by Griffiths don’t supported by other researchers Blau (1990 752), for example ,found that mechanically reducing the velocity of speech from faster (170WPM) to slower (145 WPM) did not enhance the listening comprehension of Polish or Puerto Rican learners ‘except at the lowest level of L2 proficiency’ .According to Rader (1991) said that the similar results in a Spanish as second language context The listening materials used in her study had three native Spanish broadcast narratives recorded by a native Spanish speaker from Chile The three texts recorded at the rate of 160,153, and 155 WPM respectively, which considered the normal speed Through use of sound editing software, the three texts and each expanded 135 per cent and 150 per cent The three texts were consequently slowed down to 122, 113, and 119 WPM (expansion of 135 per cent) and 108, 98, and 108 WPM (expansion of 150 per cent) Rader found that although there was a difference among the overall means across texts for the three word rates (0 per cent = 16 76, 135 per cent =21 04, and 150 per cent = 19 83), the difference did not reach a statistically significant level according to (Rader 1991 95).The result of an ANOVA did not suggest a significant effect of word rate either (p۰۵, F{2, 87) = 1 6) Thus, she concluded ‘It appears that the speech expansion of the three Spanish texts did not facilitate the listening comprehension of third-quarter university Spanish students’ .

۲.۱۸ Control speech rate vs. slow speech rate
According to McBride (2011) said that the impact of exposing EFL to four different listening conditions in a 10 session training course on their performance in both slow and fast speech rate. Recognizing the advantages offered by computers in facilitating access to authentic materials and, repeating and speed control options, she made the experiment in a computer lab. Despite the fact that the skills at play in such a CALL task may differ from those used in a usual listening class, McBride pointed the positive conclusions the effectiveness of utilizing slowed speech rate in training EFLs to understand the authentic native talk. She pointed that their LC proficiency ranges were intermediate-mid to advance. The texts used for the training recorded by native speakers from the USA. The slowing of the texts done following the deliberate articulation technique used in Hayati (2010). Surveys used consistently following each session to explore the listeners’ impressions on the effectiveness of the treatments. During the training course, all groups had the chance to listen to each dialogue twice but differed in the amount of control over the speed. Group A listened to texts recorded at a fast rate operationalized at 180 WPM. Group B listened to a slower rate at 49 135 WPM. Group C always listened to faster speech rate the first time. Then they were given the choice either to listen to the same fast SR again or to a slower one at 135WPM. Finally, Group D listened to fast SR of 180 WPM but given the choice to pause. The length and the frequency of pausing were not specified.
At the end of the training, they post tested by means of a 20-item MCQ test and a maze test (a comprehension task where they had to choose words that combine together to form grammatically correct and relevant sentences found in the aural input). The maze task used to measure the extent to which the different listening conditions enabled the participants to notice the syntactical and the lexical forms used in the aural input. Results tended to show that the slow condition (Group B) “fared the best from the training” (p.143) whereas the fast condition (Group A) scored the lowest. The other two groups scored in between. McBride’s (2011) interpretation was that the WM of the participants in the slow condition was not overtaxed by a fast SR, and so they could do according to (McBride, 2011, p.144) said that “additional mental processing of form and meaning which are both required for successful SLA” The fast rate, in Group A, on the other hand, seemed to negatively affected their bottom-up processing, and did not enhance a significant strategic transfer to other fast or slow texts. Group D (pause option) made minimal use of the pause button although they listened to the fast rate used in Group A. Still, want to point some evidence of LC improvement in the post test at both speeds. Group C (slow or fast option) pointed a pattern of performance as they scored significantly high in fast 50 texts but had a drop in scores in slowed texts. According to McBride (2011) said that this pattern resulted from development of fast processing skills that were not functional at slow speech rate. One possible reason why the participants in the slow condition outperformed their counterparts in the SR choice one could be attributed to the limited choices the latter offered. McBride (2011) let them to listen to either a fast speed or a slow speed .According to Zhao (1997), on the contrary, offered his listeners a range of six choices. This explain the difference in the results of these two studies concerning the assumed efficacy of the listener’s SR control in improving LC.

این مطلب رو هم توصیه می کنم بخونین:   پایان نامه ارشد با موضوع سود بانکی، سپرده ها، منابع مالی، عملیات بانکی

۲.۱۹ Problem of speech rate
According to Katie Schwartz (2010) People talk so fast because others around them do this, because they think erroneously that others will not take the time to listen to them, and because they do not realize the listeners are struggling. In some cultures, speaking quickly is a sign of professional competence .The average speech rate in the mid-Atlantic states is 120 – 140 words per minute .It is faster in New York City, and slower in other locales. What matters is not how many words a speaker can get out, but how many words understood by the listener. Speech rate becomes a problem in any location when the listener does not understand. The speaker either may repeat himself, or some information ignored. This may be a real danger as instructions get confused and patient compliance may slip. Young children and senior citizens also process information more slowly. If we listened to a fast speaker, and did not understand the message, ask for the confusing parts to be repeated. If you are the fast speaker, and you know this is a problem, start by listing the reasons you want to slow down. Maybe you want a promotion, but need clearer speech. Possibly your colleagues are getting frustrated with your speech. Perhaps you tired of repeating yourself. Possibly phone calls are not returned because others cannot understand your telephone number or name. Start by taking some slow, deep breaths. Then count slowly to ten, prolonging the vowels if needed. Then say your ten digit telephone number at that slow rate. Visualize someone writing it down from a telephone message. Try saying some basic sentences at that slow pace, such as “I see a ______” or “_____ are great!” so slowly recite a shopping list. Can you slightly prolong the vowels? Other ways to think of it are to go at a 25 mph pace with your words, or visualize yourself rocking in a rocking chair, slowly talking. Rate of speech for public speaking depends on several factors for effective communicating your speech topics such as: Less stress and nervousness either by public speaking training or not; To produce a well spoken English pronunciation, The words come properly with a stable vocal delivery, Your voice varying in intonation and timing pauses And the take notes written in the paper or speaking cards about pausing and speeding up or slowing down your tempo influence the speech speed too. R ate of speech varies greatly, due to different factors. Some facts to consider: Children and seniors speak slower, and enthusiastic motivational people faster. For example: Slide or Power point presentations are understand at 100 words per minute – they need time to read, A conversation with your friends ranges normally between 120 to even 200 (if you are arguing or making jokes:-) Radio and television news presenters vary from 120 to 160. Sports commentators easily reach a 400 speaking words per minute.
But what is the ideal rate of speech. The average person speaks slow if she/he talks

دسته‌ها: No category

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید