Shadowing Practice: Are we WRONG about most FAMOUS LINGUISTICS experiment?? - Learn English Speaking with Video
בחר מצב תרגול
כל מצב פותח חדר תרגול במסך מלא.
233 משפטים
אם המשפטים קצרים או ארוכים מדי, לחץ על ערוך כדי להתאים אותם.
1
recognize that this is coming from a place of respect and love.
2
If you're a sociolinguist, take a deep breath, maybe sit down before watching the rest.
3
Hi everybody, welcome back to the channel.
4
I mentioned in a recent video
5
that I had what we might call unorthodox views about probably the most famous experiment in linguistics
6
and one of the founding studies in sociolinguistics, and a lot of you were here for it.
7
If you're new to the channel, I'm Dr. Taylor Jones, I've got a PhD in linguistics from the University of Pennsylvania, and on the channel I discuss everything related to language, linguistics, language learning, and culture.
8
If you're into those topics, be sure to subscribe and ring the bell for notifications.
9
This one is going to be spicy, so send it to a linguist you know.
10
I have a dream of my YouTube video being this generation's unpublished letter from Vernot to Chomsky, and if this gets more than 5 ,000 views,
11
then it's already doing better than a top paper in Language or Glossa.
12
Anyway, I studied under Bill LeBeau.
13
I was actually his last advisee, and he came out of semi -retirement to attend my dissertation defense
14
and actually put his signature as a stamp of approval on my dissertation.
15
And if you don't know, Bill Leboe basically invented sociolinguistics.
16
Some things that people might take for granted today about the role of society in shaping language are things
17
that he introduced more or less single -handedly.
18
In the 1960s, he published field -changing, world -altering papers at a blistering pace.
19
In 1963, he published a study of the speech community on Martha's Vineyard
20
that seemed to show that people unconsciously change how they spoke based on their orientation toward or away from their local community.
21
In 1964, he published a study conducted in department stores in New York City
22
that related whether you say fourth floor or fourth floor to the perceived prestige of your job on the micro level.
23
People who all had the same job spoke differently at Saks versus at Macy's or at S.
24
Klein.
25
In 1966, he published The Social Stratification of English in New York City.
26
In 1972, he published Language in the Inner City, which was a book -length treatment of Black English as its own logical linguistic system, its own ethnolect.
27
Along the way, he gave us the idea of the linguistic variable, that is, variations in pronunciation are not random, but might be different instances of the same variable
28
that is socially evaluated and therefore subject to both linguistic pressures like careful speaking
29
and social pressures like being in an interview or talking to your boss.
30
He introduced the concept of social stratification affecting language.
31
He single -handedly came up with the Rapid Anonymous survey where he elicited casual speech by like shopping and shit.
32
So the field of sociolinguistics isn't just indebted to Lebov, it was created, sustained, and more or less fueled by Lebov.
33
And by the time I was in grad school, there was a cult of personality around Bill.
34
There were orthodoxies in how to interpret what he wrote.
35
At conferences, you'd get on an elevator and people would say fourth floor as a kind of nerd shibboleth and then giggle.
36
One conference I went to, the conference shirt just had his face on it.
37
I was asked if I wanted one and I said, as his advisee, I see enough of his mug.
38
I don't need to see it when I look in the mirror.
39
This went over like a lead balloon.
40
So you can see why I might have been more than
41
a little hesitant to criticize the orthodoxy around the department store study.
42
But on the eve of the 60th anniversary of the social stratification of English in New York City, I think now's a good time.
43
And whatever else anybody could say about Bill, he was a staunch defender of academic inquiry, empiricism, and the scientific method.
44
No one person I've ever met in my life has loved to be proven wrong more than Bill Lebov.
45
And I wish I could share these thoughts with him, but I'll share them with you all instead.
46
So today I'm talking about the social stratification of R in New York City in November of 1962, what people think it means, what people have read into it since then,
47
and the ways I think Lebov actually did a completely different study than we, or even he, thought he had done.
48
This is Language Jones.
49
The first thing I have to do is just set the scene.
50
In the 1960s, we already had tons and tons of recordings of people, and linguists had a pretty sophisticated understanding of language variation and change over time.
51
We kind of forget that because of the Chomskyan revolution and because of, well, all of Bill's contributions to our knowledge in the 1960s,
52
but he was very much in conversation with a tradition of dialectology that stretched back at least over a century.
53
Ironically, I have the impression that most of his students
54
and acolytes don't really read what he was influenced by and in conversation with.
55
Meillet and Martinet and Jacobson and Saussure and Venker and the delightfully named Jules Girond.
56
So LeBeauve was really interested in the question of how regular
57
and exceptionless sound change is over time in a given speech community, which can be defined in different ways
58
and he was really interested in the ways
59
that sound change seemed to not be exceptionless and tidy
60
and how an individual speaker may produce a bunch of different variations of the same word or sound.
61
And the 1962 department store study was first
62
and foremost his attempt to build on his introduction of the linguistic variable using a new technique, the rapid anonymous survey.
63
So, a linguistic variable is this idea that if I say I or I in the word night,
64
or if I do or don't pronounce the R's after vowels in words like fourth floor, it might not be random variation, but rather a choice between two equally meaningful variants.
65
Obviously, the choice between for and for doesn't affect the meaning of the word.
66
So, he had the idea that the thing that made the difference meaningful was social, the social interpretation of a linguistic form.
67
This is absolutely revolutionary.
68
The problem is that his thinking is a little more abstract than social evaluation on the individual level, which was not really all that new.
69
After all, we already knew that the upper class and middle class and lower classes often spoke differently,
70
and even already knew that the middle classes spoke in some ways more correctly than the upper class.
71
Hypercorrection.
72
We knew that as early as the 1930s.
73
People often act like that was LeBeau's contribution, but it wasn't.
74
First, he was interested in the linguistic system as a whole.
75
First on Martha's Vineyard, which was relatively homogenous, and later in New York City, which is, well, not.
76
In fact, he goes so far as to write, quote, the language community is prior to the individual in 1968,
77
and that, quote, language is an abstract pattern exterior to the individual.
78
In fact, it can be argued
79
that the individual does not exist as a linguistic entity in
80
the second edition of the social stratification of English in New York City.
81
So he's trying to look at social stratification, which he frankly always did kind of a poor job of precisely defining.
82
And the department store study was based on this idea
83
that people at the same level in a socioeconomic hierarchy might
84
still reflect micro differences in their probabilistic production of a given linguistic variable, whether or not you pronounce R after a vowel.
85
On the aggregate, in a way that's a microcosm of the then changing pattern in New York City, R -lessness had been the prestige form up through the 1940s,
86
with our pronunciation considered a, quote, provincialism.
87
But it started to be replaced by viewing ourfulness as the prestige default form and our dropping as substandard.
88
That shift is ongoing, but there's another element that LeBeau have introduced, covert prestige.
89
You can represent yourself as street smart, tough, savvy, authentically New York, and a whole slew of other things by saying New York
90
and coffee and various other linguistic variables that might be correlated with identity.
91
He went to Sachs, Macy's, and S.
92
Klein, which were fancy, middle class, and so down market it doesn't exist anymore, respectively.
93
And he asked as many employees as possible, without arousing suspicion, where to find something he knew was on the fourth floor.
94
To get them to say, fourth floor.
95
Then he'd be like, what?
96
To get them to speak in a more careful, more consciously monitored tone.
97
Did I mention he also came up with the idea of the sociolinguistic monitor, which is how much careful attention we're paying to our speech.
98
And he found that pronunciation of R varied by department store, despite the fact that everybody had ostensibly the same education, socioeconomic status, and so on.
99
More on this later.
100
So within the same population of people, in theory, you still see an awareness of social factors in the city where the fancier stores had more R in their pronunciations.
101
And this was a change in progress happening across the city, but visible in this teeny tiny microcosm when you have rapid anonymous interactions that are ostensibly below the level of conscious awareness,
102
where people aren't carefully monitoring their speech.
103
That's basically how his department store study is often portrayed, especially in Introduction to Linguistics or Intro to Sociolinguistics classes,
104
as though what he found was that within the same community, individuals made an unconscious calculation
105
and on the aggregate accommodated the perceived prestige of their store's clientele
106
and spontaneous probabilistic interactions that percolate up to an aggregate that mirrors the city as a whole, including a change in the culture of the city that was sort of in progress.
107
Honestly, that's probably a charitable reading because most introductions are just a paragraph
108
that say that he found that social factors affect how individuals choose to speak, like whether or not they say are in fourth floor.
109
Problem is, nearly every part of this is wrong.
110
From our understanding of what he actually did in terms of operationalizing the study, to our idea of what population was even sampled, to, well, the results that he found.
111
And people keep reproducing the study to great fanfare with similar findings and all the same conceptual flaws.
112
I'm not saying that Bill's findings, or even our understanding of them, is necessarily wrong in the sort of platonic realm of the true,
113
but what I'm saying is that we haven't actually ever tested that or demonstrated it empirically.
114
Instead, LeBeauve and everybody else has kind of done a different study entirely.
115
Bear with me here.
116
So there's a lot of problems with the study and with our understanding of it.
117
Recognize that this is coming from a place of respect and love.
118
If you're a sociolinguist, take a deep breath, maybe sit down before watching the rest.
119
The first problem is
120
that pronunciation of R in New York City was not actually below the level of conscious awareness then or now.
121
He even discusses the changes in explicit discussion of R in public schools in a long footnote.
122
On Martha's Vineyard, the pronunciation of the vowel in night was actually arguably below the level of conscious awareness.
123
Not R in New York.
124
It was already by the 1950s what we might now call inregistered, a feature people are aware of and make conscious reference to or use to construct identity.
125
The same can be said of other features in the New York accent like saying Toyty Toyd Street.
126
And in the original department store study, Bill specifically discusses the realization of th as ta, as in Fort Floor.
127
I mean, hell, the Rat Pack was making jokes about it on screen the same year the department store study was published.
128
I think there's something wrong with his throat.
129
I told him that six weeks ago.
130
I'll have a lot more to say about R not being below the level of consciousness in a minute, so buckle up, linguists.
131
A related issue is that his later work on dialects, from The Logic of Non -Centered English to Language in the Inner city inform how we read the department store study,
132
but there's no indication in the text itself, especially the first version of it, that he fully thought of Black English as a separate ethnolect,
133
or Yiddish English, or Puerto Rican English, or whatever else.
134
That all came a decade later.
135
So the full sample of 264 observations doesn't separate out different ethnolects at first, and in the first version of the paper, he's just starting to formulate his ideas about race.
136
He takes one moment and separates out Black informants, we don't really use that word anymore, and notes that at S.
137
Klein, they were 94 % R -less, and at Saks, they were nowhere to be found.
138
There's a lot going on here that I'll get to shortly, but leave me a comment if you can think of a few confounds around race in 1962.
139
Hint, what happened in 1964?
140
What happened in 1974?
141
More importantly, with the rapid anonymous survey, he breaks out the, quote, native New York white saleswomen for a subsample of 141 to really make his point, but two pages later states,
142
and I quote, it is true
143
that we do not know a great deal about the informants that we would like to know, their birthplace, language history, education, participation in New York culture, and so on.
144
So he's just kind of going on vibes.
145
It's also entirely possible to approximate that with, say, the 1960s census and Macy's own data, which they regularly published in glossy magazines,
146
and do a little light Bayesian reasoning to update your priors.
147
And here's the thing, I don't think everybody was a native New Yorker
148
because I have my own biases based on my own experiences moving to New York and working in retail.
149
Not to mention tons of family and extended family who are New Yorkers going back to the 19th century.
150
My experience in retail was that there were tons of transplants.
151
That might have been a difference in 2007 compared to 1962.
152
Thanks Bloomberg with your Disneyfication of New York.
153
But still, it's always been a city with a large population churn
154
and while the state was definitely losing people in the 1960s, I'm not so sure the city as a whole was, although Harlem in particular was, but that's also related to white flight.
155
And of course, that's a result of the ongoing Great Migration.
156
You know, that thing where hundreds of thousands of Black Southerners fled to the north
157
and then were segregated into completely different neighborhoods and school districts? That thing.
158
On top of the fact that not a single coworker of mine for five years in retail was a native New Yorker, the closest were a few Bronx Dominicans, if you know, you know,
159
there was also a huge emphasis on how we spoke to the customers.
160
And that wasn't just my experience.
161
I know people who worked retail in the 1970s and even worked in department stores like Nordstrom.
162
I'm told they were actively seeking actors.
163
They placed a huge emphasis on being, quote, well -spoken, and how well -spoken you were determined which counters and even which floors you worked on.
164
Perfume?
165
Well, let's just say you better not call it perfume and hope to work at that counter.
166
So Labov's finding that the higher floors of Saks, for instance, had more R -full pronunciation.
167
Not only is this likely not a fact of spontaneous speech production below the level of consciousness,
168
but it may have been both actively trained by management and even selected for in hiring.
169
I wrote to the leading department store historian, because that's a real thing and his work is super interesting,
170
and he told me that there was absolutely ongoing coaching on how to talk to the customer as early as the 1930s, and that Macy's might have been up to 42 % transplants.
171
Of course, there's also the confound that there's a massive ramp up in hiring temporary seasonal part -time employees in, oh, I don't know, November.
172
He also informed me that there was a strong assumption that the shopper was female even through the 1960s.
173
So a man with an educated New Jersey accent
174
and a trench coat and a freaking briefcase was in its very nature not something that would trigger unmonitored speech.
175
If anything, it's possible he was assumed to be corporate, doing a spot check of the sales floor.
176
By the way, about the suitcase, he claims repeatedly in the paper that he took impressionistic notes, but it's an open secret in linguistics that he actually used a tape recorder in a suitcase,
177
like a damn John le Carré character.
178
This both lends support to his specific claims about our pronunciation, and also would create IRB problems if the modern IRB had fully existed at that point.
179
But it didn't, and in those days, they were still giving black men syphilis for science.
180
That's because the study was carried out two years before the Civil Rights Act was passed.
181
Is that what you guessed for 1964?
182
So his seeming astonishment
183
that there were no black employees on the sales floor of SACS kind of falls flat in this context.
184
Quoting Michael Lissicke, the department store historian again, by 1962, black employees were not common on the sales floor even in NYC and certainly not at SACS.
185
He goes on to write that black Manhattanites would frequently go to Abraham and Strauss in Brooklyn because, quote, it was worth the trip to feel welcomed.
186
If you've never traveled from Harlem to downtown Brooklyn, let me tell you from experience, it's got to be something very important to make you do that.
187
Now, situating things in the context of the Great Migration, the arfulness of Sachs and the arlessness of S.
188
Klein correlated strongly with the number of Black employees, seems like it could have to do with, well, the stigma of Black speech.
189
Gerard van Herck makes a similar argument in the fantastic paper Fear of a Black Phenology, where he basically demonstrates, through quantitative research,
190
that we cannot rule out the Great Migration as a trigger for the northern city's val shift,
191
as the established white locals differentiated themselves in their speech from the influx of black newcomers.
192
All of this brings me to my main argument.
193
Bill LeBove's department store study is not really about the probabilistic
194
behavior of the individual being affected by larger social forces such that, on the aggregate, positive social orientation towards, say, class aspiration or mobility percolate up,
195
and you get a pattern reflective of the direction of the city as a whole and unconscious passing interactions.
196
Say that five times fast.
197
Say that five times.
198
Can't even do that.
199
Instead, Bill Above inadvertently did a study of employment discrimination.
200
I'll say it again.
201
The department store study, regardless what we want it to be, is actually a study of employment discrimination.
202
It still shows the effect of the social on individual linguistic behavior at the level of the sociolinguistic variable, and it even still shows the value of the rapid anonymous survey,
203
despite the many flaws there and the complete lack of Bayesian inference or whatever, or the lack of statistical power.
204
But the point is not to nitpick those little things.
205
The point is that it is neither individual nor unconscious, and therefore not something percolating up to aggregate behavior, but rather it's more than likely top -down conscious policy.
206
It is structural.
207
It is structural racism, among other things.
208
Literally employment discrimination based on accent.
209
He even talks about how at Sax, the foreign accent in speech was Western European, but at S.
210
Klein, it was Jewish.
211
This is not inconsistent, by the way, with Lebov's overall oeuvre.
212
In fact, dialect perception was a huge part of his later work, and I'm sure my ideas about it are largely shaped by his writings in The Principles of Linguistic Change.
213
But it's a radical departure from how his study was initially received and how it's still taught and discussed.
214
I'm 100 % certain Bill would be interested in pursuing these lines of inquiry
215
and I'm deeply sad this isn't a conversation that I could have had with him.
216
Honestly, I can see in my mind's eye his excited reaction to a new idea
217
or a new way of looking at something he'd been investigating for damn near 60 years.
218
We're coming up on almost a year after his passing and I miss him more than ever.
219
My hope would be for sociolinguists to engage with these criticisms sincerely and honestly, to reproduce his study taking factors like unconscious and conscious bias,
220
things that were not yet a concept in academia when he did the study the first time, into account, along with hiring policy
221
and smart statistical approaches to both having sufficient statistical power
222
and a reasonable Bayesian posterior over the probability that you're even sampling the population you think you're sampling from.
223
We have the benefit of hindsight reading the original study, not just in terms of understanding different ethnolexes,
224
different adjacent systems, but also knowing that Bill was performing his experiment at the height of the Great Migration, the beginning of white flight,
225
and the end of institutional segregation.
226
Although fair housing wasn't until 1974, so pat yourself on the back if you said the Fair Housing Act when I said 1974.
227
Anyway, if you like what I'm doing with the channel, you can support it on YouTube with super thanks or over on Patreon at patreon .com slash languagejones.
228
Please leave a comment.
229
They're great for the algorithm and subscribe if you haven't already.
230
If you want more in -depth linguistic content like this, definitely let me know.
231
And if you're using my publications or YouTube videos to teach in your classroom, please let me know that.
232
I love hearing from all of you.
233
Until next time, happy learning.
הורד אפליקציה
כל מה שאתה צריך כדי לדבר בשטף
הגיית AIציון לכל משפט
תרגול IPAשלוט בכל צליל
אוצר מיליםבנה את מאגר המילים שלך
משחק אוצר מיליםלמד תוך כדי משחק
אותו ערוץ
FOR YOU
המלץ על סרטון
C138
35 משפטים
SEtalk: What a Second Language Does to Your Brain
American AccentIELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C14
149 משפטים
SEM141 - Speech Acts - An Overview
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepCambridge Exam Prep
C17
74 משפטים
The “Nietzsche Thesis”: Why we don’t really care about truth
British AccentIELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C115
76 משפטים
Contemporary Topics 2 Unit 2 Lecture with Powerpoint
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepCambridge Exam Prep
C112
235 משפטים
Linguistic Relativity
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C29
94 משפטים
Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography - Language
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepCambridge Exam Prep
C120
158 משפטים
Introduction to Cognitive Bias: Crash Course Scientific Thinking #1
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepCambridge Exam Prep
C113
35 משפטים
SEtalk: Why We Hate Being Wrong
British AccentIELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C14
69 משפטים
Steven Pinker: Linguistics as a Window to Understanding the Brain | Big Think
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
B21
86 משפטים
What is the topic of the research?: IELTS LISTENING Vol 5 Test 8 Section 3
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C15
201 משפטים
The illusion that broken the internet
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
C11
97 משפטים
Pragmatics: Crash Course Linguistics #6
IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students
אוצר מילים והערות הגייה לשיעור הזה
שיעור הדיבור הזה ברמה C1 מבוסס על הסרטון “Are we WRONG about most FAMOUS LINGUISTICS experiment??”. המילים שחוזרות הכי הרבה: study, linguistic, store. בסרטון הזה יש 233 משפטים ו-3727 מילים לתרגול Shadowing. הדיבור נמשך 19:14. הדובר מדבר מהר, כ-194 מילים בדקה, אז צפו לצלילים מחוברים ומקוצרים. רק 80% מהמילים נמצאות בין 3,000 המילים הנפוצות ביותר באנגלית, כך שאוצר המילים מאתגר.
אוצר מילים מרכזי בסרטון הזה
15 המילים המתקדמות ביותר בסרטון, עם ההגייה והמשמעות שלהן:
| מילה | הגייה | משמעות |
|---|---|---|
| linguistic שם תואר | /lɪŋˈɡwɪstɪk/ | לְשׁוֹנִי |
| pronunciation שם עצם | /pɹəˌnʌn.siˈeɪ.ʃən/ | הֲגִיָּה, בִּטּוּי |
| linguistics שם עצם | /lɪŋˈɡwɪstɪks/ | בַּלְשָׁנוּת |
| sociolinguistics שם עצם | /ˌsoʊsi.oʊlɪŋˈɡwɪstɪks/ | בַּלְשָׁנוּת חֶבְרָתִית |
| informant שם עצם | /ɪnˈfɔɹmənt/ | רֶגֶל |
| linguist שם עצם | /ˈlɪŋɡwɪst/ | בַּלְשָׁן |
| vowel שם עצם | /ˈvaʊ.əl/ | תְּנוּעָה |
| suitcase שם עצם | /ˈsutkeɪs/ | מזוודה \ מִזְוָדָה |
| dissertation שם עצם | /ˌdɪsəˈteɪʃən/ | תזה, דיסרטציה |
| perfume שם עצם | /ˈpɝfjuːm/ | בושם, בֹּשֶׂם |
| microwave שם עצם | /ˈmaɪkɹoʊˌweɪv/ | מִיקְרוֹגַל |
| historian שם עצם | /hɪˈstɔɹi.ən/ | הִיסְטוֹרְיוֹן |
| subscribe פועל | /səbˈskɹaɪb/ | נִמְנָה |
| calculation שם עצם | /ˌkælkjuˈleɪʃn̩/ | חִשׁוּב \ חישוב |
| hierarchy שם עצם | /ˈhaɪ.ə.ɹɑː(ɹ).ki/ | הִיֵרַרכִיָה \ הייררכיה |
Phrasal verbs שתשמעו
| מילה | משמעות |
|---|---|
| sit down פועל | התיישב \ הִתְיַשֵּׁב |
משפטים שכדאי לחזור עליהם
משפטים קצרים ושלמים מהסרטון שאפשר להשתמש בהם בשיחה יומיומית:
- Then he'd be like, what?
- I think there's something wrong with his throat.
- I'm told they were actively seeking actors.
דקדוק בסרטון הזה
המבנים שהדובר משתמש בהם הכי הרבה, עם המילים המדויקות מהסרטון:
| מבנה | בסרטון |
|---|---|
| סביל (Passive voice) be + past participle — הדגש הוא על מה שקורה, לא על מי שעושה את הפעולה | is socially evaluated · isn't just indebted · was asked |
| משפטי זיקה (Relative clauses) who / which + clause — מידע נוסף על אדם או דבר | People who all · City, which was · community, which can |
| הווה מושלם (Present perfect) have/has + past participle — פעולה שקרתה בעבר ועדיין יש לה חשיבות או השפעה עכשיו | I've ever met · have read · have introduced |
הגייה ששווה לשים לב אליה
הדובר משתמש ב-50 קיצורים וצורות מקוצרות, כמו I'm, don't, you're. אמרו אותם בצורה הקצרה, כפי שאתם שומעים אותם.
- הצלילים של “th”: ethnolect /ˈɛθnəlɛkt/, algorithm /ˈælɡəɹɪðm̩/
- הצלילים של “sh” ו-“zh”: pronunciation /pɹəˌnʌn.siˈeɪ.ʃən/, unconscious /ˌʌnˈkɑnʃəs/, variation /ˌvɛəɹiˈeɪʃn̩/, dissertation /ˌdɪsəˈteɪʃən/, orientation /ˌɔː.ɹi.ənˈteɪ.ʃən/
- מילים ארוכות — שימו לב להטעמה: pronunciation /pɹəˌnʌn.siˈeɪ.ʃən/, sociolinguistics /ˌsoʊsi.oʊlɪŋˈɡwɪstɪks/, probabilistic /ˌpɹɑ.bə.bɪˈlɪs.tɪk/, microcosm /ˈmaɪ.kɹəˌkɑz.əm/, ostensibly /ɑˈstɛn.sə.bli/
צלילים שדוברי עברית מתקשים בהם:
- /w/ — שפתיים מעוגלות, לא /v/: linguistic /lɪŋˈɡwɪstɪk/, linguistics /lɪŋˈɡwɪstɪks/, sociolinguistics /ˌsoʊsi.oʊlɪŋˈɡwɪstɪks/, linguist /ˈlɪŋɡwɪst/, sociolinguistic /ˌsəʊsi.əʊlɪŋˈɡwɪstɪk/
- /æ/ — פתוח יותר מה-“אֶ” העברית, לא כמו “a” ב-“cup”: aggregate /ˈæɡ.ɹɪ.ɡət/, transplant /tɹænzˈplænt/, calculation /ˌkælkjuˈleɪʃn̩/, charitable /ˈt͡ʃæɹɪtəbəl/, algorithm /ˈælɡəɹɪðm̩/
- /r/ — הלשון לא נוגעת בשום מקום, לא ה-“ר” הגרונית: pronunciation /pɹəˌnʌn.siˈeɪ.ʃən/, prestige /pɹɛsˈtiːd͡ʒ/, aggregate /ˈæɡ.ɹɪ.ɡət/, variation /ˌvɛəɹiˈeɪʃn̩/, probabilistic /ˌpɹɑ.bə.bɪˈlɪs.tɪk/
איך לתרגל עם הסרטון הזה
- הקשיבו לכל הסרטון פעם אחת בלי לדבר, ורשמו את המילים שאתם לא מכירים.
- התחילו במהירות 0.75×, תרגלו Shadowing משפט אחר משפט, וחזרו למהירות רגילה כשזה מרגיש קל.
- הקליטו את עצמכם והשוו למקור, תוך תשומת לב למילים כמו linguistic, pronunciation, linguistics.
מהי טכניקת השאדואינג?
שאדואינג היא טכניקת למידת שפה מבוססת מדע שפותחה במקור להכשרת מתורגמנים מקצועיים ופופולרית על ידי הפוליגלוט ד"ר אלכסנדר ארגואלס. השיטה פשוטה אך עוצמתית: אתה מקשיב לאודיו באנגלית ילידית וחוזר עליו בקול רם מיד — כמו צל העוקב אחרי הדובר עם עיכוב של 1–2 שניות בלבד. בניגוד להאזנה פסיבית או תרגילי דקדוק, שאדואינג מכריח את המוח והשרירים בפה לעבד ולשחזר דפוסי דיבור אמיתיים בו זמנית. מחקרים מראים שזה משפר משמעותית את דיוק ההגייה, האינטונציה, הקצב, הדיבור המחובר, הבנת השמיעה ושטף הדיבור — מה שהופך אותו לאחת השיטות היעילות ביותר להכנה לIELTS Speaking ולתקשורת באנגלית בעולם האמיתי.