24. Praat for Indigenous Language Learning (D, T, P)

As learners, sometimes it is hard for us to pinpoint what exactly it is that we are not hearing or saying properly; Praat helps us to see this in a very concrete way. This workshop is geared towards people who are interested in fine-tuning their own or others’ listening and speaking skills. Over the course of the workshop, participants will learn how to use Praat as a visual aid for hearing and transcribing speech (e.g. stories), as well as for fine-tuning pronunciation, by measuring certain features of speech (e.g. pauses and intonation patterns) and adjusting them to match those of their elders and teachers. Example of what we might work on (depending on group interest): One way that I (Rae Anne) have used Praat is to study the pauses in my speech compared to those in my elders’ speech: I took a close look at my pauses, and discovered that some are intentional and some are not. I was able to see that when I say words full of clusters (groups of consonants), I unintentionally pause/stop for a longer time than my elders do. In sentences, I saw that I didn\u27t always pause at the same places that my elders intentionally did. I have used Praat to locate and measure pauses, in order to use them more like my elders do

Seeing Speech: Using Praat to Visualize Hul’q’umi’num’ Sounds

As is typical across Turtle Island, the Hul’q’umi’num’ (Coast Salish) language revitalization movement is being carried by adult language learners (Haynes 2010; McIvor 2015) but becoming a proficient Hul’q’umi’num’ speaker is challenging given the complexity of its sound system. In this paper, we share our experiences using the speech analysis software Praat (Boersma & Weenink 2018) to help in our pronunciation work. We describe the types of pronunciation patterns that can benefit from Praat-based speech visualization, including whole sound adjustments, glottalization adjustments, and timing adjustments. We then discuss how this tool has helped us, by providing tangible feedback on our speech, by allowing us to learn by observing and modelling (a more gentle and culturally appropriate form of learning than explicit instruction), and by learning from Elders through their voices, even when they are not able to be present during pronunciation sessions. In our experience, these benefits combine to increase the confidence that learners feel in working on their pronunciation and therefore in becoming more proficient speakers.National Foreign Language Resource Cente

Seeing Speech: A Pronunciation Toolkit for Indigenous Language Teaching and Learning

Pronunciation can present a serious challenge for language teachers and learners (e.g., Munro & Derwing 2015). In the context of Indigenous languages in particular, this can be compounded by a number of factors, including small numbers of speakers and teachers, a paucity of pedagogical resources and clear descriptions of sound systems, and the pressures faced by heritage learners to authentically preserve their ancestral language (Carpenter 1997; Hinton 2011; Hinton & Ahlers 1999). Latent speakers may be inhibited from speaking by perceived concerns over their pronunciation, particularly in the presence of elders (Basham & Fatham 2008), and other learners may face similar social and linguistic challenges. Despite these hurdles, pronunciation is considered by many to be an important aspect of Indigenous language learning, and one which requires creative community-oriented solutions (AUTHOR & Kell 2015; Carpenter 1997). Towards this end, we have developed a pronunciationlearning toolthat incorporates ultrasound technology, giving learners a visual aid to help them learn to articulate challenging or unfamiliar sounds, for example “back of the mouth” consonants (e.g. /k/ vs. /q/). Ultrasound is used to create videos of a model speaker’s tongue movements during speech, which are then overlaid on videos of an external profile view of the model’s head to create ultrasound-enhanced pronunciation videos for individual words or sounds (Abel et al. 2015). A key advantage of these videos is that they allow learners direct access to the articulatory shapes and movements that are involved in pronouncing challenging words or sounds; learners are able see how speech is produced rather than just hear and try to mimic it. Although ultrasound-enhanced videos were originally developed for commonly taught languages such as Japanese and French, there has been widespread interest from Indigenous communities in Western Canada to develop their own customized videos. To date, we have partnered with communities in Alberta and British Columbia to develop videos for four languages: SENĆOŦEN, Secwepemc, Halq’emeylem, and Blackfoot. Community-driven and capacity-building, these projects involved training community members in how to produce customized ultrasound-enhanced videos using our toolkit. The resulting videos will be featured in our presentation, along with demonstrations of how and why to use ultrasound in pronunciation teaching. Our goal is to show that the ultrasound-enhanced videos can help to address some of the challenges of pronunciation learning in Indigenous languages by giving learners a new way to understand pronunciation that focuses on seeing speech. References Abel, J., B. Allen, S. Burton, M. Kazama, M. Noguchi, A. Tsuda, N. Yamane, & AUTHOR. 2015. Ultrasound-Enhanced Multimodal Approaches to Pronunciation Teaching and Learning. Canadian Acoustics 43 (3), 130-131. Basham, C. and A. Fathman. 2008. The latent speaker: Attaining adult fluency in an endangered language. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11: 577-97. AUTHOR and S. Kell. Pronunciation in the context of language revitalization. Paper presented at ICLDC 4, 2015. Carpenter, V. 1997. Teaching Children to "Unlearn" the Sounds of English. In Teaching Indigenous Languages, ed. by Jon Reyhner. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, pp. 31-39. Hinton, L. 2011. Language revitalization and language pedagogy: New teaching and learning strategies. Language and Education 25(4): 307-318, Hinton, L. and J. Ahlers. 1999. The issue of “authenticity” in California language restoration. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 30: 56-67. Munro, M. J. & Derwing, T. M. 2015. A prospectus for pronunciation research in the 21st century: A point of view. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 1(1): 11-42

Pronunciation in the context of language revitalization

A number of studies have documented cases in which sounds in an Indigenous minority language have been replaced by similar sounds from the dominant language (e.g. Babel, 2009; King et al., 2009; Carrera-Sabaté, 2009). The resulting variation in pronunciation is particularly likely to occur when the minority language is learnt as a second language because of first (dominant) language influences (Flege, Schirru & Mackay 2003), and is often perceived negatively by community members (Dorian, 1994; King et al., 2009). To determine whether and how to approach such variation when teaching pronunciation, it is crucial first to document the facts: On the one hand, how is pronunciation likely to vary across speakers, and why? On the other, what attitudes exist among language users towards this variation? These questions were addressed in a multi-faceted project (see Basham & Fathman 2008). Two studies were undertaken with four different generations of SENĆOŦEN (a dialect of North Straits Salish) speakers - three speakers per generation: elders, younger elders (with varying levels of fluency), teachers, and language learners (young adults). In the first study, each speaker answered a series of questions designed to have them reflect on their attitudes towards pronunciation - e.g. is there such a thing as “correct” pronunciation, and how important is it in the context of language learning/revitalization? Preliminary results indicate that speakers and learners feel it is important to pronounce words the way their elders do, but that they also acknowledge variation among different speakers and families within the community. Young adult learners respect these differences, and may try to adapt their pronunciation to approximate that of the particular elders they are speaking to. In the second study, speakers were recorded pronouncing a set of 78 words illustrating the sounds considered impressionistically to be the most difficult. Preliminary results show that in some cases, variation is likely due to English-related influences (e.g. use of /d/ vs. /t’/), as found in Babel (2009) and others. In other cases, variation is due instead to familial/dialectal differences (e.g. use of /tθ’/ vs. /ts’/). Speakers are generally more aware of the latter type of variation than of the former. Together, this research highlights the need to tease apart different kinds of variation in pronunciation when developing pedagogical materials in the context of language revitalization: familial/dialectal variation can simply be acknowledged, whereas variation (and change) resulting from English influences may warrant further attention. References Babel, M. (2009). The phonetic and phonological effects of obsolescence in Northern Paiute. In J. Stanford & R. Preston (eds.) Variation in Indigenous Minority Languages (pp. 23-46). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Basham, C. & A.K. Fathman (2008). The latent speaker: attaining adult fluency in an endangered language. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 11 (5): 577-597. Carrera-Sabaté, J. (2009). Affricates in Lheidatá: a sociophonetic case study. In J. Stanford & R. Preston (eds.) Variation in Indigenous Minority Languages (pp. 77-108). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Dorian, N. (1994). Purism vs. compromise in language revitalization and language revival. Language in Society 23: 479-494. Flege, J.E., C. Schirru & I.R.A. MacKay (2003). Interaction between the native and second language phonetic subsystems. Speech Communication 40: 467-491. King, J., R. Harlow, C. Watson, P. Keegan, & M. MacLagan (2009). Changing pronunciation of the Maori language: Implications for revitalization. In J. Reyhner & L. Lockard (eds) Indigenous Language Revitalization: Encouragement, Guidance & Lessons Learned (pp. 85-96). Flagstaff AZ: Northern Arizona University

Seeing Speech: Ultrasound-based Multimedia Resources for Pronunciation Learning in Indigenous Languages

Pronunciation is an important aspect of Indigenous language learning, and one which requires creative community-oriented solutions. Towards this end, we have developed a pronunciation learning tool that incorporates ultrasound technology to give learners a visual aid to help them articulate unfamiliar and/or challenging sounds. Ultrasound is used to create videos of a model speaker’s tongue movements during speech, which are then overlaid on videos of an external profile view of the model’s head to create ultrasound-enhanced pronunciation videos for individual words or sounds. A key advantage of these videos is that learners are able see how speech is produced rather than just hear and try to mimic it. Although ultrasound-enhanced videos were originally developed for commonly taught languages such as Japanese and French, there has been widespread interest from Indigenous communities in Western Canada to develop their own customized videos. This paper reports on three collaborations between linguists and communities in British Columbia to develop ultrasound-enhanced videos for the SENĆOŦEN, Secwepemc, and Halq’emeylem languages. These videos can give learners a new way to learn pronunciation that focuses on seeing speech, and can create new documentation of understudied sound systems for future generations.National Foreign Language Resource Cente

‘iyus mumun’lh: What we are learning about our kids’ pronunciation as we teach them hul’q’umi’num’

In our talk, we report on a study of the developmental trajectory of hul’q’umi’num’ (Salish) child pronunciation. We worked as a team to analyze recordings of children 3-7 years old, and found that overlapping sounds with English and ones occurring more often in children’s input are acquired earlier

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

The phonetics and phonology of Lheidli intervocalic consonants

This dissertation explores the phonetics and phonology of intervocalic consonants in Lheidli, a dialect of Dakelh (Carrier) Athapaskan spoken in the interior of British Columbia. Through a series of studies on Lheidli, I show quantitatively what has previously been noted impressionistically in the Athapaskan literature: intervocalic consonants are remarkably long. The implication of these consonants for the structure of Lheidli is approached from two perspectives. First, I investigate their role from a purely phonetic approach, focusing on their effect on the perceived rhythmic structure of Lheidli. I propose a new model of rhythm, the Enhancement/Inhibition model, in which the perception of rhythm is created by the interplay between primary and secondary correlates of rhythm. Within the proposed model, the Lheidli data show that one of the important secondary correlates is inherent segmental duration, an element that has not yet been considered in the literature. Second, I investigate the role of intervocalic consonants from a phonological approach, focusing on their effect on syllabification. I present the results of a series of studies on the distribution of vowel duration and quality, the distribution of consonant duration, native speaker syllabification intuitions, and the interaction between stress placement and intervocalic consonant duration. Together these studies lead me to analyze Lheidli intervocalic consonants as non-contrastive, moraic geminates. I conclude by discussing the implications of the Lheidli data for phonetic and phonological theory. I argue the duration of intervocalic consonants is encoded in the Lheidli grammar as part of the language-specific phonetics. Furthermore, because this duration interacts with syllabification, it is encoded in the phonology as weight. Although in Lheidli the phonetic duration of intervocalic consonants is encoded in the phonology as well as the grammar, I propose that not all language-specific phonetic properties are specified in the grammar. This is the case for rhythm, for example, which is an effect of other phonetic and phonological factors of the language rather than being a linguistic primitive itself

Diminutive Bare-Consonant Reduplication in Stl'atl'imcets

Published as a special volume of the Coyote Papers: The University of Arizona Working Papers in Linguistics.Stl'atl'imcets, otherwise known as Lillooet, is a Salish language spoken in British Columbia, Canada. Stl' atl' imcets exhibits 4 different patterns of reduplication, plus combinations 1• In this paper I explore one of these patterns: the diminutive bare-consonant reduplication. The goal is threefold: 1) propose and Optimality Theory (OT) account of the diminutive bare-consonant reduplication in Stl'atl'imcets, 2) discuss the role of prosodic templates in reduplication, and 3) explore the use of morphologically defined constraints. The organization of the paper is as follows: first I present the basic facts of reduplication and account for them using the interaction between two constraints, REALIZEMORPHEME and CONTIGUITY. I show that together, these constraints avoid having to posit prosodic templates associated with the reduplicant and the base. Not only is it unnecessary to refer to prosodic templates, but doing so in fact achieves the wrong results. Second, I discuss cases where reduplication requires vowel epenthesis and propose that CONTIGUITY is morphologically defined, such that schwa-epenthesis does not violate it. Third, I look at reduplication involving consonant clusters, and show that the reduplicant must align to a stressed mora, rather than a stressed syllable. Finally, I conclude by discussing the implications of the proposed account, with respect to the need for prosodic templates (or lack thereof) and for morphologically defined constraints.SSHRC Grant #752-98-0274The Coyote Papers are made available by the Arizona Linguistics Circle at the University of Arizona and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] with questions about these materials