Wow! This channel is so underrated. Although I studied rhythm, pitch,stress and all about this stuff years ago, seeing this with a male teacher voice helps alot in shadowing and in getting a more solid sense of such stuff because I'm a male and most English teachers out there on UA-cam are female so when I imitate them I would found myself going even higher in pitch and with a sharper voice and I wouldn't feel very comfortable but now listening to a male voice is an advantage to me in terms of voice range and such 😅 Thank you for the great channel ❤️
This is my first time coming upon this video. Such eye-opening information! Best believe I am going to watch your previously posted videos! You have earned yourself a new subscriber. I am eager to see you post more stuff.
@@NativeEnglishHacks never give up ! Keep going on that path because I am sure one mellion percent you are going to get all what you dream to. The most important thing is if any hater says Hacks it is imposssssible to get 1M follower, you shoupd say it is possible, keep stimulating yourself up on this path and never listen to naysayers. Everything for the first time looks bapstim by fire but you will get all what you are enthusiastic to. Respect 🙏🙏🙏🙏🐅🐅🐅🐅
😊 I don't know if I'll reach 1M, but I'm not worried about it. Success is already guaranteed as long as I keep showing up and keep providing value. The only variable is time ☺
I can tell that you are not a Northeasterner speaking in a casual manner. We pronounce the first t in “important” as a glottal stop. Same deal with “mountain” and “mitten”.
Okay...? So do I, though you're correct that I'm not a Northeasterner. I'm a Westerner. Because I'm an English teacher and I'm aware that I'm talking to English learners in these videos, I try to speak more or less normally for the benefit of more realistic language exposure, but I tend to enunciate a bit more than I normally would talking to a native (which most teachers tend to do), often without realizing it. I'm not sure the purpose of your comment. What does it matter if I'm not a Northeasterner?
@@NativeEnglishHacks My San Francisco-native coworker commented on the glottal stop that I, a New England native, and my other coworker, a New Jersey native, use. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the glottal stop is characteristic of Northeastern speech.
Ah, I see. No, the glottal stop is a characteristic of General American as a whole. Not sure why your coworker would notice anything strange. It could be some regional difference. I'm aware that the San Francisco area has some things going on and it's often referred to as a "Bay accent", so it's most likely that the regional differences this person has is the source.
@@NativeEnglishHacks I hadn’t considered that the absence of the glottal stop is a characteristic of the Bay Area accent, but perhaps it is. I note that American UA-camr Luke Ranieri avoids the glottal stop in words like “Latin”. He stated that he has modified his accent to be more comprehensible to non-native English speakers.
Nice video! But talking about isochrony? Come on, it was debunked at least five decades ago, and yet there are still people talking about "stress-timed" or "syllable-timed" languages. It's a kind of "flat-earth" of linguistics.
Is this a serious comment? Stress and syllable timing are very much real in my own experience, both exploring languages and teaching English. In fact, it's one of the biggest (yet sometimes most subtle) things that I have to help intermediate learners correct.
@@NativeEnglishHacks It might be usefull sometimes as a conception for learning, like "imagine that your hand is a rubber band" in boxing, but it's wrong in its core. In any more or less modern (at least 20 years) phonetics book you'll find that that concetpion (dated by 1945 irc) just doesn't correlate with reality. Which is understandable since now we have sound-recording device like in every home ) You can find it in such a classical work, for example, as "A course of Phonetics" by Ladefoged, Johnson. If you interested in more specific details you could look up for works of Antonio Bertran, where he proves that that classification falls apart once you start really mesure your data instead of relying on your 'intuition'. Actually even Peter Roach made the similar work in 80s. I worngly assumed that you're familiar with linguistics and phonetics enough to know that isochrony died like 40-50 years ago. On the other hand, they say you always learn something new in this fast changing world.
Not a rabbit hole I care to go down for lack of time and energy, but it does seem we're not quite looking at things the same. The standard definition of stress-timing is that there's a roughly equal interval between stressed syllables. This is something that makes no sense and that I've never agreed with. I see no need for, nor existence of, an equal interval. What I do know for a fact is that, although it seems to be more relative than absolute, there is a difference in the rhythmic flow and timing between different kinds of languages. Perhaps it's something that's not objectively standing in it's own right and is tied up in other aspects of the language, but all you have to do is listen very closely to Japanese vs English or Spanish vs English and you can tell there's something going on that, if nothing else, is lending to the perceived "illusion" of such a rhythmic difference. Call it whatever you will. I also know for a fact that when I work with students to create a bigger difference in length, loudness, and pitch between stressed and unstressed syllables by making sure that not only are stressed syllables louder, longer, and generally higher in pitch, but that the unstressed syllables are actually shorter, quiter, and generally lower in pitch relative to the stressed syllables (which I talked about in another lesson) instead of being stuck in a middle zone, they immediately start sounding better. And who are the learners that tend to be stuck in that middle zone with unstressed syllables? Speakers of languages labeled as syllable-timed. I see this issue far less with Russian and German speakers than Spanish speakers, for example, which indicates to me that there is something going on here passed mere perceptual illusion. Regardless, I'm much more concerned with seeing results than being technically accurate (which is sometimes even an impediment to the result), and I'll gladly be academically wrong about something if the practical end result is correct. Besides, if it's something that's so thoroughly debunked as to be equated with flat earth theory, why are there plenty of reputable sources including the British Council talking about it as fact?
@@NativeEnglishHacks because the British Council is not a linguist? There are a differences in rhythm of different languages - no doubts, but the isochrony theory as it was stated by Pike doesn't work. Once again, it's not just my words, there was studies showing, for example, that neither English nor Russian are stress timed languages, Spanish is not syllable stressed etc. In general that dichotomy just doesn't work. Of course, you can deny works of experts and specialists if you wish, but don't be amused or offended then that I compare you to a flat-earthers. More serious researches are based on more scientific (ie measurable and proovable) basis. For example, measuring nPVI/rPVI of different langages. They have pretty looking charts that are easy to interpret by the way. If you look at those you'll probably find them intersting... I think. Moreover you can do it yourself, like taking examples of speech in different languages, placing morphemes/syllables/moras/etc boundaries, calculating the necessary data. It's not a rocket science. Man, I'm not criticizing you or something. If anything I like your videos as some of the most detailed and thoroughful explanations on UA-cam. But sticking to a pseudo-science that was (not once, not twice) proven to be wrong is just... doesn't seem right. It's time to let it go. Just like the aether theory, or caloric theory it had its place in the history but it's not anymore.
Keep meaning to reply back to this. Not that I agree, but I'd like to state that, regardless, half truths and falsehoods can be just as useful as facts. All I care about are the results. If I tell a Spanish speaker to adjust to more of a "stress-timed" framework, they usually improve. Interestingly, Russians don't see as much improvement when I tell them to do the same. If the concept helps learners reach their goals, I could care less if it's been disproven.
Wow! This channel is so underrated. Although I studied rhythm, pitch,stress and all about this stuff years ago, seeing this with a male teacher voice helps alot in shadowing and in getting a more solid sense of such stuff because I'm a male and most English teachers out there on UA-cam are female so when I imitate them I would found myself going even higher in pitch and with a sharper voice and I wouldn't feel very comfortable but now listening to a male voice is an advantage to me in terms of voice range and such 😅
Thank you for the great channel ❤️
Thank you for all your hard work on this!
❤️Great tips! The best channel ever!❤️
This is my first time coming upon this video. Such eye-opening information! Best believe I am going to watch your previously posted videos! You have earned yourself a new subscriber. I am eager to see you post more stuff.
So good! Thank you so much!
OMG. That explanation is impressive. Thank YOU!
Thanks a bunch.
impressive content!
This is helpful .
Awesome video. I have learned a lot from your channel. Thanks a lot.
Though your channel has quality content but fewer viewers.
Thanks ☺ If the content provides value, the viewers will come. It's just a matter of time
... excellent ... !!!
Thanks Josh... you are really awesome.... amazing explanation of the rhythm timing and its importance in English.👍👍🙏🙏
I just wonder how you just got 1k how ?? What the fuck. You deserve 1M followers
Thanks, I appreciate that ☺ I get that a lot, so it'll probably come in time 😎
@@NativeEnglishHacks i wish u the best of luck and get mellion followers in a short time. Respect from Moroccan university Eng student
@@abdelilahsah1669 Thanks! And awesome! Good luck with your learning ☺
@@NativeEnglishHacks never give up ! Keep going on that path because I am sure one mellion percent you are going to get all what you dream to. The most important thing is if any hater says Hacks it is imposssssible to get 1M follower, you shoupd say it is possible, keep stimulating yourself up on this path and never listen to naysayers. Everything for the first time looks bapstim by fire but you will get all what you are enthusiastic to. Respect 🙏🙏🙏🙏🐅🐅🐅🐅
😊 I don't know if I'll reach 1M, but I'm not worried about it. Success is already guaranteed as long as I keep showing up and keep providing value. The only variable is time ☺
I can tell that you are not a Northeasterner speaking in a casual manner. We pronounce the first t in “important” as a glottal stop. Same deal with “mountain” and “mitten”.
Okay...? So do I, though you're correct that I'm not a Northeasterner. I'm a Westerner. Because I'm an English teacher and I'm aware that I'm talking to English learners in these videos, I try to speak more or less normally for the benefit of more realistic language exposure, but I tend to enunciate a bit more than I normally would talking to a native (which most teachers tend to do), often without realizing it. I'm not sure the purpose of your comment. What does it matter if I'm not a Northeasterner?
@@NativeEnglishHacks My San Francisco-native coworker commented on the glottal stop that I, a New England native, and my other coworker, a New Jersey native, use. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the glottal stop is characteristic of Northeastern speech.
Ah, I see. No, the glottal stop is a characteristic of General American as a whole. Not sure why your coworker would notice anything strange. It could be some regional difference. I'm aware that the San Francisco area has some things going on and it's often referred to as a "Bay accent", so it's most likely that the regional differences this person has is the source.
@@NativeEnglishHacks I hadn’t considered that the absence of the glottal stop is a characteristic of the Bay Area accent, but perhaps it is. I note that American UA-camr Luke Ranieri avoids the glottal stop in words like “Latin”. He stated that he has modified his accent to be more comprehensible to non-native English speakers.
Teacher, when you esplain the rythem, And stressI I can hear no difference on you tone of voice of voice in same sentence
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you point out specific examples using timestamps?
Nice video! But talking about isochrony? Come on, it was debunked at least five decades ago, and yet there are still people talking about "stress-timed" or "syllable-timed" languages. It's a kind of "flat-earth" of linguistics.
Is this a serious comment? Stress and syllable timing are very much real in my own experience, both exploring languages and teaching English. In fact, it's one of the biggest (yet sometimes most subtle) things that I have to help intermediate learners correct.
@@NativeEnglishHacks It might be usefull sometimes as a conception for learning, like "imagine that your hand is a rubber band" in boxing, but it's wrong in its core.
In any more or less modern (at least 20 years) phonetics book you'll find that that concetpion (dated by 1945 irc) just doesn't correlate with reality. Which is understandable since now we have sound-recording device like in every home )
You can find it in such a classical work, for example, as "A course of Phonetics" by Ladefoged, Johnson. If you interested in more specific details you could look up for works of Antonio Bertran, where he proves that that classification falls apart once you start really mesure your data instead of relying on your 'intuition'. Actually even Peter Roach made the similar work in 80s.
I worngly assumed that you're familiar with linguistics and phonetics enough to know that isochrony died like 40-50 years ago. On the other hand, they say you always learn something new in this fast changing world.
Not a rabbit hole I care to go down for lack of time and energy, but it does seem we're not quite looking at things the same. The standard definition of stress-timing is that there's a roughly equal interval between stressed syllables. This is something that makes no sense and that I've never agreed with. I see no need for, nor existence of, an equal interval.
What I do know for a fact is that, although it seems to be more relative than absolute, there is a difference in the rhythmic flow and timing between different kinds of languages. Perhaps it's something that's not objectively standing in it's own right and is tied up in other aspects of the language, but all you have to do is listen very closely to Japanese vs English or Spanish vs English and you can tell there's something going on that, if nothing else, is lending to the perceived "illusion" of such a rhythmic difference. Call it whatever you will.
I also know for a fact that when I work with students to create a bigger difference in length, loudness, and pitch between stressed and unstressed syllables by making sure that not only are stressed syllables louder, longer, and generally higher in pitch, but that the unstressed syllables are actually shorter, quiter, and generally lower in pitch relative to the stressed syllables (which I talked about in another lesson) instead of being stuck in a middle zone, they immediately start sounding better. And who are the learners that tend to be stuck in that middle zone with unstressed syllables? Speakers of languages labeled as syllable-timed. I see this issue far less with Russian and German speakers than Spanish speakers, for example, which indicates to me that there is something going on here passed mere perceptual illusion. Regardless, I'm much more concerned with seeing results than being technically accurate (which is sometimes even an impediment to the result), and I'll gladly be academically wrong about something if the practical end result is correct.
Besides, if it's something that's so thoroughly debunked as to be equated with flat earth theory, why are there plenty of reputable sources including the British Council talking about it as fact?
@@NativeEnglishHacks because the British Council is not a linguist?
There are a differences in rhythm of different languages - no doubts, but the isochrony theory as it was stated by Pike doesn't work. Once again, it's not just my words, there was studies showing, for example, that neither English nor Russian are stress timed languages, Spanish is not syllable stressed etc. In general that dichotomy just doesn't work. Of course, you can deny works of experts and specialists if you wish, but don't be amused or offended then that I compare you to a flat-earthers.
More serious researches are based on more scientific (ie measurable and proovable) basis. For example, measuring nPVI/rPVI of different langages. They have pretty looking charts that are easy to interpret by the way. If you look at those you'll probably find them intersting... I think. Moreover you can do it yourself, like taking examples of speech in different languages, placing morphemes/syllables/moras/etc boundaries, calculating the necessary data. It's not a rocket science.
Man, I'm not criticizing you or something. If anything I like your videos as some of the most detailed and thoroughful explanations on UA-cam. But sticking to a pseudo-science that was (not once, not twice) proven to be wrong is just... doesn't seem right. It's time to let it go. Just like the aether theory, or caloric theory it had its place in the history but it's not anymore.
Keep meaning to reply back to this.
Not that I agree, but I'd like to state that, regardless, half truths and falsehoods can be just as useful as facts. All I care about are the results. If I tell a Spanish speaker to adjust to more of a "stress-timed" framework, they usually improve. Interestingly, Russians don't see as much improvement when I tell them to do the same. If the concept helps learners reach their goals, I could care less if it's been disproven.