Meditations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Meditations - Essay Example This is after the book was circulated for a collection of objection upon which he provided his replies. Most of the people who read the meditations did not agree with some of the philosophical theories built by Descartes. Therefore, this brings about some kind of disagreement between Descartes and one or more objectives that he raises. As such, these objections and replies will be evaluated to gauge their adequacy. Descartes wrote the meditations to show that he had previously been mistaken in relation to things that he had initially thought to be certain. He, therefore, makes a decision to sweep away all of the perception that he had built in the past by constructing his knowledge from ground upwards. In turn, the only ideas that he was to accept as true were those that had been confirmed to be absolutely certain. It is his senses that helped him to get all that he had thought previously. Although his senses can also be deceiving, it only happens for tiny objects or those that are f ar away. He ultimately realizes that he cannot cast any doubt upon his own existence (Garber, 2003). Position of Descartes in the Meditations In the Meditations Descartes provides a means for first philosophy hence the beginning of modern day philosophy. From the book, he starts by attempting to doubt everything. He also builds up from those things that are likely to be known with certainty. He bases his first mediation on skeptical doubts by defining knowledge in terms of doubt. With this, he makes a distinction between rigorous knowledge or scientia and the other lesser grades of convictions or persuasio. He makes a clear distinction between the human soul and body. In this, he demonstrates the existence of God and the immortality of the soul and questions how certain knowledge is. As such, his position is that people should establish what is likely to be known for sure. In order to make out what is claimed in the sciences and form a firm structure from them, it is important to ma ke a new foundation. This is because of the way he connects with the development of knowledge from the senses. This kind of information is what should be taken as true and certain (Garber, 2003). It is thus important to have a clear and distinct perception in order to secure knowledge. He thus develops a new state of mind conception by stating that the mental states are similar to what it represents. Therefore, the subject of the objections is that there should be no belief in things that are absolutely certain. In particular, the objection being made is that people only think about things that know the mind in a clear and distinct way. He claims that senses are not the source of knowledge but a means through which individuals practically move through the world. This makes the mind of human beings sufficient enough to know God. However, the reply to this objective is that people must work hard to understand their bodies. It is because the mind and body are extremely distinct and hav e nothing in common. With this, there must be the presence of doubt to gain more knowledge (Descartes, 1993). In my opinion, this reply is highly adequate because it appears to take a rational stance. It brings out the two truths that show the philosophical evidence on the existence of God, as opposed to the authority of scriptures. First Meditation: What can be called to doubt: the reliability of senses For the first meditation by Descartes which is about the reliability of the senses, he claims that the human is a complete form of spirituality. According to

My Own Behaviour in a Team Setting Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

My Own Behaviour in a Team Setting - Assignment Example I also learned that I possess a number of transferable skills such as the ability to put my personal feelings aside whenever there was conflict in the team. In these circumstances, I was able to brush my personal feelings aside and to focus on the assigned task. I also demonstrated self-discipline in that I was able to manage my time and resources in a productive and effective manner. I also discovered that I had other transferable skills such as effective communication skills. I found that I was always able to listen to others and to respond in ways that were relevant and commanded the attention of other members of the team. I also found that I had another very important transferable skill and that was the power of persuasion. I found that with commitment and effort I was able to persuade other members of the group to take a position that was akin to my own. This particular skill will be important to my chosen career when I am advising and helping those who rely on my advice and skills. As I learned from my social networking exercises, I am sure that these skills are the kinds of soft skills that employers will be looking for. I also learned that I can be a bit over anxious and too eager to achieve my end goals. In this regard, the team setting taught me that every task has a purpose and connects to the end goal. Only after several steps are taken can we finally see the results? In this regard, I have to learn to be more patient and pace my time, always aware that I cannot get to the end without starting from the beginning. I will practice this by taking on a number of projects such as reading a book and doing jigsaw puzzles. When I began the course I did so with an open mind, merely hoping that I would come out more prepared to take steps toward my career goal and expecting to at least be in a better position for taking those steps that I was before taking the course.  

Pronunciation Teaching Within A Theoretical Framework English Language Essay

Pronunciation Teaching Within A Theoretical Framework English Language Essay Although a number of studies have been reported regarding segmental over the past fifteen years for an overview, see Ekman, 2003; Strange, 1995, there are only a small number of studies focusing on L2 stress in an EFL context. On the other hand, suprasegmental properties, including stress, play an important role in second language acquisition. They are shown to be closely related to foreign accent perceived in L2 production and to difficulties in L2 perception. Researchers have attributed the problems with stress to the influence of the L1 prosodic system. However, these studies are inadequate, as their focus on stress acquisition mainly relies on the comparison of the phonological systems of L1 and L2. As Flege (1987) pointed out in research on L2 speech development at the segmental level, it is important to take phonetic details into account in order to gain a better understanding of the possible transfer of L1. The same is true for studies of prosody. It is possible that the influence of L1 lies in the difference between L1 and L2 in the employment of relevant phonetic correlates. 2.2. The history of pronunciation teaching within a theoretical framework Popular opinion regarding the place of pronunciation training in the ESL or EFL curriculum has ebbed and flowed along with the historical framework of language learning theories and methodologies. Prior to the popularity of the direct method in the late nineteenth century, pronunciation received little overt focus within the language classroom. Advocates of the direct method claim that an initial emphasis on listening without pressure to speak allows learners to acquire grammar inductively and to internalize the target sound system before speaking, much the way children acquire their first language (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, Goodwin, 1996, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004). Although popular in elite private European schools, the direct method was rejected by the public schools and by most language schools in the United States as impractical due the classroom time, effort and background required of both the teacher and students for the success of this approach. Criticism centered around the time-consuming nature of this instruction at a time in which most students only studied foreign language for two years, along with a lack of qualified teachers who had a comfortable, native-like fluency at their command. As a result, this essentially intuitive-imitative approach gave way to the return of the grammar translation approach of the reading era, with very little attention to pronunciation (Celce-Murcia et al., 1996, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004). According to Aufderhaar (2004), both the direct and grammar translation methods were more emphasized when there was a sudden and urgent need for qualified interpreters and intelligence to learn English with the advent of World War II. Rooted in Skinners (1957) theory of behaviorism which treated the acquisition of verbal skills as environmentally-determined stimulus-response behavior, the audiolingual method required intensive oral drilling for entire working days, six days a week (E. R. Brown, 1997). In contrast to the grammar-translation method, pronunciation was now considered to be of the highest priority, with phonetic transcription and articulation explicitly taught through charts and demonstrations, along with imitation (Celce-Murcia et al., 1996, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004). While generally proving successful within the military environment of small classes of highly motivated instructors and students whose well being depended in part on their command of the target language, the theoretical foundation of audiolingualism was shaken by the reality of the post World War II language classroom that was not conducive to this military regimen. Its strongest critic was Chomsky (1957), whose introduction of the generative-transformational theory viewed the underlying meaning of the whole as being more important than any one part. His focus on the creative, rule-governed nature of competence and performance led many educators to the conclusion that pronunciation should remain inductively within the context of morphology and syntax (Kreidler, 1989). At the heart of this hypothesis was the suggestion that all language skills, including listening comprehension, verbal production and pronunciation, are so integrated that there is no need to address them as separate an d distinct features (Brown, 1997). The influence of Chomskys generative-transformational theory, along with the cognitive-code theory of the 1960s, which focused on listening at the discourse level and discarded skill ordering, paved the way for the trend to avoid or ignore direct pronunciation teaching altogether. The advent of the communicative approach in the late 1970s and early 1980s likewise deemed the teaching of pronunciation as ineffective and hopeless, instead it emphasized language functions over forms with the goal being overall communicative competence and listening comprehension for general meaning: MacCarthy (1976) stated that at present any teaching of pronunciation is so ineffective as to be largely a waste of time. (p. 212). At that time, many instructors of the communicative approach assumed that pronunciation skills would be acquired naturally within the context of second language input and communicative practice. However, pronunciation was not entirely ignored in the time period of the 1960s through the mid 1980s. Remnants of the audiolingual approach lingered within structural linguistics, which viewed language learning as a process of mastering hierarchies of structurally related items for encoding meaning (Morley, 1991). When pronunciation was addressed, instruction was generally oriented toward the drilling of individual sounds via articulatory descriptions and minimal pair contrasts (Chun, 2002). It is the reliance on this traditional phonemic-based approach which Leather (1987) mentions one of the reasons for the demise of pronunciation teaching during this era: The process, viewed as meaningless non-communicative drill-and-exercise gambits, lost its appeal; likewise, the product, that is, the success ratio for the time and energy expended, was found wanting. (Morley, 1991, p. 486). Attitudes ranged from serious questioning as to whether pronunciation could be overtly taught and learned at all (Chun, 2002), to unwavering claims that adults were simply unable to acquire second language pronunciation (Scovel, 1988). According to Madsen and Bowen (1978), the lack of attention to pronunciation, which was prevalent in the communicative approach of the late 1970s and early 1980s and the direct assertion by many that pronunciation could not be taught, resulted in a great number of international students who were failed communicate effectively or even intelligibly although they had been instructed for a long time. This situation sparked research in second language acquisition that suggested a departure from the traditional, bottom-up phonemic-based approach to pronunciation teaching toward a top-down orientation focusing on suprasegmental or prosodic aspects such as rhythm, intonation, and duration. Defined by Wennerstrom (2001, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004) as a general term encompassing intonation, rhythm, tempo, loudness, and pauses, as these interact with syntax, lexical meaning, and segmental phonology in spoken texts (p.4), prosody has historically been ignored or relegated to the fringes of research and pedagogy, due in large part, according to Chun (2002), to its inherent complexity and difficulty mastering it. Considered notoriously difficult to acquire and define, Bolinger (1972) labeled the most controversial aspect of prosody, intonation, the greasy part of language. Despite its historical back-seat status, an undercurrent of research regarding prosody has spanned several disciplines. The first documented study of speech melody has been traced back to Steele (Couper-Kuhlen, 1993, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004), who, in 1775, used musical notation to identify pitch variations that occur in regular forms upon syllables. Unfortunately, his materials, based on five features he identified as accent, quantity, pause, emphasis and force were dependent upon fixed and absolute musical pitches rather than flexible and relative tones, apparently lacking in practical applicability (Pike, 1945). 2.3. Pronunciation research in applied linguistics Although attaining native-like pronunciation that facilitates mutual intelligibility is considered important for many language learners and teachers alike, there have been few empirical studies of pronunciation in applied linguistics (Derwing Munro,2005; Levis, 2005). For example, Derwing and Munro (2005, p. 386) state that it is widely accepted that suprasegmentals are very important to intelligibility, but as yet few studies support this belief. This claim is supported by other researchers such as Hahn (1994) and Levis (2005) who states that over the past 25 years there has been encouragement to teach suprasegmentals though very little pedagogy has been based on empirical research. The usefulness of empirical research for developing more effective pronunciation teaching is obvious. As Levis (2005) states, instruction should focus on those features that are most helpful for understanding and should deemphasize those that are relatively unhelpful ( pp. 370-371). Munro (2008) echoes this point when stating that it is important to establish a set of priorities for teaching. If one aspect of pronunciation instruction is more likely to promote intelligibility than some other aspect, it deserves more immediate attention. (p. 197). Of course, we must first know what the most important elements are to ensure optimal instruction and learning outcomes. As Munro (2008) argues, because prosody encompasses a wide range of speech phenomena, further research is needed to pinpoint those aspects of prosody that are most critical (p.210). Hahn (2004, p. 201) agrees that there is little empirical support for claims that teaching suprasegmentals is helpful and that knowing how the various prosodic features actually affect the way native speakersà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦process nonnative speech would substantially strengthen the rationale for current pronunciation pedagogy. For that reason, Hahn (2004) reiterates that it is important to identify the phonological features that are most salient for native listeners. Due to the complex relationship between suprasegmentals and intelligibility, Hahn (2004) argues that it is helpful to isolate particular suprasegmental features for analyses (p. 201). Hahns argument supports the importance of the research in this dissertation in which the acoustic correlates of English lexical stress are isolated and manipulated individually to identify which are the most pertinent to the perception of speech intelligibility and nativeness. Levis (2005) states that pronunciation teaching has been a study in extremes in that it was once considered the most important aspect of language learning (when audiolingual methods were favored) and then became very much marginalized in communicative language teaching. Of the research that has been carried out, such as that on intonation patterns, little of it finds its place in pronunciation textbooks (Derwing, 2008; Derwing Munro, 2005; Levis, 2005; Tarone, 2005). Therefore, there is a need to first fill a gap in empirical research treating aspects of second language pronunciation and then to ensure that these findings are relayed to professionals in the fields of education and applied linguistics so that L2 students can benefit from these findings. Once a general framework for the delivery of instruction is chosen, the next step in designing a course of any type is to consider the needs and desires of the students and create course objectives and learning outcomes. As stated earlier, ESL students are typically concerned with issues such as intelligibility, accent and nativeness. Students often voice their goals regarding attaining proficiency in these areas and teachers should consider which goals are realistic (Avery Ehrlich, 1992). To do so, the students current abilities must be assessed in order to target strategies that will help achieve these goals. Assessing students abilities is crucial in planning pronunciation teaching. Derwing (2003; 2008) stresses that each student should be assessed individually to identify the students strengths and weaknesses and determine individual needs in pronunciation. These assessments can be done in a formal or informal way by the teacher and can include self-reports or self-assessments by the students. Self-assessments by students can provide insight into the students perceived needs, although these needs may be biased by the students previous experience with pronunciation instruction. Derwing (2003) found that of the pronunciation problems identified [by the students], roughly 79% were segmental [in nature], while only 11% were related to prosody.(p.554). In other words, students are simply more aware of segmental elements than they are of prosodic ones due to more previous instruction on segmental elements. Once evaluations have been completed, the question becomes how to address the language learners pronunciation issues. A complication arises at this point because students in ESL classes typically come from very mixed language backgrounds. Even the varying needs of students in EFL classrooms, where all learners are from the same native language background, can be challenging as individual students have individual needs. Therefore, integrating pronunciation lessons into class activities can be challenging in ESL classrooms as a particular speaker (or group of speakers) may have little difficulty with a particular element of pronunciation while others have great difficulty. A well-known example is Japanese speakers difficulty acquiring /r/ and /l/ (Bradlow, 2008) which does not cause any trouble for Spanish speakers. As Derwing (2003) advises, focusing heavily on segmental instruction in mixed classrooms is inappropriate due to the variety of language backgrounds and, therefore, prosody should be emphasized as it can have greater importance for a larger diversity of students. Derwing (2008) also argues that instruction in prosody transfers better to spontaneous speech than instruction on segmentals. Many instructors are reluctant to teach pronunciation and often unsure how to go about doing it (Derwing Munro, 2005; Hewings, 2006) as they feel underprepared or have little support in terms of course materials. Derwing (2003) estimates that only about 30% of pronunciation teachers have formal linguistic training in pronunciation pedagogy. To address this issue, it is important that empirical research on pronunciation be conveyed in a clear manner to language teachers so that they can pass this information along to students. To be certain, pronunciation should be considered an important element of ESL classroom instruction. It has been noted above that pronunciation is implicated in critical elements of communication such as speech intelligibility, and can also affect perception of nativeness. In addition, accurate pronunciation is critical for students needing to pass standardized English tests such as the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) and the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) for entrance into colleges and universities in English-speaking countries, or when interviewed by entities such as the Foreign Service Institute which assesses not only a persons grammar and vocabulary but also comprehension, fluency and accent in oral interviews (Varonis Gass, 1982). Pronunciation is also a key element in programs that prepares international teaching assistants to become teachers in American classrooms (Hahn, 2004; Wennerstrom, 1998). 2.4. The reasons for teaching pronunciation One of the most urgent reasons for effective pronunciation instruction centers on the large number of non-native English speakers attending American colleges and universities. According to The Institute for International Education, these students numbered 547,867 in the 2000/2001 school year, with a substantial number serving as graduate teaching assistants. The increase in the hours of classroom instruction given by non-native speakers has led to a corresponding decrease in student satisfaction with the quality of instruction, due mainly to the reported difficulty following non-native classroom presentation (Ostrom, 1997, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004). A survey by Shaw (1985, as cited in Aufderhaar, 2004 ) revealed that having an instructor with foreign-accented speech is the highest of six areas of potential frustration for college students. Accordingly, previous studies conducted by Hinofotis and Bailey (1980) on non-native university teaching assistants revealed a threshold level of understandable pronunciation in English, below which the non-native speaker will not be able to communicate orally regardless of his or her level of control of English grammar and vocabulary. While some instructors and administrators within the field have historically dismissed these problems simply as a matter of not having enough exposure to the spoken target language (Moy, 1986), other well-meaning instructors attempting to deal with this need have often relied on minimal pair drills, repetition and articulatory instruction with poor results (MacDonald, Yule, Powers, 1994). According to Aufderhaar (2004), research in second language acquisition that suggested a departure from the traditional, bottom-up phonemic-based approach to teaching from a top-down orientation emphasizing suprasegmental or prosodic aspects such as rhythm, intonation, and duration revealed a need to increase the adult learners awareness of suprasegmental patterns of the target language at the discourse level. Chun (2002) advocates five principles for teaching intonation, including sensitization, explanation, imitation, practice activities, and communicative activities, and stresses the need for focused listening practice requiring the identification of suprasegmental features within a context of various authentic speech samples representing different speaker roles and relationships. 2.5. The sound system of English According to the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH) the unequal features between languages are the main source of errors. Lado (1957, as cited in Gass Selinker, 2008, p.96) claims that those structures that are different will be difficult because when transferred they will not function satisfactorily in the foreign language and will therefore have to be changed. In order to understand the role of the first language in the phonological acquisition of the second language, emphasis has been given to the studies that have focused on the differences between English and Persian phonological systems. As Celce-Murcia, Brinton, and Goodwin (1996) state: all languages are unique in terms of their consonant and vowel systems. In linguistics, these distinctive characteristics have been divided into segmental and suprasegmental features. The segmental features of a language relate to consonants and vowels, whereas suprasegmental aspects of a language are involved with word stress, intonation, and rhythm (p. 35). 2.5.1 English Consonants and Vowels Standard American English includes 24 consonants and 22 vowels and diphthongs; however, a study performed on American English asserted that there are similarities among consonants that permits us to classify them into groups; the classification can be done according to various criteria (Olive, Greenwood, Coleman, 1993, p. 22). They suggested that consonants could be classified based on voice, place, and manner of articulation; therefore, according to their common characteristics, which include their location inside the mouth, they can be grouped together (Olive, Greenwood, Coleman, ibid, p. 22). Table 2.1 presents the English consonants. Table 2.1. English Consonants p pour 0 thorough r writer b ball e this m man t tool s sack n none d door z Zip ņ¹ sing k key h ham I lab g gear r shawl J rude ʆ uh 3 garage w word f fish tʃ match W what v vast d3 jelly j you The most common vowels in English have been classified in accordance with how the tongue shapes them, and while the consonant sounds are mostly articulated via closure or obstruction in the vocal tract, vowel sounds are produced with a relatively free flow of air (Yule, 2006, p. 38). Therefore, vowels can be classified based on the movement of the tongue, lips, and jaw. The vowels of English have been characterized as low, mid, or high, which describe the height of the tongue, whereas features such as front, central, or back refer to the position of the tongue inside the mouth (Barry, 2008, p. 21). Table 2.2. English Simple Vowels i deed ÊÅ   could É ª sit Ɇ bought Ɇº set a pot à ¦ bad ÊŒ but u push Ç  above 2.6. The Pronunciation Errors of Persian Speakers and the Negative Transfer of Learned L1 Habits into English Major (2001) addressed the issues in L2 phonology and how L1 phonological features can be transferred to the L2 when the sound pattern and word stress of the L2 differs from the L1. A foreign or nonnative accent can be detected more easily in a formal and longer conversation because in short conversation the speaker can produce words or sounds that are similar to the L2 in terms of segmental and suprasegmental features of language. Therefore, then overall impression concerning native speakers from whether or not and to what degree a person sounds native or nonnative is called global foreign accent (Major, 2000, p. 19). The measurement of global foreign accent is essential as it indicates at what stage of language development pronunciation is acquired. Moreover, Nation and Newton (2009) stated that the goal of pronunciation instruction is to increase the intelligibility of second language speakers although factors such as age, L1, perspectives, and attitudes of the learner can affect the learning of second language phonological system. There is clear evidence that there is a relationship between the age at which a language is learned and the degree of foreign accent (Patkowski, 1990, as cited in Nation Newton, 2009, p. 78). However, pronunciation has been identified as one of the important aspects of second language acquisition as it plays a crucial role in spoken conversational interactions and intelligibility. Although some studies indicated that it is impossible for adult learners to acquire native-like pronunciation, Boudaoud and Cardosos (2009) study suggested that learners proficiency level in English could affect their pronunciation. They compared the phonological features of Persian with four languages: Spanish, Japanese, Portuguese, and Arabic and asserted that these languages prevented their speakers from producing the /s/ consonant when learning English. The study focused on four research questions related to the production of /s/ consonant by Persian speakers and the factors that affect the acquisition of English as a second language. The findings indicated that /st/ and /sn/ were more difficult to produce than /sl/ and suggested that error production decreased as the proficiency level increased. Furthermore, Paribakht (2005) examined the relationship between first language (L1; Persian) lexicalization of the concepts represented by the second language (L2; English) target words and learners inferencing behavior while reading English texts (p. 701). This study emphasized the pronunciation errors that English majors produce in Iran when they read English texts. The study asserted that students errors in reading stemmed from their lack of knowledge in English vocabulary rather than the inability to produce the English sound system. The research questions examined whether lexicalization helped students identify the meaning of unfamiliar words. The findings also showed that students relied on their L1 when they were not provided with the synonym of an unfamiliar word. Sadeghi (2009) focused on collocational differences between the L1 and L2 and [suggested] implications for EFL learners and teachers (p.100). This study addressed the errors that Iranian EFL students make when they learn English, and it stated that these errors stemmed from the differences between Persian and English. The study compared Persian and English collocations and focused on the transfer of L1 habits into L2. The aim of the study was to find out whether students made the same errors based on their proficiency level in the English language. Lower level students tend to transfer L1 habits into L2 more frequently as a result of their lack of knowledge in the target language. However, transferring Persian vowels and diphthongs into English pronunciation can also be observed by advanced learners of English. Research related to the difference between phonological systems in English and Persian provide a general overview of the difficulties ESL students may encounter when teachers focus on pronunciation, intonation, and word stress. 2.6.1. Common consonant errors of Iranian EFL learners Persian speakers tend to place a vowel after each consonant; therefore, the following errors can be predicted when Persians pronounce English words: Bread, script, and scramble are pronounced as [bɆºÃƒâ€°Ã‚ ¹Ãƒâ€°Ã¢â‚¬ ºd], [ɆºskiÉ ¹ipt], and [ɆºskɆºÃƒâ€°Ã‚ ¹Ãƒ ¦mbɆºl]. Furthermore, according to the contrastive analysis of English and Persian conducted by Yarmohammadi (1969, 1996) and Wilson and Wilson (2001), the following negative transfer of learned L1 habits into English can be expected from Persian speakers of English. 1. Stop consonants such as /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, k/, /g/ are articulated with a stronger puff of air. /k/, /p/, /g/ and /t/ become aspirated when they are placed in the post coda position. Words such as bank, tap, king, and rest are pronounced as [bà ¦nkÊ °], [tà ¦pÊ °], [kÉ ªngÊ °], and [È ·Ãƒâ€°Ã¢â‚¬ ºstÊ °]. 2. Fricatives such as /v/, /ÃŽÂ ¸/, /ÃÆ' °/, and /s/ are substituted and articulated for other consonants such as /w/, /t/ and /s/, /z/ and /d/, /Ɇºs/ (no initial consonant cluster). West, three, father, and school are pronounced as [vɆºstÊ °], [sɆºÃƒË†Ã‚ ·i] or [tɆºÃƒË†Ã‚ ·i], [fÃŽÂ ±dɆºÃƒË†Ã‚ ·], and [Ɇºskul]. 3. Nasal consonant /ņ¹/ is articulated as /n/ and /g/. Therefore, sing is pronounced as [sÉ ªngÊ °]. /m/ and /n/ are also articulated with a stronger puff of air and they may sound like /Ɇºm/ and /Ɇºn/. 4. Lateral liquid consonant /l/ can be pronounced with a stronger puff of air /Ɇºl/ when it is placed at the end of a word such as tell. 5. The retroflex liquid /È ·/ is trilled and it is produced with the vibration of the tongue. 6. The glide consonant /w/ is replaced by /v/ since /w/ does not exist in Persian consonants. Therefore, flower is articulated as [fɆºlavɆºÃƒâ€°Ã‚ ¹]. 2.6.2. Common vowel errors of Iranian EFL learners According to the contrastive analysis of English and Persian conducted by Yarmohammadi (1969, 1996) and Wilson and Wilson (2001), the following negative transfer of learned L1 habits into English can be expected from Persian speakers of English: 1. /Ɇº/ and /à ¦/ can substitute for one another; therefore, [bà ¦t] is articulated as [bɆºt]. 2. /ÊŒ/ replaces /ÃŽÂ ±/. [lÊŒk] is articulated as [lÃŽÂ ±k]. 3. /ÊÅ  / replaces /u/. [ful] is pronounced as [fÊÅ  l]. 4. /É ª/ replaces /i/. [bit] is articulated as [bÉ ªt]. 5. /j/ replaces /i/ if placed in initial position. [twin] is articulated as [tujin]. 2.7. The Importance of suprasegmentals and stress in L2 acquisition 2.7.1 The importance of suprasegmentals Pronunciation is always a difficult step in learning a second or foreign language, especially for adults. Learners may have acquired perfect reading and writing skills while still being unable to communicate functionally in L2. Problems in pronunciation can be traced to segmental as well as suprasegmental difficulties. Although most previous research has been conducted on the segmental level, recent studies show that suprasegmentals may play a more important role than segmentals in the acquisition of a second language phonological system (Anderson, Johnson Koehler 1992, Derwing, Munro Wiebe, 1998). Anderson, et al (1992) investigated the nonnative pronunciation deviance at three different levels: syllable structure, segmental structure and prosody. The correlation between the actual deviance at the three levels and nonnative speakers performance on the Speaking Proficiency English Assessment Kit (SPEAK) Test was calculated. It was shown that while all three areas had a significant influence on pronunciation ratings, the effects of the prosodic variable were the strongest. In Derwing, Munro, and Wiebes (1998) study, native speakers were invited to evaluate the final results of three types of instruction, i.e. segmental accuracy, general speaking habits and prosodic factors, and no specific pronunciation instruction, after a 12-week pronunciation course. Treated in three different ways, three groups of ESL learner reading sentences and narratives at the beginning and end of the course were recorded. Both the first and second groups, who received pronunciation instruction, showed significant improvement in sentence reading. However, only the second group, where prosodic factors were included in the instruction, showed improvement in accentedness and fluency in the narratives. In Johanssons (1978, as cited in Wang, 2009) study of Swedish-accented English speech, segmental and non-segmental errors were compared in terms of accentedness scores. Native English judges were presented with two kinds of production, those with native English intonation but segmental errors on the one hand, and those with nonnative intonation (Swedish-accented) but no segmental errors on the other. Higher scores were assigned to productions with native-like suprasegmental characteristics but poor segmentals. In a more recent study, Munro (1995, as cited in Wang, 2009) used low-pass filtered English speech produced by Mandarin speakers for accent judgment. Untrained native English listeners were invited to rate the speech samples. It was found that non-segmental factors such as speaking rate, pitch patterns and reduction contribute to the detected foreign accent in Mandarin speakers production and that their foreign accent can be detected based solely on suprasegmental information. In addition, some recent studies have, therefore, focused on stress production with nonce words of English. For example, Pater (1997, as cited in Altmann, 2006) investigated the stress placement patterns for English nonce words by both English native speakers and French learners of English. While this study varied syllable weight within words, it used a rather small set of items. The native English speakers exhibited a stress placement pattern that was basically identical to the Latin stress rule (i.e., stre

Hip Hop and the Civil Rights Movement Essay -- Music

The Hip Hop movement was born while the Civil Rights movement was aging. The Civil Rights movement, at its height addressed social inequalities however, in its old age it began to demand economic equality – enter Martin Luther King Jr.’s Poor People’s Campaign. Although Black Americans were allowed to eat next to White Americans in restaurants, and were allowed to sit next to White Americans on buses and enjoy equality in terms of access, white supremacy went underground and manifested as red-lining, unequal protection under the law, and a greater disparity between once racially segregated schools that are now economically segregated. The Civil Rights Movement and the Hip Hop movement are similar, but yet are different. If oppressed individuals draw upon the strengths and weaknesses of these movements they will produce profound results socially and economically in the United States and abroad. It is impossible to separate my voice from this topic, as I was born as an African American girl in 1984 during a time when Hip Hop could metaphorically be considered an adolescent. Through conversations with my grandmother, who grew up in segregated Arkansas, as well as my mother who was a teenager during the turbulent 70’s I have learned qualitative information about the Civil Rights movement. After much research, the major concern for Civil Right’s activists was the integration of schools and all public institutions. Black children had to walk several miles to school – while white students were provided transportation, Black children were given â€Å"hand-me down† textbooks and supplies and black teachers were provided a fraction of the salary that white teachers made. After the historic win of Brown v. Board of Educati... ... always been an issue, but hip hop has the power to cross economic, social and religious divisions. The civil rights movement did not have the resources that the hip-hop movement has today however it has the resiliency, the know-how and blueprint to take our society to the next level where individuals will be less oppressed and more able to positively add to the legacy and values revolution of America. 10 Works Cited hooks, bell. We Real Cool: Black Men and Masculinity. New York: Routledge, 2004. Kitwana, Bakari. The Hip Hop Generation: Young Blacks and Crisis in African American Culture. New York: Basic Civitas, 2002. Morgan, Joan. When Chickenheads Come Home To Roost: My Life as a Hip Hop Feminist. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999. Neal, Mark Anthony. Soul Babies: Black Popular Culture and the Post-Soul Aesthetic. New York: Routledge, 2002.

How I See Myself 10 Years From Now

Ten years Ten years from now I see myself as a very successful person. I would be 25 years old have a job to help support my family while I attend college. I would live in a large house on a decent amount of property. I will have a large barn with a huge indoor arena. I will have 13 horses, 4 dogs, and a lot of barn cats. I will be going to school to be a neurosurgeon. A neurosurgeon is a surgeon who specializes only on the spine and brain.It would take many years of schooling and a lot of money, but when I'm finished I will have a high paying job and be very happy. I want to be a surgeon because I would be helping or saving someone else. I would work long shifts and many days, but it would definitely be worth it. I hope to be married or getting married in ten years. Then after I will have at least two kids and if I have more than oh well. I don't want just one, because then they will be alone and definitely would be spoiled.I would like to adopt a child, but if my husband doesn't th en we won't. I will be a good mother and wife. My house will be fairly large with a inside pool and an outdoor pool. I will have nice brick tiled walkways leading to the barn, pastures, driveway, and pool. I will have nice landscaping around the house. A decent size pond behind the house where we could fish, swim and whatever else. I will have a nice large dog house made for the dogs, but they will sleep in the regular house.

Darren Mansaram (or Flash as he is better off known) scored one of the best goals he had ever scored in his short career

Darren Mansaram (or Flash as he is better off known) scored one of the best goals he had ever scored in his short career. Only eighteen years of age, but an up and coming star of the future hit the sweetest of shots to keep Grimsby Town in the F. A Cup. Grimsby was playing Burnley in the third round of the F. A Cup for a place in the fourth round maybe to face one of the premiership big boys. It was a miserable day with snow coming down in buckets. The previous league match at Grimsby was called off because of a waterlogged pitch so this match was lucky to go ahead. The eighteen year old from Doncaster was named in the starting eleven to face the team they had beat 6-5 two months previously. With the ground quickly filling up, the players came out of the dressing room onto the pitch for a warm up. Every Grimsby player applauded the Grimsby fans for their support and every person in the crowd applauded back. The team started their warm-up and there, right in the middle was Darren Mansaram. This was to be his first F. A. Cup match of his career and it was definitely going to be one to remember. Kick Off was approaching quickly and the snow seemed to have cleared, so the referee gave to ‘all clear' for the match to go on. The ground was rather full as the players came out of the tunnel, the Grimsby faithful applauded their team and the Burnley faithful applauded theirs. The officials called in the two captains to determine who was to kick off. It was to be Grimsby to kick off left to right towards the away end. Flash and David ‘Digger' Soames to kick off, playing the ball back to Stuart Campbell who in turn plays it to player/manager Paul Groves. Groves loses out to Paul Weller who plays a first time ball to Arthur Gnohere. He hits a long ball over the top of the Grimsby defence, Georges Santos looks over at the linesman to see if there is an off-side, Robbie Blake chases it down, takes it around the Grimsby keeper, Danny Coyne, and hits a shot which smacks the upright. The Grimsby defence can't clear it, Tony Grant comes steaming in and whacks the ball straight over the Pontoon. The town fans cheer with sheer delight as they watch the ball disappear. Grant got right under the ball there. Danny Coyne to take the goal kick, it's a brilliant kick which Stacey Coldicott heads on straight for ‘Digger' Soames who chases it down and hits a first time shot right into the Burnley keeper's arms. A great chance for Grimsby turned into a wasted opportunity. Marlon Beresford clears the ball for Burnley, Georges Santos heads the ball clear. It's pumped straight back into the box by Mark McGregor; Coyne comes flying out of his goal and gathers the ball comfortably. He rolls it out to Gallimore who plays a first time ball to Ford. Ford to Santos, up to Cooke who controls the ball well. Cooke has the ability to take people on from here. Branch and Gnohere quickly close Cooke down. Cooke decides to dribble the ball. He's took it past Branch, skips past the challenge from Gnohere. It's three on two for Grimsby here, what can Cooke do? Who can he pick out? It's a great ball behind Cox. Digger Soames is onto it. One on one with Marlon Beresford. Beresford makes himself as big as possible, Digger slides the ball underneath Beresford and just the wrong side of the post. The Burnley supporters look happy to see the ball slide the wrong side of the upright. Great play by Grimsby, deserved a goal there. Beresford to take the goal kick. He's taking his time with it to slow down the flow of play. Super goal kick headed away by McDermott, headed on by Groves. Cleared by McGregor, Ian Moore controls the ball. Forty yards out, dribbles the ball around Coldicott, Groves comes steaming in. Moore skips past the challenge from Groves, slides a ball around the back of the Grimsby defence, Alan Moore is onto it. Just Coyne to beat. SUPER GOAL from Alan Moore, 1-0 Burnley. Coyne is absolutely furious with his defence. The Burnley fans jump up as overjoyed as Moore himself. Flash to precede the match with the kick off. He plays the ball to Digger who picks out Cooke with a pin-point pass. Cooke, back to McDermott. McDermott brings the ball in-field, Santos goes the opposite way. Great play here from Grimsby. Santos plays a neat one-two with Cooke, Santos keeps going. He sees Flash in space and plays a tidy ball around the back of the Burnley defence. Flash runs onto it. Cox comes flying in with the challenge. Flash neatly tucks the ball between Cox's legs. This is great build-up play from Mansaram. The town faithful are on their feet, urging Flash on. He spots Digger making his way into the box. Superb ball straight to the head of Digger Soames, Just wide, if anything deserved a goal that certainly did. Beresford to resume play, just a short kick out to Cox, who turns and controls well. Tony Grant receives the ball at half way. Grant runs with the ball, past Groves, past Santos. One on One with Coyne. The shot deflects off Coyne's legs straight to WELLER. 2-0 to Burnley who I dare say justify this lead. Player/Manager Groves can't believe that his side are 2-0 down to the team they beat 6-5. Where on earth was the Grimsby defence there? Digger to kick off for Town as they look to come back from 2-0 down to beat this Burnley side. Coldicott in possession of the ball for Town. Groves takes over and plays it to Cooke. Cooke attempts to play a cross-field ball to Gallimore, which finds its intended target. Gallimore plays a neat one-two with Santos. Gallimore to Campbell, who plays a first time ball to Stacy Coldicott. Town are keeping possession well here. Coldicott in midfield plays the ball back to Ford. Ford leaves it for Coyne, who hits the ball first time to out to McDermott. McDermott turns and sees Cooke in space. Cooke receives the ball at half-way. He's got time and space to run with the ball here. Cooke takes the ball on, Gnohere comes across. Cooke skips past the challenge from Gnohere. The crowd urges Cooke on. Cooke comes in-field, he's got time to cross a ball in. It's a superb ball onto the head of Mansaram. It smacks the upright and bounces out. Groves has a shot, which is blocked by Branch. Coldicott hits a shot which is saved by Beresford. What a goalmouth scramble. Campbell hits a screamer which is blocked on the line by Cox. Finally Ian Moore clears the ball for Burnley and the defence can breathe again. Grimsby are really trying to get back into the match. Graham Rodger the assistant manager screams instructions to the captain McDermott and to player-manager Paul Groves. For the time being it is Burnley in the lead and Burnley in possession with Papadopoulos. This is his first real touch in this exciting and productive first half. Thirty Seven minutes in and its Grimsby Town 0, Burnley 2. Papadopoulos with a one-two with Grant. Papadopoulos keeps going and slides a ball through the middle of the defence. Alan Moore is chasing the ball down, Coyne comes flying out of his goal. Moore has to get past Santos first. He's done that successfully. He's one on one with Coyne. Coyne still flying from his goal line, collects the ball comfortable. The danger is over for Grimsby. Burnley are to make a substitution here, It's going to be Paul Weller to leave the field of play to be replaced by Paul Cook. Grimsby will be happy to hear the referee's whistle for half time. There is two minutes plus stoppage time left. McDermott is in possession for Grimsby. He's trying to slow things down here. He plays it back to Coyne, Coyne controls the ball and takes his time before playing the ball to Gallimore. The fourth official holds up the electronic board. He's indicated one added on minute. Gallimore to Georges Santos straight to Groves. Groves hits a ball over the top of the Burnley defence, Digger chases after it. Last chance for Grimsby. Digger has two defenders to beat. Cox and Gnohere. He beats Cox comfortably, only Gnohere to beat. Gnohere takes the ball off Digger and pumps a ball up-field. The Burnley crowd breath a sigh of relief. The referee blows for half time. What an exciting, action-packed first half, more of the same is expected in the second. Burnley are two goals up here against a weak Grimsby side compared to the one almost two months ago. Well, Grimsby have had the most possession but it's Burnley who have got the rewards for their hard work. At half time here at Blundell Park, it's Grimsby Town nil Burnley two. Half time entertainment here at Blundell Park today with to local junior sides are playing in a mini tournament. I wonder what is going on in both changing rooms, do you? Well wonder no more because in both changing rooms we have installed microphone camera's, so off to the home changing room to get an idea of the atmosphere in there. What a pathetic performance you lot are showing, absolutely pathetic' Graham Rodger, the assistant manager, was yelling at his players. ‘Either buck your ideas up or some of you are going to be put on the transfer list' he continued. Ok, I think we are getting the point that the Town assistant manager is appalled with the first half performance of the mariners. Off to the away dressing room we go. I presume it's a better atmosphere in there. ‘E. I. E. I. O through the F. A Cup we go, when we get Man United, this is what we'll sing. We are Burnley, we are Burnley, Ternant is our king' Wow, they are really enjoying today. Grimsby Town are coming out for the second half. Grimsby Town look fired up for a tense and nerve wracking forty-five minutes for the Grimsby Town supporters. There is no sign of Burnley yet. I can tell you there have been no substitutions during half time. Papadopoulos and Blake to get this second half under way. Blake back to Grant who gives the ball to Cook. Cook plays a neat one-two with Branch, Cook continues down this left hand touchline. He comes in-field and gives the ball to Alan Moore who loses out to Groves. Groves, who is just inside his own half, plays the ball back to Santos who kicks it first time to Gallimore. Santos looks like he has injured himself but play continues with Gallimore. Gallimore to Campbell. An over-hit pass there from Gallimore which Campbell controls brilliantly. He turns, looks up and sees Digger in Space. Campbell decides to take the ball on himself. Santos is signalling to the bench that he wants to come off. Campbell to Mansaram. Mansaram to ‘Digger' Soames. Soames tricks the defender into going one way and he goes the other. Excellent build up play from Grimsby Town. Digger sends in a left footed cross which falls onto the head of Coldicott. Super header from Coldicott smacks the bar, Terry Cooke comes flying in and sails the ball straight into the stand. Beresford takes his time in retrieving the ball from the stand containing Grimsby supporters. Grimsby Town to make a substitution here. It's going to be Steve Chettle coming on for Georges Santos. Beresford to resume play from the goal kick, plays a ball up-field trying to find Alan Moore. The ball doesn't reach him but is headed away by Groves. Coldicott picks it up on half way, controlled well. He picks out Cooke with a precise pass. What a good game Cooke and Coldicott are having. Cooke on the right wing plays the ball to Mansaram who gives the ball back to Cooke. Great play from Grimsby Town, the crowd are really getting behind Grimsby. Cooke travels further with the ball. There is only ‘Digger' Soames in the box. Cooke decides to shoot himself. It's a real pile driver of a shot that Beresford can only tip behind for a corner. The crowd are buzzing with excitement. Campbell to take the corner for Grimsby. There are six in the area for Grimsby including Cooke, Mansaram and Chettle. The ball is driven into the area to Cooke who stumbles under a challenge from Cox, Burnley manage to clear the ball. The referee blows his whistle, the crowd are astonished to hear the whistle, and the players are totally astounded to hear it. The referee points to the penalty spot, he's awarded a penalty to Grimsby Town, possibly for the slight challenge on Cooke, we'll never know. Cooke has got up and is ready to take the penalty himself. He puts the ball on the spot, this to make it two-one. The crowd are trying their best to put off the Burnley keeper. It's Cooke against Beresford. Cooke takes a run up and belts the ball. GOAL. Grimsby Town are back into this game thanks to a dubious decision by the referee. At Blundell Park, Cleethorpes its Grimsby Town One, Burnley Two. Burnley are absolutely furious with the decision but ‘The show must go on'. Stan Ternant, the Burnley manager, is angry at the officials, he's having a right go at the fourth official. The referee sees it. He's walking over. He's talking to the official. He's going over to Stan. The referee has sent him away from the dugout. I presume that is for the abuse he was giving the fourth official. He will certainly be complaining about these officials to the F. A. Burnley to resume play from the centre circle. Papadopoulos plays the ball back to back who spots Grant running down the left touchline. Brilliant ball straight to the feet of Grant who loses out to McDermott. McDermott plays a long cross-field ball to Campbell who turns well. Grimsby look like they are going to make a substitution, Chris Thompson is warming up on the touchline. Groves receives the ball at half way and takes his time before playing a ball back to Santos. Santos to Gallimore on this left touchline. Thompson is ready to come on when the ball goes out of play. Gallimore hits a long ball up to Cooke who mis-controls and the ball rolls over the line for a Burnley throw-in. It's going to be a double substitution for Grimsby Town. The electronic board goes up, it's going to be 14 Chris Thompson for 20 David Soames and 12 Jonathan Rowan replacing 2 John McDermott. Burnley to take the throw-in with Branch. Gnohere receives the ball who gives it to Cox. Up-field straight to Paul Cook. Cook runs with the ball, trying to take on the Grimsby defence by himself. He's past Groves, skips past the challenge from Ford and rides the challenge from Santos. Only Coyne to beat. Cook tries to slide the ball underneath Coyne. He's done that successfully. Coyne got a touch, the ball is rolling towards the line, Santos is trying to get back. What a brilliant clearance off the line from Santos. Grimsby are straight on the attack with Cooke on the ball. Cooke hits a ball up-field to Mansaram. Great touch to control the ball. Mansaram brings the ball out left, he's got support from the packed Grimsby midfield. He's turned brilliantly, he's going back to where he started. He turns well again and strikes a left footed shot. GOAL, wow what a superb shot straight past the helpless Beresford. There was nothing the goal keeper could do there. After 88 minutes, it's Grimsby Town 2 Burnley 2. Burnley are devastated by that, that they decide to make an attacking substitution. Dimitrios Papadopoulos is coming off to be replaced by Gordon Armstrong. The fourth official holds up the board and indicates two minutes added time. The ninety minutes are up, Grimsby are under a lot of pressure from the Burnley attack. The referee blows his whistle for full time, it's finished Grimsby Town 2 Burnley 2.