VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY - HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE SOLVING COMMON INTONATION PROBLEMS OF NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE: AN ACTION RESEARCH STUDY A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature in partial fulfillment of the Master's degree in TESOL By PHAM DUY DUONG Supervised by Assoc. Prof. Dr. NGUYEN THANH TUNG HO CHI MINH CITY, MAY 2018 ACKNOWLEDMENTS Firstly, I would like to show my deepest gratitude to my beloved supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thanh Tung, for having wholeheartedly instructed, inspired, reminded and supported me when I conducted the study. I do apologize profusely to him for my lateness sometimes. Without my dear supervisor, I could not have completed my thesis on time. Secondly, I would like to give all my heartfelt thanks to all the lecturers at Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities and other lecturers for teaching, guiding and imparting the knowledge to me. I have learned a great deal of valuable knowledge from them since I was a postgraduate at this university. Thirdly, this thesis is highly dedicated to my parents and my two older brothers. I owe a debt of gratitude to them. They always remind me of the bright future after graduation and say to me "Do not ever give up and do your best!" when I feel totally dispirited. Next, I am extremely grateful to all my dear students and colleagues at Ho Chi Minh City University of Science for making my thesis complete and perfect. Last but not least, I owe my friends, especially my closest one, special thanks. They are always by my side to unceasingly motivate and push me when I am on the wrong track and give me helpful pieces of advice when I do not have sufficient motivation for completing the thesis. Thank you all of you from the bottom of my heart! i STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY I certify that this thesis, entitled "Solving common intonation problems of non-English major students at Ho Chi Minh City University of Science: An action research study" is my own work. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other institution. Ho Chi Minh City, May 2018 Pham Duy Duong ii RETENTION OF USE I hereby state that I, Pham Duy Duong, being a candidate for the degree of Master of Arts in TESOL, accept the requirements of the university related to the retention and use of Master's Thesis deposited in the University Library. I agree that the original of my Master's Thesis deposited in the University Library should be accessible for the purpose of the study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan and reproduction of theses. Ho Chi Minh City, May 2018 Pham Duy Duong iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDMENTS ............................................................................. i STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ......................................................... ii RETENTION OF USE.............................................................................. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................... iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................... ix LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................... x LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................ xiii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................. xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1 1.1 Background to the study .................................................................. 1 1.2 Statement of the problem ................................................................ 2 1.3 Aim and research questions ............................................................. 3 1.4 Significance of the study ................................................................. 4 1.5 Organization of the thesis ................................................................ 4 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................. 6 2.1 Pronunciation................................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Definitions of pronunciation ...................................................... 6 2.1.2 Aspects of pronunciation ........................................................... 7 2.1.3 Importance of pronunciation ..................................................... 8 2.2 Intonation ......................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Definitions of intonation ............................................................ 9 2.2.2 Components of intonation ....................................................... 11 2.2.2.1 Pitch ................................................................................... 11 2.2.2.2 Word stress ........................................................................ 12 iv 2.2.2.3 Sentence stress ................................................................... 14 2.2.2.4 Tone unit ............................................................................ 16 2.2.3 Intonation patterns ................................................................... 20 2.2.3.1 Paulston and Bruder (1976) ............................................... 20 2.2.3.2 Kelly (2000) ....................................................................... 21 2.2.3.3 Kreidler (2004) .................................................................. 23 2.2.3.4 Yoshida (2013) .................................................................. 23 2.2.4 Functions of intonation ............................................................ 26 2.3 Intelligibility and its application to intonation assessment ........... 28 2.3.1 Intelligibility ............................................................................ 28 2.3.2 Applying intelligibility to intonation assessment .................... 29 2.4 Intonation teaching techniques ...................................................... 30 2.4.1 Using videos ............................................................................ 30 2.4.2 Using Coolspeech .................................................................... 31 2.4.3 Using Speech Analyzer ........................................................... 31 2.5 Review of previous studies............................................................ 31 2.6 Chapter summary .......................................................................... 33 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 34 3.1 Research site .................................................................................. 34 3.2 Participants .................................................................................... 35 3.3 Research methodology .................................................................. 36 3.3.1 Research approach ................................................................... 36 3.3.2 Research method...................................................................... 37 3.3.2.1 Reasons for choosing action research ................................ 37 3.3.2.2 Applying action research to the study ............................... 38 v 3.3.3 Research instruments ............................................................... 40 3.3.3.1 Questionnaires ................................................................... 40 3.3.3.2 Tests ................................................................................... 41 3.4 Analytical framework .................................................................... 43 3.4.1 Questionnaires ......................................................................... 43 3.4.2 Tests ......................................................................................... 43 3.5 Validity and reliability................................................................... 48 3.5.1 Questionnaires ......................................................................... 48 3.5.2 Tests ......................................................................................... 48 3.6 Chapter summary .......................................................................... 49 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..................................... 50 4.1 Data analysis .................................................................................. 50 4.1.1 Results from the two questionnaires ........................................ 50 4.1.1.1 Results from the pre-questionnaire .................................... 50 4.1.1.2 Results from the post-questionnaire .................................. 59 4.1.1.3 Comparison of pre- and post-questionnaires ..................... 64 4.1.1.4 Results from the two mini-tests of the two questionnaires 67 4.1.2 Results from the two tests ........................................................ 67 4.1.2.1 Inter-rater reliability........................................................... 67 4.1.2.2 Tests data analysis ............................................................. 71 4.2 Discussion of the findings ............................................................. 76 4.2.1 Findings about the students' attitudes towards learning intonation ............................................................................................ 76 4.2.2 Findings about the students' intonation performance .............. 77 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ................................................................ 80 5.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 80 vi 5.2 Evaluation of research methodology ............................................. 81 5.2.1 Strengths .................................................................................. 81 5.2.2 Weaknesses .............................................................................. 82 5.3 Recommendations ......................................................................... 82 5.3.1 For the teachers ........................................................................ 82 5.3.2 For the students ........................................................................ 83 5.3.3 For the schools ......................................................................... 83 5.4 Suggestions for further research .................................................... 84 5.5 Chapter summary .......................................................................... 84 REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 85 APPENDICES .......................................................................................... 88 (Pre-questionnaire) .............. 89 APPENDIX 2: Pre-questionnaire ........................................................... 94 (Post-questionnaire) ............. 98 APPENDIX 4: Post-questionnaire ........................................................ 102 APPENDIX 5: Intonation test (Pre-test) .............................................. 105 APPENDIX 6: Intonation test (Post-test) ............................................ 107 APPENDIX 7: Pre-test assessment ....................................................... 109 APPENDIX 8: Post-test assessment ..................................................... 112 APPENDIX 9: Criteria for intonation assessment .............................. 115 APPENDIX 10: Raw scores by Examiner 1 ........................................ 116 APPENDIX 11: Raw scores by Examiner 2 ........................................ 117 APPENDIX 12: Total scores by Examiner 1 ....................................... 118 APPENDIX 13: Total scores by Examiner 2 ....................................... 119 APPENDIX 14: Mean scores by the two examiners ........................... 120 vii APPENDIX 15: General improvement of students ............................ 121 APPENDIX 16: Mean scores of the four types by the two examiners122 APPENDIX 17: Students' improvement for each type ....................... 123 viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AR : Action research HCMUS : Ho Chi Minh City University of Science SPSS : The statistical package for the social sciences ix LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Definitions of intonation by Kenworthy (1987), Roach (1991), Kelly (2000), Kreidler (2004), Knight (2012) and Yoshida (2013). 11 Table 2.2: Examples of word stress by Kelly (2000) .................................. 12 Table 2.3: Content words and function words by Yoshida (2013) .............. 15 Table 2.4: Intonation patterns by Kelly (2000)............................................ 22 Table 2.5: Intonation patterns by Kreidler (2004) ....................................... 23 Table 2.6: A summary of functions of intonation ........................................ 27 Table 3.1: Students' personal information ................................................... 35 Table 3.2: Teaching procedures ................................................................... 39 Table 3.3: A summary of questions in the pre-questionnaire ...................... 40 Table 3.4: A summary of questions in the post-questionnaire .................... 41 Table 3.5: Number of questions in the two mini-tests ................................. 42 Table 3.6: Number of questions in the two tests.......................................... 42 Table 3.7: Steps for assessing students' intonation ...................................... 44 Table 3.8: Criteria for intonation assessment .............................................. 46 Table 3.9: Criteria for students' levels ......................................................... 47 Table 4.1: Importance of speaking skills and pronunciation ....................... 52 Table 4.2: Aspects of pronunciation ............................................................ 55 Table 4.3: Familiarity with aspects of pronunciation .................................. 55 Table 4.4: Definition of intonation .............................................................. 56 Table 4.5: Functions of intonation ............................................................... 56 x Table 4.6: Intonation patterns ...................................................................... 57 Table 4.7: Reasons for difficulties in using intonation ................................ 58 Table 4.8: Suggested solutions for solving the problem.............................. 59 Table 4.9: Definition of intonation .............................................................. 61 Table 4.10: Functions of intonation ............................................................. 62 Table 4.11: Intonation patterns .................................................................... 62 Table 4.12: Incorporating intonation into the lesson and necessity of intonation teaching ............................................................................ 63 Table 4.13: Suggested solutions for solving the problem ............................ 64 Table 4.14: Differences between pre- and post-questionnaires ................... 65 Table 4.15: Students’ improvement from the two mini-tests ...................... 67 Table 4.16: Inter-rater reliability of pre-test scores of the two examiners .. 68 Table 4.17: Inter-rater reliability of post-test scores of the two examiners . 68 Table 4.18: Inter-rater reliability of pre-test scores of the two examiners for each type ........................................................................................... 69 Table 4.19: Inter-rater reliability of post-test scores of the two examiners for each type ........................................................................................... 70 Table 4.20: Mean scores of pre- and post-tests ........................................... 72 Table 4.21: A paired-samples t-test of the means before and after the intervention ....................................................................................... 72 Table 4.22: Improvement for each type of the sentence .............................. 73 Table 4.23: Mean scores of the four types ................................................... 73 xi Table 4.24: A paired-samples t-test of the means before and after the intervention for wh-questions ........................................................... 74 Table 4.25: A paired-samples t-test of the means before and after the intervention for statements ............................................................... 74 Table 4.26: A paired-samples t-test of the means before and after the intervention for tag questions ........................................................... 75 Table 4.27: A paired-samples t-test of the means before and after the intervention for yes/no questions ...................................................... 76 xii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Aspects of pronunciation by Kelly (2000) .................................. 7 Figure 3.1: Cycle of action research by Kemmis and Mc Taggart (1988, as cited in Burns, 2010, p. 9) ................................................................. 37 Figure 3.2: Sample contour (Wh-question) ................................................. 45 Figure 3.3: Sample contour (Tag question) ................................................. 45 Figure 4.1: Level of students ....................................................................... 50 Figure 4.2: Years of learning English .......................................................... 51 Figure 4.3: The most difficult aspect in learning English ........................... 51 Figure 4.4: The most important aspect to acquire good speaking skills ...... 53 Figure 4.5: Difficulty in English pronunciation........................................... 53 Figure 4.6: Level of difficulty in English pronunciation ............................. 54 Figure 4.7: Importance of intonation ........................................................... 60 Figure 4.8: Understanding of intonation ...................................................... 60 Figure 4.9: Using intonation in speaking ..................................................... 61 Figure 4.10: Differences of students' levels ................................................. 71 xiii ABSTRACT The study was carried out from November 13 to December 18, 2017 in order to determine some common intonation problems of non-English major students at HCMUS in the four main types (wh-questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions). This study also investigated their difficulties in learning intonation and their suggested solutions to solve these difficulties. The intervention was the application of videos of native speakers and two pieces of software on teaching intonation to help the students hone their intonation. The action research study with four phases (planning, acting, observing, and reflecting) was undertaken with one cycle for six weeks. The class of 30 students was the sample of the study. The data were collected through the two questionnaires (a pre- and a post-) and the two tests (a pre- and a post-). A Pearson correlation coefficient was employed for the test inter-rater reliability and a paired-samples t-test was run for checking whether the disparity in the means of the students’ pre- and post-test scores was statistically significant. The findings of the study indicate that using videos of native speakers and two pieces of software brought good results to the students as they significantly improved their intonation in the tests. Furthermore, the findings from the two questionnaires show that the students became more aware of intonation for the four main types. From the scores of the two examiners, the results were positive and the students could understand and apply intonation patterns to English speaking and use them in everyday communication. xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the study "English today is the native language of nearly 400 million people and and it is the second language of many others scattered all over the world" (Kreidler, 2004, p. 1). In fact, an increasing number of people in general and Vietnamese people in particular have been learning English every day for many different purposes: learning, working and doing business. That is why English has served a pivotal role in the social development and thanks to English, Vietnamese people today can communicate with native speakers and do business with foreign companies easily. In reality, English has become a lingua franca and even those who are not native speakers know some simple words in English (Harmer, 2001, p. 1). It has lead to the growing demand for learning English of Vietnamese people in recent years. In fact, English has become one of the compulsory and core subjects for Vietnamese students since they started primary school. However, Vietnamese students do not have sufficient time to cover all the English skills at school. In addition, when graduating from high school, they have to take the exam with only two skills of reading and writing. They, therefore, cannot gain a good level of competence in speaking when they get accepted to university. Consequently, they lack confidence and motivation for learning English, especially learning for communication. The truth is that when learning English, learners have to be adept at not only receptive skills but also productive ones because the main aim of learning any language is communication (Ahmad, 2016, p. 478). These days, English communication has become an integral part in learning English. Besides enhancing listening, reading and writing skills, Vietnamese students must spend a great deal of time communicating with their classmates and even teachers through speaking activities. When they enter a 1 university or college, it may be a long journey for them because everything such as life and studies has changed completely. Back to the studies at university, English is one of the toughest subjects Vietnamese students have to face when going to university. They have some barriers when approaching the new way of learning English at university. Listening and speaking skills will then occupy most of the time in the English class. Moreover, the teaching methodology will switch from teacher-centered to student-centered. According to Dang (2000, p. 4), in English communication, Vietnamese students have to deal with seven problems pertaining to pronunciation (voiced, unvoiced, linking, word stress, to name just a few) and intonation is part of it. The reason for the problem in using intonation is the dissimilarity between the two languages. Vietnamese is a tone language, whereas English is an intonation one. One more thing, when Vietnamese students speak English, they are afraid to raise or lower their voice and most of them are not taught much about intonation at school. Besides, English teachers often ignore this aspect when they teach English to students for their lack of knowledge and experience (Setter & Ngo, 2011, p. 1466). As a consequence, students may not understand what intonation is and do not know how to speak English naturally. The neglect of teaching intonation is one of the main barriers to English learning success. Based on the above problem, the researcher wants to choose the aspect of intonation to conduct the research to partly help his students hone their intonation in English communication. 1.2 Statement of the problem Although intonation is a crucial part of pronunciation, it is still not seen as a priority in teaching English in Vietnam (Setter & Ngo, 2011, p. 1466). Taking no notice of intonation teaching may potentially result in barriers for Vietnamese learners to gain communicative competence. Doan (2005) and Ky (2007) (both as cited in Ngo, 2017) state the three main reasons for intonation to be neglected to teach by teachers at universities: the lack of time, the lack of teaching materials and facilities, and the testing method which focuses on 2 written tests rather than speaking and pronunciation. In addition, the complicated tonal system of the Vietnamese language and the low frequency of intonation-related lessons in English coursebooks also make learning intonation become difficult (Griffiths, 2010, as cited in Ngo, 2017, p. 13). Thus, these problems will adversely affect students’ intonation in English. In order to cope with these intonation problems, there is a great deal of research undertaken to find the best solution to solve students' problems in using intonation. Some research mainly aims to address problems in using intonation in the four main types: wh-questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions. Park (2011) uses the technique "reading aloud" to help students improve intonation in the four types mentioned above. After the intervention, the result was significantly positive because Park's students could understand and use intonation patterns for the four main types. The study conducted by Winarti (2014) also brings the same result to the students. By using "jazz chants" as the technique, this researcher helps them make a vast improvement in using intonation for the four aforementioned types: wh- questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions. From the positive results above from the two researchers, the researcher of this study then also wants to conduct the research to tackle his students' problems in using intonation for the four main types: wh-questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions. 1.3 Aim and research questions The main aim of the study is that the researcher would like to investigate some common intonation problems of students in the four main types: wh-questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions. Specially, it aims to see the effectiveness of techniques used in the study on their intonation. Therefore, the study entails the two research questions as follows: 3 1. What are common intonation problems of students in the four types: wh- questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions? 2. What is the effectiveness of the techniques used in the research? 1.4 Significance of the study The main significance of the study is that through the investigation of their common intonation problems, students can gradually develop their intonation in the four main types (wh-questions, statements, tag questions, and yes/no questions); from these, they may know and pay more attention to intonation when speaking English. Furthermore, the researcher also has a chance to review what teaching situation he is in and what level of intonation his students belong to; therefore, he will achieve some valuable experience in teaching and improving students’ intonation in his teaching career. Foremost among these is that his students will make the most of the solutions and treatments used in this study to learn English better later, especially in English intonation. 1.5 Organization of the thesis The thesis covers five chapters of the research. Chapter 1 mentions the background, statement of the problem, aim, and significance, and then raises some research questions for the whole study. The next chapter (Chapter 2) will next provide the theoretical background of pronunciation, intonation, components of intonation, intelligibility and its application to intonation assessment, and intonation teaching techniques. Besides, this part also presents some previous studies of other researchers and gives the researcher’s comments on their limitations to identify a gap. The third chapter justifies the methodology of the study, which consists of descriptions of setting, participants, research methodology, analytical framework, and the issues of validity and reliability of the data. Next, Chapter 4 will analyze data collected from questionnaires and tape recordings and discuss the findings of the study. The final chapter, Chapter 5, concludes the thesis by first giving the main conclusions of the study through the explicit answers to the research questions, 4 next evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the research methodology, then giving some recommendations for teachers, students and schools, and finally making some suggestions for further research with the same topic of intonation. 5