The Variability in Phonology of Indonesian Learner’s Interlanguage: A case study on English marked-fricatives

Iwan Fauzi(1*),

(1) Department of English Language & Education The University of Palangka Raya
(*) Corresponding Author




DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v5i4.19468

Abstract


Interlanguage is the most fruitful issue in the field of second language acquisition. In the interlanguage phase, Indonesian learners of English tend to alternate between two forms of language features to express the same language function where a variation of language forms will be exhibited to mark the variable of linguistic function. Variability in phonology of interlanguage is the most interesting subject to investigate based on markedness differential hypothesis theory. This study is aimed at finding out (1) marked sounds of English fricatives: [θ], [ð], [ʃ], and [ʒ] which are indicated as interlanguage variants; and (2) how interlanguage sound variants emerge based on surround the varying element. There were 30 college students of English study purposively selected to become respondents in this research representing advance and intermediate proficiency of English speaking. The data were taken from two types of task namely word list reading and sentence reading. There were 600-word tokens containing target marked sounds of fricative [θ], [ð], [ʃ], and [ʒ] obtained from the data collection. The analysis was done quantitatively to find the percentages of non-interlanguge sounds and interlanguge ones produced by respondents. The result showed that fricatives such as [θ], [ʃ], and [ʒ] have phonological variations in interlanguage with certain positions of word being pronounced. These phonological variations emerge due to the generalization of pronunciation by similar-ending sounds, the certain vowel sound preceding marked sounds, and the absence of consonant clusters in learners’ native language which bears the variation of certain marked fricatives of English.


Keywords


interlanguage; variability; markedness; English fricatives; phonology

Full Text:

PDF

References


Azizi, A. A., Jamil, S. S., & Omar, H. M. (2013). Debunking the notion of nativization in the pronunciation variation at segmental level among non-native ESL teachers in Sabah, Malaysia. International Journal of Pedagogical Innovations, 1(10), 1-10.

Bialystok, E., and Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Interlanguage is not a state of mind: An evaluation of the construct for second-language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.2.101

Celce-Murcia, M., Briton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (1996). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Corder, S.P. (1971). Idiosyncratic dialects and error analysis. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 147-160.

Dickerson, L. (1975). The Learner's interlanguage as a system of variable rules. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 401-407.

Djajadiningrat, I. (2011). The mapping of pronunciation error. Seminar Semester Genap, 1(1), 7-11.

Ellis, R. (1985a). Sources of variability in interlanguage. Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 118-131. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.2.118

Ellis, R. (1985b). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (1988). The effects of linguistic environment on the second language acquisition of grammatical rules. Applied Linguistics, 9(3), 257-274.

Jehma, Hambalee & Phoocharoensil, Supakorn. (2014). L1 Transfer in the Production of Fricatives and Stops by Pattani-Malay Learners of English in Thailand. Asian Social Science, 10(7), 67-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n7p67

Fasold, R. (1984). Variation theory and language learning. In Trudgill, P (ed), Applied Sociolinguistics. London: Academic Press.

Fauzi, I. (2018). Teaching English in Multiethnic Classroom: A case study on phonemic variation of secondary school students in Central Kalimantan. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Social Sciences Education: Multicultural Transformation in Education, Social Sciences and Wetland Environment (ICSSE 2017), 147, 153-158. https://doi.org/10.2991/icsse-17.2018.36

Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Linguistic Research (pp. 233-277). York Press. Timonium, MD.

Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.) New York: Taylor & Francis.

Nemser, W. (1971). Approximate systems of foreign language learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 9, 115-124.

Nozadze, A. (2012). Dealing with fossilized errors while teaching grammar. Journal of Education, 1(1), 41-46.

Osborne, D. M. (2008). Systematic differences in consonant sounds between the interlanguage phonology of a Brazilian Portuguese learner of English and standard American English. Ilha do Desterro, 55, 111-132.

Richards, J.C. (1974). Error analysis: Perspetive on second language acquisition. London: Longman.

Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 209-231.

Song, Lichao. (2012). On the Variability of Interlanguage. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(4), 778-783. http://dx.doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.4.778-783

Sridhanyarat, Kietnawin. (2017). The Acquisition of L2 Fricatives in Thai Learners’ Interlanguage. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 23(1), 15–34. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-02

Tarone, E. (1988). Variation in Interlanguage. London: Edward Arnold.

Tiono, N. I., & Yostanto, A. M. (2008). A Study of English Phonological Errors Produced by English Department Students. k@ta, 10(1), 79-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.9744/kata.10.1.79-112

Utumber Singh, J. K., Yusoff, N., & Abdul Malik, C. M. A. (2014). Language Identity: Variability in Phonology in Different Races in Malaysia. AJELP: Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 2, 74-82. Retrieved from https://ejournal.upsi.edu.my/index.php/AJELP/article/view/1101

Wolfram, W. (2006). Variation and Language: An overview. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.) pp. 333 – 341. Boston: Elsevier.

Young, R. (1991). Variation in interlanguage morphology. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 444 times | PDF view : 68 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


License URL: https://creativecommons.org/

 

 

 

Creative Commons License


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.