<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Search results for 'tag:Paragraphs tag:Phonetics' matching tags 'Paragraphs' and 'Phonetics'</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aParagraphs+tag%3aPhonetics</link><description>Search results for 'tag:Paragraphs tag:Phonetics' matching tags 'Paragraphs' and 'Phonetics'</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CSMOD (Build: 3259.27886)</generator><item><title>linguistic theories and language learning</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/English/LinguisticTheoriesLanguageLearning/vdqwm/post.htm</link><pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:25:13 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="true">946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:353595</guid><dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator><description>Do you think linguistic theories help foreign language learning?&lt;br&gt;


I majored in the English language at university.&lt;br&gt;

&lt;br&gt;


In my opinion, general linguistic theories, such as phonetics, phonology, syntax and semantics,&lt;br&gt;


partly helped me improve my English skills, but I found it more important to memorize words by exposing myself&lt;br&gt;


to English through listening and writing.&lt;br&gt;


&lt;br&gt;


Sociolinguisics, psycholinguistics and historical linguistics were very
interesting subjects and helped broaden my perspectives, but they have
very little to do with practical language learning. &lt;br&gt;


&lt;br&gt;


Applied linguistics are for professionals such as language teachers or speech therapists.&lt;br&gt;


I won't deny the importance of SLA research, but it doesn't help students with no teaching experiences.&lt;br&gt;


Those with teaching experiences find it more helpful.&lt;br&gt;


&lt;br&gt;


In conclusion, I think linguistic theories are not necessarily very important for early stage language learning.&lt;br&gt;


As I said, in the second paragraph, language learners, particularly novice and intermediate learners, should&lt;br&gt;


focus more on vocabulary building, listening and reading.&lt;br&gt;


In my opinion, linguistic theories help learners organize their knowledge about the language they learn.&lt;br&gt;

However, this happens when they have reached advanced levels.</description></item><item><title>Are linguistic theories important for language learning?</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/English/LinguisticTheoriesImportantLanguage-Learning/vdpcj/post.htm</link><pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:54:38 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="true">946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:353201</guid><dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator><description>Do you think linguistic theories help foreign language learning?&lt;br&gt;

I majored in the English language at university.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;

In my opinion, general linguistic theories, such as phonetics, phonology, syntax and semantics,&lt;br&gt;

partly helped me improve my English skills, but I found it more important to memorize words by exposing myself&lt;br&gt;

to English through listening and writing.&lt;br&gt;

&lt;br&gt;

Sociolinguisics, psycholinguistics and historical linguistics were very
interesting subjects and helped broaden my perspectives, but they have
very little to do with practical language learning. &lt;br&gt;

&lt;br&gt;

Applied linguistics are for professionals such as language teachers or speech therapists.&lt;br&gt;

I won't deny the importance of SLA research, but it doesn't appeal to students with no teaching experiences.&lt;br&gt;

Those with teaching experiences find it more helpful.&lt;br&gt;

&lt;br&gt;

In conclusion, I think linguistic theories are not necessarily very important for early stage language learning.&lt;br&gt;

As I said, in the second paragraph, language learners, particularly novice and intermediate learners, should&lt;br&gt;

focus more on vocabulary building, listening and reading.&lt;br&gt;

In my opinion, linguistic theories help learners organize their knowledge about the language they learn.&lt;br&gt;
However, this happens when they have reached advanced levels.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: how to pronounce 'sp', 'st' and 'sk' in the middle of the word?</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/English/PronounceMiddleWord/dklrh/post.htm#302879</link><pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:34:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="true">946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:302879</guid><dc:creator>Kooyeen</dc:creator><description>Hi, this is interesting, it reminds me of something I read in a book for improving pronunciation (the famous "American Accent Training"). The title of the paragraph is "Spoon or Sboon?" &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;She (the author) say: "Say spoon. Now say sboon. Hear how they sound the same?" &lt;font color="#0000ff"&gt;&lt;i&gt;This is similar to your p/b problem. Anyway, I disagree, spoon and sboon sound similar to me, but not the same, and people say spoon, not sboon.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/font&gt; She go on saying: "Hear how they sound the same? This is why I'd like you to always convert the preposition &lt;b&gt;to&lt;/b&gt; to &lt;b&gt;duh&lt;/b&gt; when you are speaking, no matter what comes before it (voiced or unvoiced sound)." &lt;font color="#0000ff"&gt;&lt;i&gt;I have to disagree again. I don't think &lt;b&gt;to&lt;/b&gt; becomes &lt;b&gt;duh&lt;/b&gt; after unvoiced consonants. Examples: "Way duh go!" (ok, vowel sound), "I need duh know that" (ok, voiced consonant), "To be or nod duh be" (I don't think so, I think it's simply "To be or not to be"). In the book, however, she explicitly write in the phonetic transcription "T'bee r nah d'bee".&lt;/i&gt; &lt;/font&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In the end, that paragraph was one the ones I didn't pay too much attention to. But maybe she's right, and I'm just a bad sutdent not willing to listen to teachers &lt;img src="/emoticons/emotion-4.gif" alt="Stick out tongue [:P]" /&gt;&lt;br&gt;</description></item><item><title>Phonetic Transcriptions</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/English/PhoneticTranscriptions/bmpgw/post.htm</link><pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2005 19:58:04 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="true">946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:146922</guid><dc:creator>Rhirwen</dc:creator><description>Hello everyone!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I am in my third year of English at University, and am looking to a career in teaching English.&amp;nbsp; As part of my education, one of my classes require me to do a phonetic transcription of three different speakers whose first language is English.&amp;nbsp; Unfortunately because of my location limitations (doing correspondance course), I am unable to to find live people with different speech patterns.&amp;nbsp; I would be very grateful if anyone would like to help me out.&amp;nbsp; All I need is a recording (.wav file) of you reading a short paragraph in your normal relaxed voice.&amp;nbsp; As I said before, I would be very very grateful if anyone could help me out.&amp;nbsp; Please reply if you would be interested in helping.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks,&lt;br&gt;Michelle&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;PS.&lt;br&gt;The paragraph which I need read is as follows:&lt;br&gt;"The fact that Henry Armstrong was buried did not seem to him to prove that he was dead: he had always been a hard man to convince. That he really was buried, the testimony of his senses compelled him to admit. His posture -- flat upon his back, with his hands crossed upon his stomach and tied with something that he easily broke without profitably altering the situation -- the strict confinement of his entire person, the black darkness and profound silence, made a body of evidence impossible to controvert and he accepted it without cavil. &lt;br&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; But dead -- no; he was only very, very ill. He had, withal, the invalid's apathy and did not greatly concern himself about the uncommon fate that had been allotted to him. No philosopher was he -- just a plain, commonplace person gifted, for the time being, with a pathological indifference: the organ that he feared consequences with was torpid. So, with no particular apprehension for his immediate future, he fell asleep and all was peace with Henry Armstrong. &lt;br&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; But something was going on overhead. It was a dark summer night, shot through with infrequent shimmers of lightning silently firing a cloud lying low in the west and portending a storm. These brief, stammering illuminations brought out with ghastly distinctness the monuments and headstones of the cemetery and seemed to set them dancing."&lt;br&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>