A LITERATURE REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON PRONUNCIATION INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES IN CHINESE AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE (CFL) STUDIES

Since the study of learning Chinese as a Foreign Language (CFL) is a relatively new direction in the research field of second language acquisition (SLA), the relevant literature is relatively limited, especially as to the teaching of pronunciation. Most studies are written in Chinese and as such hardly accessible to foreign researchers. The purpose of this review – building on both Chinese and English sources - is to develop an overview of CFL studies focusing on:
(1) an inventory of instructional Chinese pronunciation strategies;
(2) an overview of Chinese pronunciation models and
(3) how both are interlinked.

The literature review is based on the five-stage framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley. Crucial definitions and key words are generated to get the literature related to pronunciation learning and teaching, pronunciation strategies within higher education from multilingual CFL perspectives. Using the key search items, 820 articles were initially selected. Based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, in total 50 Chinese language articles and 12 English articles could be included in the subsequent analysis process. Full text versions of those articles could be obtained. The review reveals that only two studies reported on results to develop Chinese pronunciation models for pronunciation instructions. The results point further at four main Chinese pronunciation aspects being discussed in studies and related instructions are provided when dealing with specific teaching contexts. Overall, the review results reveal a significant number of research gaps in the CFL literature, most notably in relation to Chinese pronunciation models and instructional pronunciation strategies (IPS). Nearly 90% of the articles about instructional pronunciation strategies are based on comparative pronunciation error analysis and qualitative studies, and as such remain limited in scope. Hardly any empirical base was adopted indemnifying CFL teachers’ instructional strategies. Most studies are descriptive. These focus on personal teaching experiences or eclectic summaries of earlier research and do not add to a comprehensive picture that might guide effective pronunciation instruction and result in related language acquisition. Further analysis shows that specific teaching approaches, such as task-based approach, game teaching, were applied by CFL teachers to instruct CFL learners’ pronunciation. Drill and “tongue twister” are the two most common manners for pronunciation practicing. In the articles, we find a large number of qualitative feedbacks that reflect a positive picture of how instructional pronunciation strategies improve the effectiveness of students’ pronunciation learning. Other studies stress the positive impact on both teachers’ and learners’ motivation and how this is linked to teachers becoming better instructional problem solvers and students who develop better pronunciation. However, the review findings also help uncovering limitations in the established teaching approaches and instructional materials used for decades. A key finding is that no studies focus on IPS in multilingual CFL contexts. Therefore, understanding the multilingual IPS in CFL studies is necessary and influential. The findings of the literature review help pushing an agenda for future CFL research that center on a more developed inventory of instructional strategies in CFL pronunciation, especially taking into account multilingual CFL contexts.