The Relationship between the Parroting and Listening Comprehension Abilities of the Undergraduate EFL Learners

Year 2015, Volume: 36 Issue: 3, 1260 - 1265, 13.05.2015

Moslem Fatollahı , Naser Fallah

Abstract

Abstract. Parroting is a widely applied technique in simultaneous interpreter training programs. This technique mainly involves repetition after an audio track at a premium flow of speech with a time delay of about three seconds. Parroting has been comprehensively discussed in the field of interpretation. Yet, it has been mainly ignored in TEFL. This article aims at exploring the relationship between the parroting and listening comprehension abilities of a group of undergraduate EFL learners. The obtained results revealed the significant relationship between the parroting ability of the subjects and their performance on the listening section of the Paper-Based TOEFL. As a pedagogical implication, parroting might be applied as a useful technique for improving the listening comprehension ability of the EFL students.  

Keywords

Parroting, interpretation, Listening Comprehension, EFL learners

References

• Angelelli, C. V. (2004). Medical Interpreting and Cross-Cultural Communications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Chernov, G. V. (2004). Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
• Christoffels, I. K. & De Groot, A. B. (2004). Components of Simultaneous Interpreting: Comparing Interpreting With Shadowing and Paraphrasing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7 (3), 227–240.
• Corsellis, A. (2008). Public Service Interpreting: The First Steps. Hampshire: Palgrave Textbooks in Translating and Interpreting.
• Fatemi, M., Salamian, M. & Khakzadan, R. (2013). The Effect of Emailing Vocabulary on Listening Comprehension Ability. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on Teaching, Literature and Translation, (pp. 26-43). Retrieved from: http://www.civilica.com/EnPaper-- TELT01_246.html.
• Hale, S. B. (2004). The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
• Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd Edition. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.
• Kraushaar, B., & Lambert, S. (1987). Parroting Proficiency According to Ear of Input and Type of Bilingualism. Bulletin of the Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics, 9(1), pp. 17- 31.
• Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding Language Teaching: from Method to Post- Method. London: Laurence Erlbaum.
• Marslen-Wilson, W. (1973). Linguistic Structure and Speech Shadowing at Very Short Latencies. Nature 244 (5417): 522–523.
• Monacelli, C. (2009). Self-Preservation in Simultaneous Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
• Pearl, L. (2014). Evaluating Learning Strategy Components: Being Fair. Language, 90(3), 107-114.
• Pochhaker, F. (2004). Introducing Interpreting Studies. London & New York: Routledge.
• Salama-Carr, M. (2007). Translating and Interpreting Conflict. Amsterdam & New York: Approaches to Translation Studies.
• Tonelli, L. & Ricardi, A. (1995). Speech Errors, Shadowing and Simultaneous Interpretation. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 6, 67-74.
• Valero-Garces, C. & Martin, A. (2008). Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.