The Teaching of French Pronunciation by the Use of Phonetic Symbols

Author(s): Anna Woods Ballard

Source: The Modern Language Journal , Apr., 1919, Vol. 3, No. 7 (Apr., 1919), pp. 325-
330
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/313459

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations and Wiley are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
THE TEACHING OF FRENCH PRONUNCIATION
BY THE USE OF PHONETIC SYMBOLS

In all the work we do in languages, ancient and mode

pose there is no difficulty more serious than that of Frenc
ciation. The only way to conquer a difficulty is to face
How shall we approach this one?
The matter of pronunciation is surely one of vital im
Without proper attention to it, our whole modem met
language teaching falls to the ground. If the pronunci
the pupils is bad, what earthly use is oral work? It
is it not ?
Suppose you are in a classroom in France or Germany
English is being taught. The teacher tells a story in English
with excellent pronunciation and then questions the class. What
would you think if the pupils were to answer in the Yorkshire
dialect or with a Cockney accent and the teacher did not object?
It would be odd as a sample of oral work, would it not? But
would it be any worse than many glaring and uncorrected mis-
pronunciations of French in classes where the teacher pronounces
well?
What redeems oral work from being a farce is that those who
believe in it and who can do it successfully are usually agreed
on the importance of correct pronunciation, and are trained to
give it to their pupils.
The pronunciation of Greek and Latin, Italian and Spanish,
and German can be learned easily enough. A few directions and a
little practice can make the work of beginners correct for, in the
main, they say what they see. And when they begin to pronounce
French, the method is reversed. What they see is what they do
not say! Is not the best plan to place before beginners and before
all who pronounce badly the very sounds they are to say? Shall
we not teach them how to say them correctly, shall we not give
them sufficient practice so that they will recognize these sounds
the moment they are heard? The method is so very simple and
such an economy of time. May I not outline it for you?
Each sound is taught by the correct pronunciation of a word
containing it, a word in which it is easy to pronounce that sound
correctly. For instance, in the very first lesson the words lit,
(325)

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
326 The Modern Language Journal

nez, met, table are pronounced first by teacher, then by class in con-
cert. Then they are written on the board and beside them in brackets
the sounds they illustrate (i), (e), (e), (a). The pupils are told that
these are key-words-they must connect each with the corresponding
sound. When there is any difficulty in pronouncing the sound
in other words (there often is), they should pronounce the key-
word, get the sound correctly and apply it to the new difficult
word. For instance, they learn to say une, representing the sound
(y). Any one can say" une" correctly. Many can copy it directly
from the teacher. Others need to say (i) and round lips quickly.
We do this in concert. All get it with little difficulty. Then we
practise the list of words containing this sound, saying "une"
before each. The list begins dur, rue, plume, juste, jupe. We say,
une, dur; une, rue; une, plume, etc. This works admirably with
any difficult sound. Every such sound has its own list for prac-
tice. The result is that later the class pronounces best the hardest
sounds and recognizes them most rapidly. Every lesson begins
with a complete review of all sound work taught. All sounds
learned are dictated. In about six lessons of fifteen minutes each,
the pupil knows the sounds of French and can write them from
dictation. No English soands are given as a guide unless they are
exact equivalents. Nor are like sounds compared until they have
become distinct by practice.
After the sounds have been taught, the phonetic text is opened.
The teacher pronounces the sounds, then the word, the class
repeating. After a few words, the class readily pronounces the
word correctly, the separate sounds having been correctly pro-
nounced. The lines read one day are reviewed the next. After
a few pages have been gone over in this way, the teacher assigns
as home work a page of regular text, corresponding to the phone-
tic text already prepared. The pupils are to compare one text
with the other, line by line, pronouncing aloud first from the
phonetic transcription and then from the regular spelling. That
first page of French text has been pronounced with only one bad
mistake-the (y) in mur-on the very first day that the regular
text was opened in class. Extraordinary success is the reward
of students who listen carefully, who practise aloud faithfully
at home and who are prompt in asking for help. The rapid im-
provement in their pronunciation is little short of marvellous.

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Teaching of French Pronunciation by Phonetic Symbols 327

Their pleasure in it is a fresh incentive to diligent practice. On

that all success depends.
Why is it that so often when a teacher pronounces excellently,
half the class may pronounce almost as well as the teacher, a quar-
ter rather badly, and the rest very badly indeed? Why does the
teacher allow such a state of affairs? Does he not notice it? I
can hardly think so. Does he not think pronunciation of im
portance? I can hardly believe it. Is he hopeless about improvin
the pronunciation of those who murder the language? When
a teacher has been phonetically trained and trains his pupils
phonetically he is never hopeless and that submerged quarter of
the class pronounces decently at least. The pupils make mis-
takes, give the wrong nasal sound, but the sounds they utter are
French sounds.
The truth of what I say has been proved over and over again.
Prove it for yourselves anywhere. Listen to the French classes
in any High School. Compare the pronunciation of pupils
whose teachers have done practical work in French phonetics,
with the pronunciation of other pupils whose teachers pronounce
well but do not understand or use phonetic symbols. There is,
there will be, and can be only one answer. However well the
teacher pronounces without a knowledge of phonetics, half or
one-third of her class pronounces badly and has no apparent
hope of improvement for these bad pronunciations occur in second
and third year classes. Such a teacher says that she does not
believe in phonetics and depends on imitation. Imitation?
Of course, we learn to speak by imitation! There is no other way.
Why the French baby before he says a word is rounding his lips
there in his cradle. He is imitating the mouths around him,
And the British baby's little mouth is almost a straight line.
He is imitating what he sees too just a, perfectly as the French
baby. They are Allies you know. Of course we learn to pro-
nounce by imitation. What use could a singer make of his printed
notes if he had never heard them sung ? What use could a violinist
make of his score if he had never heard the notes played?
If notes, the phonetic symbols of music, are useless to the singer,
the pianist, the violinist, unless he has heard them sung or played,
how can a student read from the sounds of French unless he has

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
328 The Modern Language Journal

heard them correctly prounounced? Of course, we teach our

pupils to pronounce by imitation. The question is not whether
we shall work by imitation but whether that imitation shall be
definite, precise, and constant. Those who argue against the use
of phonetic symbols should object to the use of printed music.
Printed notes have exactly the same relation to the voice or to the
musical instrument that the written sounds have to pronunciation.
Shall a music student do definite and useful home work in practis-
ing from printed music the exercises set by the teacher; or shall
he try to imitate the teacher in class and do nothing out of class?
Shall the student of French pronunciation be deprived of the
swiftest, surest, and most interesting method of attaining his
object? Shall we not give him the tools that he can use and use
effectually the moment he can pronounce the sounds?
After five or six lessons the student can practise his pronuncia-
tion at home from the phonetic text. He can and he will-for
this method wins at once the pupils interest and willing effort.
The results of such work are wonderful-the most encouraging
phenomenon in the history of teaching. Many pupils who have
never before heard a French word will read correctly from the
phonetic text at the seventh French lesson. The lazy student
is instantly detected. If he cannot pronounce well in class from
the phonetic text assigned for home work, he has not practised
aloud. The whole class knows that. For phonetic work not
only sharpens the ear of the teacher, but trains the ears of the class
and develops their critical faculty to an extraordinary degree.
They say that foreign language work is impossible for older
students. I have never seen any reason to believe it. You know
Cato learned Greek at eigthy. In almost every class of students of
any age about two per cent. are sound deaf and language dumb.
Those I firmly believe are the people who when older are dull in
language work. Some of the very best phonetic work is done by
men and women of from thirty to forty-five years of age, and older
who have never studied a foreign language, who have never had
musical training.
It is the old story, you know: the dear old doctrine of interest
and desire, the fine capacity, according to Kitchener the American
capacity for lifting yourself very well indeed by your boot straps.
There is no rule ever made by psychologists that such students

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Teaching of French Pronunciation by Phonetic Symbols 329

do not break-to the delight of the teacher and the vast admiration
of the class.
It is not necessary for pupils to spend weeks reading from phone-
tic transcriptions before they see the French text. Reading aloud
from the phonetic text goes hand in hand with reading from the
corresponding French text. They do not confuse sounds and let-
ters. A few words of explanation suffice. In two years' work
with as many as seventy-five beginners each year, I have had only
two cases of confusing the phonetic spelling of a word with its
ordinary spelling. Perhaps the reason for this complete lack of
confusion is my belief that pupils need not write whole sentences
or even whole words in phonetic characters. The phonetic text
is distinctly intended for the eyes, not for the fingers. From it
they learn how to pronounce the regular text. It is useful just
for pronunciation. What is very important for successful work
is constant practice in placing the correct symbol over the hard
part of difficult words. For instance, a list of words containing
nasal sounds is put on the board. The pupils place the correct
symbol over each nasal sound. Then the words are read in concert
and by individuals. Or a number of typewritten questions are
passed and answered rapidly either orally or in writing: What is
the first sound in guide, aura, ainsi: the last in fille, nous, neuf, faim,
monsieur: the second in jeune, tete, cocher, etc. Such a drill is
excellent for review; it can be done with amazing rapidity and is
welcomed by the class-there is no part of the work that arouses
their enthusiastic interest more than this work in sounds. They
are anxious to pronounce well even when their real object in
studying French is a reading knowledge.
It is idle to dispute about the value of phonetics with those who
have never studied the subject practically. "A little learning is a
dangerous thing." A violent opponent of phonetics said to me once,
"I have read book after book on phonetics and I don't believe in
them." " If you have read all the books printed," I answered, "you
have done just one-seventh of the work. The other six-sevenths
consists in listening to someone who can say the sounds correctly.
You must practice until you can say them." He was rather sur-
prised for he was quite proud of his knowledge of phonetics and he
happened to pronounce rather badly.

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
330 The Modern Language Journal

What are the facts? The important and difficult part is to

pronounce excellently. I have often heard it said that native
French teachers do not need phonetics. But their pupils do.
Such teachers can learn in three or four hours how to apply their
good pronunciation to the advantage of their pupils. All that
is necessary is to connect the sounds they say with the symbols
we use and to learn the easiest way to train their pupils to imitate
them. These symbols are not arbitrary symbols: they are not
Egyptian hieroglyphics. They represent the sounds uttered by
one who pronounces well and who perhaps has never heard of the
science of phonetics.
Pupils who have not been trained to pronounce French cor-
rectly blame their first teacher. It is much easier to train a begin-
ner to pronounce with fair correctness than to improve the false
sounds of the pupil who pronounces badly. If we would spare
ourselves the condemnation of our pupils-and would one of us
willingly deserve it?-we must be sure that the sounds of our be-
ginners are correct. There is a charm in teaching first year
French for anyone who loves to teach. It is the everlasting charm
of the beginnings of things and of weakness depending on strength.
For in this matter of pronunciation our pupils are absolutely
dependent on us-on the correctness of our own sounds, on the
carefulness with which we listen to theirs, on the skill with which
we improve them, on our interest in having them pronounce well,
on our hopefulness in the success of our labors. An adequate
preparation, carefulness, skill, interest, hope-what ever resisted
them successfully? Who ever taught well without them?
ANNA WOODS BALLARD.
Teachers College, Columbia University.

This content downloaded from

157.46.91.234 on Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:04:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms