1. Word-level stress patterns in the academic word
list
John Murphy*, Magdi Kandil
Department of Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Language, PO Box 4099,
Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30302-3082, USA
Received 12 March 2003; received in revised form 24 June 2003; accepted 29 June 2003
Abstract
This paper addresses teachers and researchers of English as a second or foreign language
who are interested in speech intelligibility training and/or vocabulary acquisition. The study
reports a stress-pattern analysis of the Academic Word List (AWL) as made available by
Coxhead [TESOL Quarterly 34 (2000) 213]. To examine the AWL in a new way, we identified
patterns of word-level stress in the AWL’s 525 headwords and 2454 sublist items, or 2979
polysyllabic academic words in all. The report’s final table rank orders 39 patterns of word-
level stress. We learned that the first 14 patterns encompass over 90% of the AWL’s lexical
items, while the remaining 25 patterns are low in frequency of occurrence. Results of our
analysis may be coupled with information on word-level stress already available in the litera-
ture (e.g., systematic shifts in word-level stress—as well as corresponding changes in vowel
quality—due to such phenomena as suffixation, derivational morphology, and other aspects
of rule-based pedagogy). The paper’s concluding section highlights the importance of intro-
ducing English for Academic Purposes (EAP) learners to such pattern phenomena in coordi-
nation with the word stress frequency data reported in the study.
# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Word-level stress patterns; Academic word list; Vocabulary; Pronunciation
Being easily understood when we speak is important to all second language
learners. Speech intelligibility, however, may be especially important and challenging
for nonnative English speaking (NNES) teachers, scholars, graduate students, and
System 32 (2004) 61–74
www.elsevier.com/locate/system
0346-251X/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2003.06.001
* Corresponding author. Present address: 3621 Castaway Court, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. Tel.: +1-
770-270-9028; fax: +1-404-651-3652.
E-mail addresses: jmmurphy@gsu.edu (J. Murphy), magdykan@yahoo.com (M. Kandil).

2. undergraduate students as they learn to use the vocabulary required for academic
communication. While longer stretches of speech and related dimensions of phon-
ology have been emphasized in recent studies (Pickering, 2001; Wennerstrom, 1998),
NNES scholars and students also need to be knowledgeable about word-level
pronunciation both of general academic vocabulary and of the technical words
characteristic of specialized fields of study. Speech-intelligibility is of particular
concern to such English language learners. Though accepted instructional practice
in recent years has been to focus on longer stretches of discourse (Levis, 1999;
Morley, 1994), we worked at the word-level for purposes of this report in response
to a number of specialists who suggest that gaining requisite control of word-stress
patterns is an integral part of the experience of learning—and of learning to use—a
new word. In the next section, we briefly review five areas of the literature that
support our interest in patterns of word-level stress for purposes of English language
teaching and learning. These areas suggest connections between more confident use
of word-level stress for spoken communication and: (1) expanding one’s active
vocabulary, (2) fine-tuning use of broader phonological features, (3) synchronizing
physical correlates of body language, (4) enhancing vowel quality usage, and (5)
learning to use orthographic clues to predict the pronunciation of less familiar
words.
1. Literature review
The phenomenon of word-level stress is one of the more prominent topics featured
in English as a second language (ESL) speech-intelligibility training (Celce-Murcia
et al., 1996). Since polysyllabic words permeate the English lexical system, ESL
learners need to be familiar with—and to be able to work with—word-level stress if
their speech is to be comprehensible to proficient English speakers (Murphy, in
press). Patterns of word-level stress provide essential signals to English language
listeners as they attempt to make sense of incoming messages (Aitchison, 1994;
Cutler et al., 1997). Nation’s (2001) definition of what it means for ESL learners to
know a word includes three facets: The word’s form (spoken, written, and word
parts), meaning, and use. All three facets are essential to developing and expanding
one’s vocabulary knowledge. An essential dimension of knowing a word’s spoken
form is learning to use its pattern of word-level stress. Adding further support to
Nation’s position, contemporary psycholinguists agree that one of the ways in which
language users store words in the mind is connected with stress patterning (Levelt,
1993). Both Aitchison’s (1994) model of vocabulary knowledge and Levelt’s (1993)
model of speaking competence propose that learners who are able to recognize and
use accurately the stress pattern of a new word are more likely to remember and use
the word in extemporaneous speech.
An advantage for ESL speakers with adequate control of word-level stress is that
similar phenomena are paralleled at phrase, sentence, and even broader discourse
levels. Familiarity with the phenomena of word-stress provides an essential basis for
understanding how stress functions at broader levels since patterns of ‘‘word and
62 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

3. sentence stress combine to create the rhythm of an English utterance’’ (Celce-Murcia
et al., 1996, p. 152). To function as intelligible speakers in English, ESL learners
need adequate control over such phonological features. Along with intonation,
English language listeners depend upon stress and rhythm patterns as navigational
guides to support effective listening (Gilbert, 1994). Acton (2001) proposes addi-
tional functions of stress in spoken English by pointing out that physical correlates
of body language are closely tied to word-, phrase-, and sentence-level stress phe-
nomena. As discussed below, Acton is not alone in highlighting connections between
body language and rhythmic dimensions of spoken communication.
Proficient English speakers link body gestures to rhythmic features of their speech.
That is, English speakers use much more than what we conventionally think of as
the organs of speech (e.g., tongue, mouth, vocal cords) when communicating with
others (McNeill, 1992). Rather, we use our whole bodies including hand movements,
head nods, shifts in body positionings, eye contact, the tapping of fingers, toes, feet,
and so forth. Wylie (1978) comments as follows:
Communication [in English] is really a dance of the whole body and the sounds
we produce [while speaking] are simply the music that accompanies the rest of
the communication . . . when I talk with my voice the noises I am making fit in
with the motions I am giving my hands, fit in with the steps I take with my feet.
My whole body is in synchrony’’ (pp. 51, 57).
Through frame-by-frame analysis of film recordings of naturally occurring con-
versations, Byers (1976) illustrates that interpersonal communication in English
includes a process of attaining, or trying to attain, synchrony with others via physi-
cal correlates of body language. Thus, attention to word-level stress may serve as a
starting point for developing ESL learner awareness of speech–body connections
that eventually may be expanded to include attention to phrase, sentence, and dis-
course levels.
Acton (2001) describes ESL pedagogy informed by this perspective. At initial
stages in the classroom, the teacher familiarizes learners with a video sample of
recorded English speech. Along with watching the video, a written transcript is
provided. For example, learners might watch a 10 min segment of a popular English
language talk show (e.g., Oprah, Larry King, or Dr. Phil). After viewing the video
several times, students begin to analyze the written version. Their analysis includes
parsing the transcript ‘‘. . . into rhythm groups at constituent boundaries. The major
constituents are then tied into, or associated with, the upper-body rhythms and
facial expressions . . .’’ (Acton, 1984, p. 79). At culminating stages, students are
asked to speak along with the show’s participants [i.e., simultaneously] while using
speech synchronized gestures. ‘‘. . . Students begin to move their bodies in accor-
dance with the rhythm groups [as depicted in the recording]. The specific non-verbal
movements focused on include . . . gestures that may accompany certain intonation
contours (e.g., head motions, body and hand movements) . . .’’ (p. 79). Minimally,
students learn to move their upper bodies in ‘‘a gentle, unobtrusive rocking motion,
coordinating that movement with sentence stress and contrastive stress’’ (p. 79).
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 63

4. Speech intelligibility practice of this kind is intriguing since it integrates attention to
rhythms of word, phrase, and broader discourse samples with illustrations of body
language modeled by native English speakers.
Along with ties to physical gestures, there are important connections between the
operation of word-level stress and other phonological features of English such as
vowel quality, pitch, rhythm, and intonation. Table 1 illustrates that at word-level,
stress locations and tonic accents tend to be realized as full vowels while the quality
of unstressed vowels tends to reduce to an indistinct ‘‘schwa’’ sound. Also, Dick-
erson (1994) advances the idea that knowledge of stress patterns of polysyllabic
words not only assists ESL learners in becoming more confident spellers in English
but may contribute to empowering them to predict target pronunciations from the
orthographic forms of unfamiliar words (p. 17). Further, familiarity with word-level
stress may be exploited in ESL classrooms by making connections to information on
derivational morphology and parts of speech (e.g., verb vs. adjective forms of words
such as appropriate, graduate, moderate). These proposals suggest that along with
attention to longer stretches of speech and related dimensions of English language
phonology, attention to word-level stress plays an essential role when it comes to the
teaching of speech-intelligibility.
2. Why focus on the AWL?
ESL students can be overwhelmed, at times, by the many features of the English
sound system they face as second language learners. To provide information that
teachers can use to address this issue, we decided to identify patterns of word-level
stress, and their frequency of occurrence, in the Academic Word List (AWL) as
provided by Coxhead (2000). In wide use at the present time, the AWL is the first
listing of academic words that was developed through techniques of principled cor-
pus analysis. Coxhead generated the AWL by examining electronic texts with the
support of computer technologies. The AWL was compiled from ‘‘. . . a corpus of
3.5 million running words of written academic texts by examining the range and
frequency of words outside the first 2,000 most frequently occurring words of
English . .,’’ (Coxhead, 2000, 213). Readily available on the Internet (http://
www.vuw.ac.nz/lals/div1/awl/), the AWL presents words and word families that
occur with high frequency across academic content areas such as the Arts, Com-
merce, Law, and Science. The AWL features 570 headwords (stem nouns and verb
Table 1
The combination of stress, intonation, and vowel reduction in a number of words
Explain Explanation Exploit Exploitation
Tonic accent À+ ÀÀ+À À+ ÀÀ+À
Stress À+ +À+À À+ +À+À
Full vowel À+ +À+À À+ +++À
Adapted from Ladefoged (2001), p. 97.
64 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

5. forms) of major word families. These macro-level lexical items are clustered into 10
sublists of 60 word families each (with the exception of sublist 10 which contains 30
word families) based on the range, frequency, and uniformity of frequency in the
corpus Coxhead examined. While the AWL was generated for purposes of EAP
vocabulary and reading instruction, after examining Coxhead’s work we realized
that it could also serve as a useful resource for teachers who prepare EAP learners as
more competent speakers and listeners in academic settings.
To gain a clearer picture of how to sequence the introduction of word-stress pat-
terns in EAP courses, we examined the frequency of occurrence of word-level stress
patterns within the full AWL inventory. Our purpose was to provide information to
enhance an important dimension of EAP speech-intelligibility curriculum planning
for which few supports are available to date. By focusing on the AWL we identified
stress patterns for lexical items that intermediate to advanced level EAP learners
would recognize as being relevant to their continuing development as intelligible
English speakers. Equipped with information on the frequency of occurrence of
stress patterns in the AWL, teachers can also build learner awareness of the function
of related phenomena, such as suffixation, in academic words. For many English
words, ‘‘a change of suffix not only brings about a shift in stress but also a change in
the accompanying vowel reduction or neutralization in the unstressed syllable’’
(Celce-Murcia et al., 1996, p. 137). Table 2 illustrates some of the predictable ways
in which suffixation alters word-level stress patterns in English. In the conclusion
section to this report, we emphasize the importance of introducing EAP learners to
such predictable patterns in conjunction with the frequency data reported in the
study.
3. Method
We examined patterns of word-stress as revealed in the 525 polysyllabic head-
words featured in the AWL and the additional 2454 polysyllabic words included in
the AWL sublists, or 2979 lexical items in all. We excluded from our analysis the 64
monosyllabic words that appear in the AWL inventories because our focus was
word-level stress of polysyllabic words. The number of syllables of individual AWL
items ranges from two syllables, culture, to seven syllables, unidentifiable. When
analyzing these 2979 items, we classified each word according to total number of
syllables, location of the word’s primary stressed syllable, and location of the word’s
secondary stressed syllable(s) (if any). We recognized that many polysyllabic words
in English have more than one secondary stressed syllable. In North American
English (NAE), for example, the word revolutionary is a six-syllable word with pri-
mary stress on its third syllable and secondary stresses on both its first and fifth
syllables. The reference tool we used to identify and classify word-stress patterns was
the Internet-based ‘Dictionary.com’ [http://dictionary.com]. This contemporary tool
was developed in Los Angeles by North American lexicographers (the Lexico Pub-
lishing Group) and reflects a preference for NAE patterns of pronunciation. When
doubts arose as to preferred pronunciations, we also consulted the American
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 65

6. Heritage Dictionary (Houghton Mifflin, 2000). From these reference materials, we
classified AWL items according to the first pronunciation listed by our sources’
pronunciation keys. For the small number of two-syllable words that may vary in
syntactic function as either nouns or verbs depending upon location of word-level
stress (e.g., conduct, survey, progress), we divided this set of thirty words (18 head-
words, 12 sublist words) in half and classified half of them as nouns and the other
half as verbs.
Preliminary analysis indicated that across the entire AWL inventory the most
frequent pattern of word-level stress coincides with words of three syllables that
carry primary stress on the second syllable (e.g., assessment, consistent, specifics). We
began to refer to this highest frequency pattern as the basic ‘3-2’ pattern. That is, the
initial number ‘30
indicates that all of these words have three syllables; the number
‘2’ following the hyphen signals that primary stress falls on the words’ second syl-
lables. Once we had determined how many syllables are in a target word and loca-
tion of its primary stressed syllable, we used our numeric system as short hand for
categorizing individual words. While the word assessment is classified as a 3-2 word,
we characterize a word such as theoretical as a 5-3-1 word. The inclusion of a third
digit in the word’s numeric description signals both (a) the presence and (b) location
of a secondary stressed syllable. That is, the descriptor 5-3-1 signals that theoretical
is a five syllable word (the number 5 is the descriptor’s initial digit), primary stress
falls on its third syllable (the number 3 is the descriptor’s second digit), there is an
occurrence of secondary stress (the appearance of a third digit in the descriptor), and
location of this word’s secondary stressed syllable coincides with its first syllable (the
numeric value of the descriptor’s third digit). Of course, some words in English have
more than a single secondary stressed syllable. To illustrate, we begin our char-
Table 2
Illustrations of the effect of suffixation on word-level stress
Key: /=Primary stress location (also bolded with CAPITAL LETTERS)
=secondary stress location (also in CAPITAL LETTERS)
_=reduced vowel
_ / _ _ _ / _ _ _ / _
aCADemy AcaDEMic AcadeMIcian
_ / _ / _ _ _ / _
PHOtoGRAPH phoTOGraphy PHOtoGRAPHic
/ _ _ / _ _ _ / _
REaLIZE reALity REaLIStic
_ / _ _ _ / _ _ / _ _
asTRONomy AStroNOMic asTRONomer
_ / _ _ _ / _ _ / _ _
eCONomy EcoNOMic eCONomist
– Adapted from Celce-Murcia et al., 1996, p. 137.
66 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

7. acterization of the word methodology by referring to it as a 5-3 word (five syllables
with primary stress on the third syllable). However, to make our characterization
more complete we needed conventions to indicate that this 5-3 word carries sec-
ondary stresses on both its first and final syllables. To signal this information, we
classify methodology as a 5-3-1-5 word. The last two digits (i.e., the 1-5 sequence)
signal the locations of secondary stresses on both its first and fifth syllables. In the
‘5-3-1-5’ code we use, the final 1-5 section follows the nature order of the word (i.e.,
the sequence of the ‘1’ coming before ‘5’ does not denote anything about relative
degree of secondary stress):
/
meth o dol o gy ===> . . . is a ‘5-3-1-5’ word:
1 2 3 4 5
a five syllable word with primary stress on the third syllable and secondary stresses
on both its first and fifth syllables. The word has reduced vowels on both its second
and fourth syllables.
While working with individual AWL items, we examined each word in reference
to the pronunciation key of the dictionaries cited above and identified its (a) total
number of syllables, (b) the location of its primary stressed syllable and (c) the
location of any secondary stressed syllable(s). We labeled each word with a relevant
numeric code—as illustrated above with the words assessment (3-2) and methodology
(5-3-1-5). Once all of the words were labeled we grouped them according the stress
patterns that emerged from the data. Finally, we tallied the patterns and rank
ordered them according to frequency of occurrence.
4. Results
Now that the numeric conventions for characterizing individual words have been
introduced, we are ready to present the findings of our analysis of word-stress pat-
terns of AWL items. Table 3 depicts the results of our analysis of the combined
AWL polysyllabic headword and sublists inventories. The information presented in
columns A–H is arranged as follows. Columns A–F provide information on the
combined headword and sublists inventories (2979 items in all). Column A lists the
full inventory of word-level stress patterns we found in the AWL arranged according
to frequency of occurrence. Column B presents one example word to illustrate each
of the stress patterns. Column C presents each stress-pattern’s numeric ranking
based on frequency of occurrence within the combined inventories (a total of 39
word-stress patterns). Items in bold/italics in Columns A–C and F are the 14 word-
stress patterns corresponding with 90% coverage of the AWL combined inventories.
These initial 14 patterns are of high frequency of occurrence. In contrast, patterns
24–39 are of very low frequency. Column D gives the total number of words corre-
sponding with each of the identified stress-patterns. For Column E, we divided the
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 67

8. number of words for each pattern by the total number of AWL items to present the
percentage of occurrence for each stress pattern. Column F tracks the cumulative
percentages for all of the stress patterns.
Along with our analysis of the combined AWL inventories (Columns A–F), we
also examined the AWL list of headwords and sublists separately. Column G
presents the stress-patterns’ numeric rankings based on frequency of occurrence
within the AWL headword inventory (only). Items in bold/italics are the nine stress
patterns corresponding with 90% coverage of the 525 item headword list. Similarly,
Column H presents numeric rankings based on frequency of occurrence within the
2454 sublist items (only). Items in bold/italics in Column H are the 15 stress patterns
corresponding to 90% coverage of the sublists inventory. Though rank orderings are
not identical across the combined, headwords, and sublists inventories, comparison
between Columns C, G, and H reveal a high degree of overlap between them.
To illustrate how to work with Table 3, its first several rows may be interpreted as
follows: Row 1 indicates that the most frequent pattern (of the combined, head-
word, and sublists inventories) is for three syllable words that carry primary stress
on the second syllable (the basic 3-2 pattern, as discussed above). Words reflecting
this highest frequency pattern accounted for approximately nineteen percent of the
combined inventories (see Column E). Row 2 presents the second most frequent
pattern: Two syllable words with primary stress on the second syllable (i.e., the 2-2
pattern as in approach, compile and consume). Column D of this second row shows
that 340 words fit the 2-2 pattern, which represented approximately 11% of the
combined inventory (Column E). Column F signals that the combined percentages
for these first two patterns represent 30% of the total number of AWL words. Row
three presents the third most frequent pattern of the combined inventory: Four
syllable words with primary stress on the second syllable (i.e., the 4-2 pattern as in
complexity, available and appropriate). In row four we learn that the fourth most
frequent pattern is for two syllable words with primary stress on the first syllable
(the 2-1 pattern as in versions, data and classic). The fifth row presents the first word-
stress pattern coinciding with an incidence of secondary stress. The fifth row’s
pattern is 4-3-1, which signals words of four syllables with primary stress on the
third syllable and secondary stress on the first syllable (e.g., concentration, definition
and publication). Under Column F, the cumulative percentage corresponding with
row five indicates that the first five word-stress patterns encompass 55% of the
combined inventory. If we skip down and examine row 14, we notice in Column F
that the cumulative percentage of the 14 most frequent word-stress patterns
accounts for 90% of the combined AWL inventories.
5. Discussion
We believe the information depicted in Table 3 will be useful to EAP learners,
teachers, and curriculum planners since it serves as an informative complement to
other sources of information on word-stress when making decisions as to which
patterns to feature within EAP and other ESL speech-intelligibility instructional
68 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

9. Table 3
Word-level stress patterns of the AWLa
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)
Stress pattern Example word Ranking of
combined
inventories
No. of
words
% Cumulative%
(rounded)
Ranking
within
headword
list (only)
Ranking
within
sublists
(only)
3-2 commitment 1 556 18.66 19 1 1
2-2 approach 2 340 11.41 30 3 2
4-2 complexity 3 264 8.86 39 5 3
2-1 versions 4 257 8.62 48 2 5
4-3-1 economic 5 236 7.92 55 6 4
3-1 analyst 6 196 6.58 62 4 7
4-1-3 qualitative 7 178 5.98 68 9 6
3-1-3 institute 8 150 5.04 73 8 8
5-3-1 methodologies 9 112 3.76 77 11 9
5-2-4 discriminating 10 95 3.19 80 16 10
4-2-4 facilitate 11 80 2.69 83 14 11
4-1 variable 12 71 2.38 85 13 12
3-3-1 guarantee 13 68 2.28 87 12 13
2-1-2 networks 14 64 2.15 90 7 16
5-2 considerable 15 60 2.01 92 15 14
6-3-1 philosophically 16 49 1.64 93 24 15
5-4-1 implementation 17 34 1.14 94 18 17
5-4-2 environmental 18 30 1.01 95 10 20
3-1-2 formatted 19 22 0.74 96 17 19
4-1-4 visualize 20 21 0.70 97 18
5-1-4 regulatory 21 17 0.57 21
6-4-2 predictability 22 13 0.44 98 22
6-5-2 intensification 23 11 0.37 23
6-4-1 variability 24 10 0.34 24
7. . . . .a
inevitability (7-5-2) 25 9 0.30 99 25
3-3 unaware 26 7 0.23 26
5-2-5 contexualize 27 5 0.17 27
5-2-1-4 incorporated 28 4 0.13 28
5-1-3 specifiable 29 3 0.10 29
6-5-1 re-evaluation 30 3 0.10 30
6-2-5 conceptualizing 31 3 0.10 31
6-2 inevitably 32 3 0.10 22 33
6-2-4 administratively 33 2 0.07 32
6-1-3 justifiably 34 1 0.03 36
6-5-3-1 differentiation 35 1 0.03 23
5-1 culturally 36 1 0.03 35
4-4-1 nevertheless 37 1 0.03 19
4-2-1 practitioner 38 1 0.03 20
3-2-3 adulthood 39 1 0.03 100 34
Columns A–F: Headwords and Sublist items combined (N=2979). Bold/Italics signals items within 90%
coverage range.
a
There were four different word-stress patterns for seven-syllable words. We group them together since
all were of very low frequency and no single pattern was applicable to more than two words.
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 69

10. units. The feasibility of structuring and sequencing EAP instructional materials
according to the criteria depicted in Table 3 remains unclear. A reason is that the
content-organization of the discipline being studied takes precedence over formal
properties of the linguistic system in most EAP courses. With respect to the learning
and teaching of EAP vocabulary, however, Cobb and Horst (2001) argue that if
learners have to wait to meet relatively more important words in natural occurrence,
they will never encounter enough of them to become competent readers of academic
materials. Rather, these researchers propose a learner-as-lexicographer approach
where EAP learners work from the AWL and collaborate online to find examples in
texts tied to the content areas they are studying. A possibility for speech-intellig-
ibility instruction is to follow a similar approach in connection with the teaching of
word-level stress phenomena. Learners can work with patterns that have been iden-
tified as high in frequency, and/or with sets of words that correspond with high fre-
quency patterns, and collaborate with others to find examples of occurrence in both
course materials and topic-related library and online resources.
Through reference to the information on pattern frequency depicted in Table 3,
EAP teachers could feature the explicit teaching of patterns of word stress as a
normal part of the instructional routine. To introduce the concept of word-stress,
for example, teachers might preview assigned reading or lecture materials to identify
key words that illustrate the 3-2 pattern (e.g., assessment, consistent, establish). An
implication of our analysis is that it should be easy to find such examples. At
appropriate points during class, learners may be reminded of (and practise in con-
texts of phrases and sentences) this highest frequency pattern. To reinforce the idea
that locations of word-level stress reflect predictable phenomena, teachers might use
an example such as consistent to explain that in English, word stress rarely falls on
syllables that historically entered the language as a prefix (con-) or suffix (-tent).
Because 3-2 words are very high in frequency of occurrence, this pattern may serve
as a useful anchor when expanding learner awareness of word-level stress phenom-
ena and related phonological features of English. With 3-2 words such as assess-
ment, consistent and establish, for example, learner attention may be directed to the
location of primary stress on the second syllable, the consistently obscured vowel
quality of each of these words’ initial syllables, and the similarly unstressed/reduced
quality of the words’ final syllables. Though we devised the convention of referring
to such words as fitting a 3-2 pattern to ease our own discussions of AWL items,
subsequently we have found that the numeric conventions for labeling stress pat-
terns illustrated in this report are useful when working with EAP and other ESL
learners.
The study’s findings provide information on more common patterns teachers may
focus upon, especially as starting points, when planning instruction. In addition, the
findings can be extended in order to exploit related English phonological features
tied to shifts in word-level stress locations due to such phenomena as suffixation,
other forms of derivational morphology, and part of speech. For example, the 2-1-2
pattern (e.g., network, guideline, highlight) reflects a tendency for noun compounds
in English to carry primary stress on the first syllable while maintaining secondary
stress on the second syllable.
70 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

11. Along with teaching the stress pattern of a high frequency AWL item such as
economic (see Table 3’s fifth row), teachers may take advantage of the opportunity
such words present to build learner awareness of the impacts of suffixation by also
introducing the stress patterns of related words within the same lexical family (e.g.,
eCONomy, ecoNOMical, ecoNOMically, and eCONomist). Other lexical items may
be introduced that illustrate patterns of similar shifts in word stress locations (e.g.,
psyCHOLogy, psychoLOGical, psychoLOGically, and psyCHOLogist). Teachers and
learners should find the sublists and word families featured in the Internet version of
the AWL to be especially helpful for the purpose of exploring the impact of deriva-
tional morphology on shifts in word stress locations, as well as corresponding
changes in vowel quality, both within and across word families.
Rather than taking the time to provide instruction in what may appear to learners
to be an overwhelming inventory of 39 possible stress patterns in academic words,
our analysis revealed that just 14 patterns encompass 90% of the polysyllabic items
in the combined AWL headwords and sublists inventories. To illustrate this sharp
decline in order of frequency even more vividly, Fig. 1. arranges the 39 patterns in
declining order along the horizontal axis of a bar graph.
In this context, it is worth mentioning a similarity between our finding - that just
a few word-level stress patterns cover most academic words—and parallel findings
of specialists who pursue a frequency approach toward curriculum planning for
vocabulary instruction in general. Through word frequency analysis, Nation (1997)
demonstrates that while English has a lot of words, only a few of them are used
over and over again. Estimates are that the just 2000 of the most frequent word
families in English give 80% coverage of academic vocabulary and adding in the
word families of the AWL gives about 90% coverage (Cobb and Horst, 2001). The
link between these general findings on academic vocabulary and our work is that
English has many word stress patterns—particularly for the items tied to Greco-
Latin roots that are major constituents of the AWL—but that just a few patterns
are used with great frequency. To our knowledge, this is the first study to docu-
ment that a relatively small number of stress patterns are reflected in the pro-
nunciations of a large number of academic words. This finding signals that the
process of gaining control over word-level stress patterns of academic vocabulary
may be more manageable than previously believed, and it should be taken as
encouraging news by EAP learners and their teachers. It would be helpful, for
example, for EAP learners and teachers to prioritize their efforts by highlighting
attention to words already included in course materials that fit the relatively
higher-frequency patterns. Such an instructional focus will help to ensure that EAP
learners are comfortable in working with a large proportion of word-level stress
patterns of the combined inventories. At 90% coverage, we consider an inventory
of the fourteen most frequent patterns to be a manageable number to feature in
either courses or lesson segments of EAP speech-intelligibility instruction. It is also
revealing to learn that the remaining ten percent of AWL items are tied to 25
additional patterns, each of which is of relatively low frequency of occurrence (see
Table 3 and Fig. 1). Such information illuminates where learners with beginning to
high-intermediate levels of proficiency in English can most profitably spend their
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 71

12. Fig.1.
72 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74

13. time and energy when it comes to learning to recognize, identify, and use stress
patterns of polysyllabic words.
The information depicted in Table 3 should prove useful as a complementary
source of information for purposes of curriculum and lesson planning and private
study. Because listeners in academic settings depend upon word-stress signals to
interpret incoming messages, the same information has implication for purposes of
EAP listening training, as well. EAP learners are more likely to respond well to
speech-intelligibility training informed by our analysis since the frequency data we
identified is a useful complement to information already available in the literature
(e.g., ways in which word-level stress and vowel quality change due to impacts of
suffixation and other forms of derivational morphology). As such, these combined
sources of information may contribute in important ways to a dimension of speech-
intelligibility training with ties to enhancing more active use of vocabulary knowl-
edge. The next stages of our work will report on EAP learners’ responses to word-
level stress speech-intelligibility training sequenced around the 14 highest frequency
patterns depicted in Table 3.
References
Acton, W., 1984. Changing fossilized pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly 18 (1), 71–86.
Acton, W., 2001. FocalSpeak: Integrating rhythm and stress in speech-pronunciation. In: Murphy, J.,
Byrd, H. (Eds.), Understanding the Courses We Teach: Local Perspectives on English Language
Teaching. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 197–217.
Aitchison, J., 1994. Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon, second ed.. Blackwell,
Cambridge, MA.
Byers, P., 1976. Biological rhythms as information channels in interpersonal communication behavior. In:
Bateson, P.P.G., Klopfer, P.H. (Eds.), Perspectives in Ethology. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 135–164.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., Goodwin, J., 1996. Teaching Pronunciation: A Reference for Teachers of
English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Cobb, T., Horst, M., 2001. Reading academic English: Carrying learners across the lexical threshold. In:
Flowerdew, J., Peacock, M. (Eds.), The English for Academic Purposes Curriculum. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, pp. 315–329.
Coxhead, A., 2000. A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly 34, 213–238.
Cutler, A., Dahan, D., van Donselaar, W., 1997. Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A
literature review. Language and Speech 40 (2), 141–201.
Dickerson, W., 1994. Empowering students with predictive skills. In: Morley, J. (Ed.), Pronunciation
Pedagogy and Theory: New Views, New Perspectives. TESOL, Alexandria, VA, pp. 17–35.
Gilbert, J., 1994. Intonation: A navigation guide for the listener. In: Morley, J. (Ed.), Pronunciation
Pedagogy and Theory: New Views, New Perspectives. TESOL, Alexandria, VA, pp. 36–48.
Houghton-Mifflin, X., 2000. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, fourth ed.
Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Ladefoged, P., 2001. A Course in Phonetics, fourth ed.. Harcourt College Publishers, New York.
Levelt, W., 1993. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Levis, J., 1999. Intonation in theory and practice, revisited. TESOL Quarterly 33 (1), 37–63.
McNeill, D., 1992. Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Morley, J., 1994. Pronunciation Pedagogy and Theory: New Views. New Perspectives. TESOL,
Alexandria, VA.
J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74 73

14. Murphy, J.M. Attending to word-stress while learning new vocabulary. English for Specific Purposes
Journal. (in press).
Nation, P., 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Nation, P., 1997. Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In: Schmitt, N., McCarthy, M. (Eds.),
Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition, Pedagogy. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 6–19.
Pickering, L., 2001. The role of tone choice in improving ITA communication in the classroom. TESOL
Quarterly 35, 233–255.
Wennerstrom, A., 1998. Intonation as cohesion in academic discourse: A study of Chinese speakers of
English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 1–25.
Wylie, L., 1978. What is body language? [lecture delivered at Harvard University]. In: Mason, A. (Ed.),
Teachers Manual/transcripts that Accompany Understanding Academic Lectures. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 49–60.
74 J. Murphy, M. Kandil / System 32 (2004) 61–74