Thanks for chasing this up! And thanks to Dogen also for being a good sport and replying in so much detail to both of us.
I agree. But in my research (see below) I found that most of the resistance to teaching this comes from teachers. Students (in formal learning environments) will study whatever they are given (although they will of course prefer certain topics). So efforts like this should really target teachers, to convince them that it is important and relevant, and to provide them with tools and methodologies to do so effectively.
Currently, there are some tools out there, but there is no clearly established curriculum. Most teachers prefer to focus on the things that they consider to be essential for comprehension, and the teachers that are interested in teaching it tend to lack the tools. The fact that normally native speakers have the worst intuitions about their own languages doesn’t help when those teachers are native.
I sympathise with this argument. Specially if making videos on Youtube, it is hard to tailor what you say for all audiences. But I feel that we do a disservice to our audience when we use language that is not only simplified, but conflicts with the more accurate terminology.
Ideally, beginners will eventually become proficient, and will learn the differences between say fundamental frequency and pitch, or between mora and syllable. So it would be better if we make materials that, while using a simplified vocabulary, can later be inflated and still make sense.
I see now what he was aiming at by making a distinction between “prominent accent” and “pitch change”, but that distinction stops being informative as soon as you learn why pitch changes are important, or what an accent is, or what is called “prominence” (spoiler alert: pitch changes are important because they are perceptually salient and make certain parts of the speech prominent, which can mark those parts as accented).
He could have said “All accent patterns in Tokyo Japanese change pitch at the beginning, but unlike heiban, the other patterns are accented because they also have a pitch fall” (or something like this). I don’t think we need to have a trade off between precision and a simplified language.
Yeah, we agree there. Just to clarify: it is heiban that is not a rising tone.
I did my PhD in Speech and Hearing Sciences, and my dissertation was on the perception of Japanese and Spanish lexical prominence. I’m not sure if that qualifies as a “day-job”, but until last year that’s what I did 150% of the time. Nowadays, I’ve moved to slightly different fields.