i
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND IJỌ SEGMENTALS AND SUPRASEGMENTALS
BY
IWOLO, IZUONGERE PG/MA/09/51183
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHER NIGERIAN LANGUAGES, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA,
SEPTEMBER, 2014
ii
TITLE PAGE
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND IJỌ SEGMENTALS AND SUPRASEGMENTALS
by
IWOLO, IZUONGERE PG/MA/09/51183
A Dissertation Submitted in the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of the Masters of Arts Degree in Linguistics
September, 2014
iii
APPROVAL PAGE
IWOLO, IZUONGERE PG/MA/09/51183, a postgraduate student in the Department of
Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts (M.A.) in Linguistics. This dissertation is original and has not been submitted in any form for any degree in this University or any other University.
…………………………………… …………………………………… MR. B. N. ANASIUDU Date (Supervisor)
……………………………... ………………………………... PROF. C. N. OKEBALAMA Date (Head of Department)
……………………………. ………………………………. (External Examiner) Date
iv
CERTIFICATION PAGE
This is to certify that Iwolo Izuongere, a post graduate student of the Department of Linguistics,
Igbo and other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka with registration number
PG/MA/0951183 has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the research work for the award of masters degree in Linguistics (Applied Linguistics). This project work is original and has not been submitted in part or in full for any degree of this or any other institution.
------MR. B. N. ANASIUDU IWOLO IZUONGERE (SUPERVISOR) STUDENT
v
DEDICATION
To
God Almighty
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My unalloyed gratitude goes to Mr. B. N. Anasiudu, my kind-hearted supervisor, who not only supervised the work but encouraged me with fatherly love and care; he is indeed my academic father. I am unreservedly and deeply indebted to my father, Barr. Ibeni Iwolo for his encouragement and unconditional financial support in my academic pursuit. I also thank my mother for her fervent payers and moral support to me. I owe my beloved husband an immeasurable gratitude for his care and understanding throughout the period of this study. Prof. and Mrs. C.N. Okebalama also deserve my commendation. I thank the following lecturers of mine for their academic inspiration: Dr. B.M. Mbah, Prof. R.I. Okorji, Dr. C.U. Agbedo, Dr.
(Mrs) E.E. Mbah and Dr. (Mrs.) J. O. Uguru. My colleagues: Monday, Benita, Chinwe, Aloy,
Ndubuisi, David, Juliet, Tochi and Chinenye deserve commendation. My step-mother, Mrs.
Manna Iwolo is also thanked for her encouragement. I want to say a big thank you to my brothers and sisters: Ebinimi, Josephine, Gloria, Ifieyemi and Tarila,
God bless you all!
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page i
Approval page ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgments v
Table of contents vi
Abstract viii
CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background to the Study 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem 2 1.3 Research Questions 3 1.4 Purpose of the Study 4 1.5 Significance of the Study 4 1.6 Scope of the Study 4 1.7 Limitation of the Study 5
CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Studies 6
2.2 Empirical Studies 17
2.3 Summary 21
CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Area of Study 23
3.2 Research Population 24
3.3 Method of Data Analysis 24 viii
CHAPTER FOUR:
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Presentation of Data 26
4.1.1 English and Ijọ Segmental Phonemes 26
4.1.1.1 English and Ijọ Consonantal Phonemes 26
4.1.1.1.1 English Consonants 27
4.1.1.1.2 Ijọ Consonants 28
4.1.1.2 English and Ijọ Vocalic Phonemes 29
4.1.1.2.1 English Vocalic Phonemes 32
4.1.1.2.2 Ijọ Vocalic Phonemes 33
4.1.2 English and Ijọ Suprasegmental Features 33
4.1.2.1 English Stress and Intonation 34
4.1.2.1.1 Stress 34
4.1.2.1.2 Intonation 35
4.1.2.2 Ijọ Tone 36
4.2 Comparison 38
4.2.1 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijọ Consonants 38
4.2.2 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijọ Vowels 40
4.2.3 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijọ Suprasegmentals 42
CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
5.1 Findings 46
5.2 Conclusion 51
5.3 Recommendation 51
References 53
ix
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the differences and similarities between English and Ijọ segmental phonemes and suprasegmental feature. The study uses contrastive analysis (CA) as its theoretical framework. CA is a good tool to find out difficulties which second language learners may encounter such that predictions are made. The use of this framework is, therefore, borne out of the fact that it facilitates second-language (L2) learning in that the features of learners’ first language (L1) and L2 are succinctly contrasted for a pedagogic purpose. Differences abound between English and Ijọ segmental phonemes and suprasegmental features. These differences notwithstanding, there are a few similarities between their phonemes. It is revealed that such differences are found more between the vocalic phonemes of the two languages than their consonantal phonemes; and their suprasegmental features are totally different from each other. Owing to these differences, it is predicted that Ijọ learners of English find it difficult to learn English phonemes, stress and intonation. However, these learners find it easy to learn areas where there are phonemic similarities between their L1 and the target language. 1
Chapter One
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background to the Study
Language is as old as man, and it is inevitable because it is the means through which humans communicate, translate, and transmit ideas into reality. And as such the history of language can be traced as far back as the creation of man on earth. Finnegan (2008:11) opines, “A good many people in all parts of the world share a belief that the origin of language can be traced to the Garden of Eden”.
Different scholars have different views on the origin of language. People have different ways of explaining why languages change or differ from one author. The Old
Testament relates that before the tower of Babel all men and women spoke the same language and could understand one another. Eventually, human pride provoked God into confounding their communication with mutually unintelligible languages. However, language differences among people can be seen as a penalty for sinful behaviour.
Language differences can also be traced to the intermingling of people with different linguistic backgrounds in a particular location. But linguists believe the reason for numerous languages in the world is the natural change over time, the inevitable product of reshaping speech to meet changing social and intellectual needs, reflecting contact with people speaking other languages.
When groups move to new places and mix with speakers of different languages, there is an influence because their languages must adapt to new circumstances. The people will be forced to learn each other’s language to achieve a purpose. Such is so glaring in Nigeria when the colonial masters came into the country and introduced English, which is used as an official language today. Pidgin English is as a result of people moving from one place to the other to meet changing social and intellectual needs. It is amazing that, with influences of
2 languages on each other, there are changes which occur. Naturally, there are differences and similarities between languages. The differences are always more than the similarities, but all languages are complete irrespective of the differences. They all perform the same purpose which is communication. Anagbogu, Mbah and Eme (2010:26) ask a question: Does the language of a particular people perform the function they want it to perform? If it does, then it is complete. It is true that when a language performs the purpose which its speakers intend, such a language is complete; no language in the world is seen as superior to the other.
It is on this basis that we want to do a contrastive analysis of English and Izon segmentals and supra-segmentals.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The English language was introduced into Nigeria by early European traders, who first visited the country in the 16th century. However, Spencer (1971:79) avers that it is difficult to lay hold on evidence available to picture in any form the nature of African-
European contact in a linguistic point of view, but it is clear that it is from the mercantile period that pidgin of West Africa came into existence. In order to trade and later to administer and to teach Nigerians the Christian religion, these early Europeans, specifically the British, literally forced Nigerians to learn the English language.
However, the English language has been in Nigeria for decades now but it still poses problems to the ordinary man in Nigeria. Few among millions of Nigerians can speak English fluently. Even with difficulties of the language, Bamgbose (1971:65) opines that it is still the language of government, business, commerce, education, mass media, literature and for internal and external communications. Thus, the language is indispensable to the country.
Ijo is a large language group spoken in Rivers state, Bayelsa state, Delta state, Edo state and Ondo state. It is divided into East Ijo and West Ijo. East Ijo comprises Nkoro,
3
Kalabari, Okrika and Ibani all spoken in Rivers state; and Nembe-Akassa spoken in Bayelsa state. Conversely, West Ijo is divided into inland Ijo, on the one hand, and Izon on the other.
Izon is the largest language of the Ijo group, and it comprises a large number of dialects. While Ijo as earlier noted is a large language group spoken in the above mentioned states without dialects. All of inland Ijo and much of Izon are spoken in Bayelsa state, but
Izon also extends into Delta state, Edo state and Ondo state with differences in phonology.
English and Izon are two different languages that do not have the same origin. The former is European while the latter is Niger-Congo. Also, they do not belong to the same family. For languages to belong to the same family depends on the lexis, morphology and phonology of the languages. Katamba (1989:79) avers that no two languages have exactly the same phoneme inventories which are realized by the same sets of allophones; no two languages have exactly the same phonological rules regulating the deployment of their sounds.
Following the above assertion, the phoneme inventories of English and Izon differ.
This difference is also applicable to tone and stress of the two languages and it constitutes a problem to Izon speakers trying to learn English as a second language (L2).
1.3 Research Questions
This research will provide answers to the following questions.
1. What are the similarities between English and Izon phonemes?
2. How do English and Izon phonemes differ?
3. What are the difficulties encountered by Izon speakers trying to pronounce English
speech sounds?
4. How can the difficulties faced by Izon learners of English be predicted?
4
1.4 Purpose of the Study
The aim of this research is to mainly look at the differences and similarities between the segmentals and supra-segmentals of the English and Izon languages so as to find out areas in which Izon learners of English as a second language may encounter difficulties. When the difficult areas are identified, it will be possible for the teacher to emphasize those areas more in order to improve upon the performances of the students.
On this note, the study will employ contrastive analysis as a predicting tool for analyzing the possible difficulties encountered by Izon learners of English. Contrastive analysis in the words of Lado (1957:1) is a scientific description of language to be learned, carefully compared with the parallel description of the native language of the learner. And on the basis of this comparison, the learners’ problems are predicted.
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study to an extent will proffer solutions to difficulties which Izon speakers who learn English as a second language encounter. Because this research will expose the areas of difficulties possibly encountered by the native speakers of Izon who learn English as their L2, it will also equip the language teachers with ample information on how to improve those predicted areas of difficulties in order to facilitate learning.
The focus of any research work is to primarily improve upon the existing knowledge and this study is bent towards this fact.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The areas to be covered in this research are segmentals and supra-segmentals of
English and Izon languages. The areas to be investigated are: English and Izon consonantal phonemes; English and Izon vocalic phonemes; English intonation, stress and Izon tone.
5
1.7 Limitation of the Study
This work seeks to investigate segmentals and supra-segmentals of English and Izon languages. The segmentals include: consonants and vowels, while the supra-segmentals are stress, intonation and tone. Izon has several dialects, but for the purpose of this research,
Kolokuma dialect is used because it is the standard dialect of the Izon language.
The research was unable to touch other areas of phonology of the two languages as a result of time and financial constraints.
6
Chapter Two
Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Studies
The term contrastive linguistics was first suggested by Whorf (1941:212), for the purpose of comparative study which is giving emphasis on linguistic differences. However, contrastive linguistics has been redefined as a sub-discipline of linguistics which concerns itself with contrasting two languages or systems of languages in order to determine both the differences and similarities between such languages (Fisiak, 1981:1).
The theoretical background of what is known as contrastive analysis hypothesis
(CAH) was devised in Lado’s Linguistics Across Cultures (1957). In his study, Lado asserts that those elements which are similar to the learner’s native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are different will be difficult. While this was not a strange suggestion,
Lado was the first scholar to provide a clear-cut theoretical stance and to suggest a systematic array of technical methods for the contrastive study of languages, which include describing the languages, contrasting them and predicting learning difficulties for pedagogic purposes.
Contrastive analysis, therefore, is a systematic study of a pair of languages with a view to identifying their differences and similarities in order to predict learning difficulties which language learners may encounter while learning their target language. Contrastive analysis (CA) was used extensively in the field of second-language acquisition (SLA) in
1960s and early 1970s, as a way of explaining why some elements of a target language (TL) were more difficult than others. According to the behaviourist theories in vogue then, language learning was a question of habit formation, and this could be reinforced or hampered by existing habits. The difficulty in understanding certain structures or elements in a second language (L2) depends on the differences between the learner’s mother tongue or first language (L1) and the language he/she is learning.
7
Contrastive analysis in linguistics is used as a tool for solving certain problems encountered by language learners. This tool was developed by structural grammarians as a way of predicting problems that any target language learner may encounter in language learning (Udegbunam, 2004:10). Johnson (1975:14) defines CA as “contrasting a series of statements about similarities and differences between two languages”.
A plausible explanation for L2 learners’ difficulty with target-language (TL) sounds that are different from those of the learners’ native language is that the TL sounds in question could not be accurately perceived. This explanation is certainly reasonable on the face of it, the conventional wisdom being that, at least for child L1 acquisition, children’s perception of phonemic contrasts always developed prior to their production of those contrasts (Menyuk,
1977:34). If the learner cannot perceive the TL sounds correctly, the argument goes, then the learners will not be able to successfully produce those sounds.
Geethaku (2002:3) opines that contrastive analysis is a method or way of analyzing the structures of any two languages with the aim of estimating the differential aspects of their systems irrespective of their genetic affinity or level of development. She further asserts that a contrastive analysis of two languages becomes useful when it is adequately describing the sound structures and grammatical structures of the languages in question, giving due emphasis to their areas of difference for pedagogic purposes. From the above view, we can say that despite the fact that two languages do not belong to the same language group, they can be contrasted to get the similarities and dissimarities in them so as to predict learning difficulties which L2 learners may face. And this will form learning materials or syllabuses for language teaching.
Contrastive analysis is important in the area of second language teaching. Its importance according to Agbedo (2000:167) is impossible to quantify. He further elaborates by citing Wilkins (1972:198) thus:
8
It is one of the few investigations into language structure that has improved pedagogy as its aim. The contrastive analysis brings to light the differences between the mother tongue and the target language of the learners and so makes it possible to predict the difficulties that the learners will have. This in turn determines what the learners have to learn and what the teacher has to teach. The results of the contrastive analysis are therefore built into language teaching materials, syllabuses, texts and researches.
The above assertion makes it evident that language teachers cannot do without contrastive analysis, because it sets the pace for them after predicting the difficulties of the learners. When contrastive analysis must have studied the structures and terms of two languages, it gives rise to easy teaching and learning of those languages.
Schmitt (2002:258) views contrastive analysis as “comparing the grammatical structures of two languages, in an attempt to ascertain structural differences, which were believed to pose the greatest problems for second language writers and learners”. In the words of Lado (1957:75), contrastive analysis is a scientific description of learners’ native language with parallel description and comparison of language to be learnt (ie. L2). On the basis of this comparison, according to Lado, learners’ problems will be predicted. Following from the above views of Schmitt and Lado, we can aver that a detailed contrast of one’s first language with the target language brings out the differences between them and would lead us to predicting learning difficulties, which deserve solutions pedagogically.
Ikenna (1999:8) opines that contrastive analysis serves as a tool for language teachers because it enables them to prepare teaching materials, which will be very useful to the learner. In a similar view, Ferguson (1965:5-7) says, “Careful contrastive analysis of any two languages offers an excellent basis for the preparation of instrumental materials for planning a course and the development of actual classroom teaching”. With good teaching materials, therefore, no second language teacher will be mis-led or find problems towards his or her learners’ difficulties. Teaching materials on second language should be authentic and carefully selected. That is why Fries (1945:9) declares thus: “The most efficient teaching
9 materials will be those that are based upon a scientific description of the language to be learned, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native language of the learner”.
It is generally believed that the mother tongue or the L1 has a great influence on the second language, because it is not acquired but learned. In view of this, Okorji and Okeke
(2009:26) are of the opinion that contrastive analysis as a tool derives its importance from the belief that the first language influences the learning of any other language. Mother tongue or
L1 is a language acquired informally and in the process the speaker encounters little or no influence. Weinreich (1953:2) avers that the mother tongue or L1 is in a privileged position to resist influence. This simply means that people’s mother tongue does not pose problems to them at all, unlike the second language. Weinreich (1953:1) defines interference as “those instances of deviation from the norms of either language which occur in the speech as a result of transfer”.
Candling (1991:53) avers that “foreign language learners are all too familiar with the interfering of native language causing everything from accented speech to inappropriate non- verbal behaviour”. From the above assertion, it is glaring that learners are not new in the language learning phenomenon due to the fact that interference is always involved in language teaching and learning.
Oluikpe (1978:11) stipulates two basic views of interference. The first one is that: positive interference occurs when the first language closely approximates the structure in the second language. Secondly, negative interference occurs when a structure in the second language is lacking in the first language. These two views pointed out by Oluikpe show that when the structure of the mother tongue of the learner is similar to the target language, there is a positive interference. Conversely, when the structures of the two languages differ, negative interference will be observed. Osgood (1949:5) says:
When two sets of materials to be learned are quite different or are easily discriminated by the learner, there is relatively little interaction that is,
10
learning one has little effect upon learning the other. If they are similar in such a way that the learning of one serves as partial learning of the other, there may be facilitation, or positive transfer. If, however, the similarities either of stimuli or responses are such that responses interfere with one another, then there will be greater interference as similarity increases.
Again, Bamgbose (1976:47) adds that the interference of the first language poses the greatest difficulty for learners of the second language. This implies that learners of the second language use the structure of their native languages to learn the second language which in turn makes them encounter difficulties in their learning.
In addition, Williams (1990:81) observes that learning difficulties occur as a result of one form of interference or the other. He says that each language has a different set of phonemes and that could possibly make learners transfer the phonemic pattern or system of their L1 to the target language.
Lado (1957:59) says that “Since the learner tends to transfer the habits in his native language structure that are similar, it will facilitate the learning of the foreign language”.
Osgood (1949:12) opines that learning a new language makes way for interference, which every L2 learner will encounter as one of the major problems. In a similar vein, Allen
(1975:98) avers that a learner of a foreign language has already had well developed articulatory movement and perceptual strategies before his exposure to a new language. As such, he or she hears and produces his native language phonological categories. Lado
(1957:58) says that in second language learning, individual learners try to approximate or transfer what already exists in their L1 to L2. We can, therefore, say that CA more or less researches into mother-tongue or first-language stilted influence to proffer pedagogic solutions for L2 learners.
Onyemelukwe (1982) cited by Anidobe (2007:13) identifies three levels in which native language interference can be examined. The levels are: positive, neutral and negative interference levels. His neutral interference which is lacking in Oluikpe’s (1978:11) views as
11 we earlier noted, occurs where prior linguistic knowledge has no effect of any kind on subsequent language acquisition.
It is axiomatic to say, therefore, that the first language or mother tongue of the language learner influences the learning of the target language because there are some strange sounds that will make the learning uneasy. And that is why Lado (1957:71) says: “The adult speaker of one language cannot easily pronounce language sounds of another even though he has no speech impediment…he cannot easily hear language sounds other than those of his native language”. Wilkins (1972:191) also avers that in his effort to make utterances in the foreign language, the learner is influenced not only by the sounds that exist in his mother tongue, but also by their distribution and phonological status.
Besides, Udegbunam (2004:16) opines that it is not only the sound structure, phonological status and syntactic or morphological structures that are influenced; the learner transfers the terms, meaning and culture of his native language to the foreign language he is learning. Udegbunam further asserts that it is the duty of the language teacher to capture this situation through a systematic contrastive analysis of the languages involved. By so doing, the difficulties encountered by the language learners will be reduced to a greater extent.
It is obvious that an individual’s mother tongue interferes with the learning of the target language. This interference is so glaring because the mother tongue is not learnt but acquired, while the target or second language is learnt. Politzer (1970:10) opines that no aspect of language learning is free from interference. However, it is more obvious in the phonological aspect of language learning. Again, Williams (1990:41) asserts that learning problems are as a result of interference. He further notes that each language has a different set of phonemes and the learner approximates the sounds of his mother tongue or L1 to those of the target language.
12
The issue of mother tongue interference is not what one can avoid because if a learner wants to succeed in learning a language other than his L1, he must be well grounded in his L1 in that it will help him in second language learning, and since he the language learner) is well established in his L1, avoiding L1 transfer to L2 becomes impossible. In line with the above assertion, McCarthy (1978:1) says:
Learning another language later on is a different matter…The first language is already there and nothing can alter the fact that it will always form part of one’s linguistic background. One’s habit of speech soon becomes fixed…, so there is bound to be interference with acquiring the new sets of habits that a second or foreign language will demand.
From the foregoing, we understand that since a language learner has internalized his
L1 or mother tongue, he is always tempted to approximate what he has already known to the target language, and this poses challenges to second language learning.
Chaturvedi (1973:92) in Geethaku (2002:3) suggests four guiding principles for contrastive study. They are:
1. To analyse the mother tongue and the target language independently and completely.
2. To compare the two languages item by item at all levels of their structures.
3. To arrive at the categories of similar features, dissimilar features and partially similar
features between L1 and L2.
4. To arrive at principles of text preparation, text framing and target language teaching in
general.
The above enumerated principles suggest that if contrastive analysis is carefully done, it will help in the preparation of teaching materials; and of course, the predicted learning problems can easily be overcome by learners of the second language.
It is important to state that the primary aim of CA is to preclict learning difficulties through the study of the differences and similarities between learners’ L1 and L2 in order to provide materials for pedagogy. Contrastive analysis is, therefore, a tool used for solving
13 problems which language learners may face in the second language learning processes. Izon natives who learn English as an L2, for instance, may encounter problems of pronouncing or learning some English phonemes which do not have equivalents in Izon. But these learning difficulties could be reduced through the input of contrastive analysis, where the similarities and differences between the two languages will be well defined, described and analysed for pedogical reasons.
Coupled with the above assertions, CA is an eminently useful instrument in material design, able not only to predict areas of potential learning difficulties, but also to provide explanations and to remedy many of those difficulties that actually crop up. Thus, it is able to provide an inventory of useful data for authors of textbooks and pedagogical grammars. CA would also become particularly helpful where the teacher does not have competence in the L1 of the learners; that is the basic knowledge necessary to understand and remedy interference issues.
Furthermore, CA is valuable in overcoming learner’s pronunciation problems by identifying e.g. L1 phonemes which will facilitate the learning of certain TL sounds, where such references may be more effective than plain cross-linguistic contrasts. It can help determine the relative frequency and stylistic distribution of certain structures of L1 and L2. It can also help to teach the learner to use idiomatic TL features in his/her speech, and thus stop sounding foreign. CA can also play a crucial role in both ‘didactic’ (selection, grading, and exposition of teaching items) and ‘methodic’ (actual classroom presentation) programming
(Wikipedia).
However, contrastive analysis has, over the years, been questioned by many scholars; the fact being that it cannot proffer solutions to all the learning difficulties it predicts. That is why Anasiudu (1978:19) asserts that the problems encountered by the second-language learners cannot be solved all by contrastive analysis. This view is supported by Johnson
14
(1975:16), who says that contrastive analysis is over-exaggerated, that is, not all difficulties can be predicted by CA. Again, Adimmuo (1987:12) is of the view that the term contrastive analysis has been over explored by so many scholars. She also said that the differences identified in contrastive analysis may not cause the same level of difficulties, and as a result the differences cannot be predicted.
Burens (1980:83) argues that “contrastive analysis should be justified in its explanatory power and if a contrastive study fails to explain anything about the nature of language data, it scarcely seems worth the time and labour that have been expended on it”.
Furthermore, Johnson (1975:21) avers that contrastive analysis should be used to explain difficulties already found rather than predicting such difficulties. Oldin (1989:19) supports this view by saying: “The predictive validity of many contrastive studies seemed questionable because empirical research was beginning to show that learning difficulties do not always arise from cross-linguistic differences and those difficulties which do not arise are not always predicted by contrastive analysis”.
Other scholars who examined the weaknesses of contrastive analysis are: Freeman and Long (1991), Dulay and Burt (1974), Abbas (1995) Klein (1986) and Anidobe (2007).
Most of the criticisms are coming from the angle at which Lado, who is the pioneer of CA, focused more attention, i.e. differences; and pay little or no attention to similarities between first language and second language. Lado (1957:57) opines that “the language learning mode/which is also known as grammatical structure is a system of habits”. However, scholars like Schuster (1997:54) says that majority of researches on second language acquisition shows serious disagreement with such a view.
Whiteman (1970:191) is of the opinion that “contrastive analysis must proceed through four steps. These steps are: description, selection, contrast and prediction.
Unfortunately, most analyses are weakened by insufficient care or attention at one or more of
15 these steps, each of which is beset with a host of problems”. These four steps simply suggest there must be a strong and consistent basis for making selections, a format for contrasts, and a means of relating contrast and prediction.
From the above view of Whiteman (1970;191), for a contrastive study of two languages to be effective, the analyst must first of all describe vividly the linguistic elements of those languages so as to select the relevant data needed. The data collected should also be contrasted to know their areas of convergence and divergence in order to finally predict learning difficulties which L2 learners may encounter.
Finigan (2008:521) asserts that “for various reasons teaching materials based on contrastive analysis have not proven very effective, in that a number of problems have been uncovered”. He further points out that the recognition of an asymmetry between learners acquiring one another’s language is difficult. His argument is based on the fact that contrastive analysis predicts when two languages contrast; and the differences between them should prove equally challenging for speakers of both languages.
It is worthy of note that contrastive linguistic research has gained momentum with the emergence and rapid development of corpus linguistics (allowing parallel compilation, cluster computing and complex quires) and advances in the automatic assignment of phonological and syntactic categories, which are increasingly focusing on cross-linguistic studies, including massive bilingual corpora of authentic language material, enabling more objective, reliable, high-quality empirical investigation and quantification of formerly mainly intuition-based judgments (Granger 2003:17; Rawoens 2006:3).
Aijmer and Altenberg (1996:12) list the following advantages of bi/multi-lingual corpora.
a. They offer new insights into the languages contrasted, likely to go unnoticed in
studies of a solitary language and by no means obvious even to professionals.
16
b. They can increase our knowledge of language-specific and typological differences as
well as universal features.
c. They illuminate differences between native and non-native texts as well as between
source texts and translations.
d. They can find practical applications in eg. Language pedagogy, translation, and
lexicography.
In addition, Granger (2003:45) maintains that the benefit of contrasting eg. Learners’ output with that from a corpus of professional translations for determining rates of over/under representation is also appealing.
Pedagogically, students ought to be made aware of the range of skills and awareness which they possess from learning and using their first and other languages. Another obvious corollary is that learners who have already had some experience of learning another language will have an advantage embracing successive ones, as they will be able to utilize the formerly acquired and well tried-and-tested skills and strategies. The more languages you know, the easier it is with successive ones (Wikipedia).
Consequently, more emphasis should be placed on developing strategies and skills for language learning since the learner can apply these skills to learning or acquiring other languages. Teachers sometimes believe that a beginner starts from scratch, but in actual sense most have experiences of other languages and skills and knowledge they can apply usefully to learning the new language (Wikipedia). A further rationale for a contrastive approach to linguistic analysis is connected with promoting intercultural competence, i.e. not just knowing what language/register is appropriate for use in particular circumstances
(sociolinguistic competence), but also how this appropriacy differs between cultures.
Thus far, our theoretical review has shown the worth of contrastive analysis irrespective of its criticisms. CA is, therefore, a good framework for analyzing issues of
17 second language teaching and learning (language pedagogy). And that is why this study adopts it as its theoretical base.
2.2 Empirical Studies
Contrastive analysis helps us to identify the differences and similarities between two languages in order to predict the areas of difficulties learners may encounter in learning the target language. Several scholars have used CA as a tool to contrast two languages and have come up with different results.
Ohari (1998) carried out a contrastive study of Igbo and English segmental phonemes.
In his work, he focuses mainly on the similarities and differences between the languages and also predicts the problems an Igbo speaker will encounter in studying the English language.
Dunstan (1969) carried out a contrastive study on the phonological systems of twelve
Nigerian languages. Her findings are based on the differences in the phonemic inventory which native speakers of these languages will find difficult to understand while learning the target language, which may give room for mother tongue interference. Mother tongue interference has become a basic problem to native speakers trying to learn the target language. Based on these facts, Okorji and Okeke (2009) did a phonological survey of
English and Igbo, and came up with the findings that mother tongue interference is a major problem of Igbo speakers trying to learn English as L2.
Asadu (2008) did a study on Igbo and French Adverbs, and says the major difference between the adverbs of the two languages is openness. He notes that the Igbo adverbial is widely accepted to have a closed system, while the French adverb has an open system in most cases. Similarly, Banjo (1969) carried out a contrastive study on the aspects of syntactic and lexical rules of English and Yoruba. He finds out that English and Yoruba syntactic and lexical inventories differ to some extent, and that a Yoruba learner of English will encounter a lot of difficulties while learning English lexis and structure. Again Oluikpe (1978)
18 contrasted Igbo and English syntax. His findings show that mother tongue interference is the major problem confronting an Igbo learner of English. He points out this fact by highlighting the sentence and lexical choice patterns which Igbo students learning English embark on. In the same vein, Mmaduka (1991) studied the adjectives of English and Igbo. His basic findings were also based on interference problems.
Johansson (1973) carried out a study on twenty L2 learners of Swedish from eight different native language backgrounds. Her findings show that while many of the errors were predictable by the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH), others were explainable in terms of articulation.
Furthermore, Matemilola (2002) researched on the vowel harmony systems of Igbo and Yoruba. His observations were that vowel harmony is prominently productive in Igbo than Yoruba; it is much more of a phonological process in Igbo than it is in Yoruba. He further observed that prefixes and suffixes that are conditioned by vowel harmony are in
Igbo, but there are only prefixes in Yoruba. Omachonu (2000) researched on Igala phonology. His basic interest was on the phonological differences between Igala and English.
He observes that Igala operates a seven vowel system and a twenty four consonant system.
He further suggests a thirty sound system for Igala, comprising seven vowels and twenty- three consonants. He made this decision based on the consonants /nm/and /m/ and says they are allophones and should be seen as occurring in free variation.
Cook (1969) carried out a contrastive study of English and Efik phonological, grammatical and semantic systems. According to him, the reason for the research was to examine the abilities of native speakers of Efik in learning English speech sounds. He finds out that using CA is crucial to learning a target language easily. According to Cook, although
Efik learners of English may encounter problems learning English phonological, grammatical and semantic systems, if the two languages are contrasted, the difficulties will lessen. Abbas
19
(1995) investigates the adverbial positions of English and Arabic. His study reveals that learners of English and Arabic have access to more than one place to accommodate the adverbial concerned in a sentence. In a similar view, Hammerly (1982) carried out empirical study on sixty two English speaking learners of Arabic using different tasks. His results show that the greatest difficulty was the suppression of native language (NL) allophones in pronouncing the TL allophones. Another area is the difficulty of producing NL allophones with a different distribution in the TL; also the pronunciation of TL allophones that do not exist in the NL seems to be a problem which the learners encountered.
Finigan (2008) researched into English and Chinese tonal and intonational systems.
He asserts that English speakers find it imperative to learn the Chinese tonal system and find it so easy to adapt to the absence of a tonal system. Ikebude (1988) carried out a contrastive study on Igbo and Yoruba phonemes. She finds out that Igbo consonantal phonemes are more complex than those of Yoruba. She further notes that Igbo speakers trying to learn Yoruba will find it easier than Yoruba speakers trying to learn Igbo. Her reason is that there are some consonantal phonemes of Yoruba that are found in Igbo. Besides, she opines that an Igbo speaker trying to learn Yoruba will encounter some difficulties in the vocalic phonemes due to the fact that there are nasalized vowels in the Yoruba language.
Mbah (1988) carried out a phonological contrastive analysis of Igbo and Yoruba. Her major finding is interference which an Igbo speaker will have while learning Yoruba. In the same vein, Enem (1999) did a contrastive study of Igbo and Hausa phonology. He found out that there are some difficulties faced by an Igbo speaker trying to learn Hausa as an alternate language owing to the differences between the two phonemic systems.
Madobo (1996) studied Igbo and Hausa vowels. In his findings, he says that Igbo has eight (8) vowels, while Hausa has five (5) pairs of vowel sounds. According to him four (4) of Igbo vowels are produced with an expanded pharynx and the remaining four (4) vowels
20 are produced with unexpanded pharynx. Conversely, the five pairs of vowels identified in the
Hausa language constitute five long vowels and five short vowels respectively. According to him, the vowels /i,e/ and /u,o/ are similar in the two languages because they are front and back vowels of both languages. He concludes by saying that vowels do occur freely at every phonetic environment in the Igbo language, but they do not occur in that manner in Hausa.
Ayegba (2011) did a contrastive analysis of English and Igala phonology and morphology. He opines that English and Igala have a number of phonemic differences. He further observes that due to the consonantal and vocalic differences between the languages, an Igala speaker finds it difficult to learn English as a second language. However, the difference between English and Igala morphology is not much. Ayegba explains that Igala dwells more in derivational morphology than inflectional morphology. He says that both languages have free and bound morphemes, undergo processes such as prefixation, compounding, reduplication, clipping and inter fixation. But suffixation is not clear in Igala.
The major learning problem here is, according to him, interference.
Anidobe (2007) researched on Igbo and Hausa phonemes and phonotactics. She finds out that Igbo has a total of 36 phonemes; conversely, Hausa has 44 phonemes. The study reveals that an Igbo speaker learning Hausa will find it difficult to pronounce implosives
/ƃ,ɗ/, ejectives /s’ k’/, flap /y/ with palatalized phonemes /kᴶ, gᴶ , pᴶ/. A Hausa learner of Igbo, on the other hand, will have some difficulties pronouncing the phonemes of Igbo that do not occur in the Hausa language.
Udegbunam (2004) studied Igbo and Ngas phonology. The study shows that an Igbo speaker learning Ngas will find it difficult to articulate a close syllable in the Ngas language.
An Ngas speaker, on the other hand, will find dependent N-syllable morpheme difficult because Ngas does not have a syllabic nasal. Bendo (1974) studied the tonal systems of ten
Nigerian languages. He says that the ten languages of different linguistic groups are selected
21 to illustrate different types of tonal systems. The study reveals that tonal features differ from language to language.
Aura (1991) carried out a study on Hausa and Yoruba phonology. He examines the interference problems learners of either language will face in learning the other. In Aura
(1991), twelve native speakers of the languages were used as informants. The information given was based on the compilation in English. He notices some similarities and a lot of differences between the phonology of the two languages. He predicts that speakers of either language will find it difficult to learn the phonemes of the other owing to the differences between them.
Okoro (1991) examines the segmental phonemes of English and Obioma dialect of
Igbo with the intention of highlighting the differences and similarities between the two languages. According to him, the differences predicted will pose problems to the Obioma native speaker who is learning English. In the same vein, Ike (1998) studied the phonological problems of an Ndi-Ikelionwu speaker of Igbo who learns English as a second language. Her major focus is on the similarities and differences between both languages in order to be able to predict learning difficulties which Ndi-Ikelionwu natives of Igbo will face while learning
English as their L2. Okoro observes that as a result of phonological differences between
English and Ndi-Ikelionwu dialect of Igbo, an Ndi-Ikelionwu learner of English will find it difficult to pronounce some English phonemes correctly.
2.3 Summary
From the literature review so far, it is evident that a good number of scholars have used contrastive analysis as a framework or tool in applied linguistics to solve certain problems which second language learners may encounter in learning their L2 or TL. Despite the fact that CA has over the years attracted criticisms from many scholars, it has been effective in the area of second-language teaching. It helps the language teacher to emphasize
22 the predicted difficulties his students may encounter in second-language learning.
Furthermore, the significance of contrastive analysis to language teaching and learning as we have thus far reviewed in the existing literatures is impeccably explicit. It is a basis for the language teacher to identify second-language learners’ problems. However, much contrastive study has not been done on the Izon language, especially on its phonology. It is at this juncture that the researcher finds it necessary to carry out this study. It is believed that this work will serve as a guide to teachers who teach English as a second language to Izon native speakers.
23
Chapter Three
3.0 Methodology
This chapter presents the procedure which the researcher follows in the study. The chapter is divided into: areas of study, research population and method of data analysis.
3.1 Area of Study
This research work focuses on contrastive study of English and Izon segmental and supra-segmental features. There are many varieties of English; but the two widely used ones are British and American English (Quirk and Greenbaum, 1973:4). However, the variety adopted in this study is the British English, which is the one mostly taught in schools and colleges in Nigeria. The British English is the English variety accepted in educational curriculum in Nigeria.
Izon, on the other hand, has a good number of varieties (dialects), but the one considered in this study is Kolokuma dialect, which is taught in formal (school) setting. Izon is mainly spoken in Bayelsa state of Nigeria. It cuts across five (5) local government areas of the state, namely Southern Ijaw Local Government Area, Yenagoa Local Government Area,
Kolokuma-Okpukuma Local Government Area, Sagbama Local Government Area and
Ekeremor Local Government Area. It belongs to the new Benue-Congo family of languages.
Although some researchers or writers have carried out investigations on a number of linguistic aspects of the Izon language, one hardly finds works or researches done on its phonology.
Furthermore, and particularly, the work looks at the similarities and differences between English and Izon consonants, vowels, supra-segmental features such as stress, intonation and tone. By comparing and contrasting the above areas of the phonology of these two languages (English and Izon), Izon speakers who learn English as L2 will find it easier to overcome the difficulties which they encounter while learning their L2 (English); they will
24 know the interface between the phonology of the two languages, and their departing point(s).
CA, a systematic framework which deals with the study of a pair of languages with a view to identifying their differences and similarities in order to predict learning difficulties which language learners may encounter while learning a target language, is used to analyze English and Izon phonemes in this wise.
3.2 Research Population
The population of the study comprises native speakers of Izon who learn English as a second language in senior secondary schools in Yanagoa, the headquarters of Bayelsa State.
The students examined in these schools, therefore, represent all Izon native speakers who learn English as L2. Izon native speakers, no doubt, have problems in the pronunciation of a good number of words in English. Thus, problems arise as a result of differences between
English and Izon phonology. The differences in the phonology of these two languages lead to mother tongue interference where students are tempted to transfer phonological features from their first language (mostly their mother tongue) to their target language.
The population examined consists of both male and female students of Izon origin; that is to say that the government schools where the population is drawn are made up of male and female students and this is to give the respondents equal opportunity of representation.
Most of these students were born and brought up in Izon communities, where they did their nursery and primary education. They, therefore, have internalized knowledge of their mother tongue (Izon). The researcher herself is a native speaker of Izon, and more importantly, she is a linguist. She, therefore, has a good knowledge of both English and Izon which the study focuses on.
3.3 Method of Data Analysis
This study is purely a descriptive research. The data or information got is analyzed contrastively. Contrastive analysis is applied in the following order: description, comparison
25 and prediction. Based on this order, Corder (1973) says that description and comparison are the first and second steps in CA respectively. Prediction, on the other hand, is the third step; and through the prediction made, curriculum planners and teachers will be able to organize and present the target language in a way that makes learners learn faster and easier.
The descriptions of the segmental and supra-segmental features of English and Izon are done in parallel order so that the similarities and differences between the phonology of these languages are made adequately explicit. The parallel descriptions of the phonology of the languages lead to a reliable comparison of the phonological features of these languages.
The second step or order of analysis in CA as we earlier noted is comparison. This step looks at the interface and the departing points(s) between the variables. That is to say that the phonological features of English and Izon are examined contrastively, where their similarities and differences are drawn outright. Features which are found in both languages are seen as being similar, and those features which are found in one language but not in the other are classified as being different. Following from the above, predictions are made.
The last order of data analysis using CA is prediction. After description and comparison of the features of the two variables under study, predictions are made tentatively to show what may likely be learners’ performances which the researcher has already known through the interpretation of the data with the help of cross-linguistic comparison
(Wardhaugh, 1970:74). Oldin (1989:59) says that predictions in CA are based only on comparison of the linguistic systems of L1 and L2 of the learner.
A good contrastive analysis done in the light of the above assertions would make it easier to draw universal principles on sound predictions about interference of L1 features with
L2 features. This, in turn, leads to production of teaching materials for second language teaching and learning, helping second-language learners to learn easily.
26
Chapter Four
4.0 Presentation and Analysis of Data
In this chapter, data gathered on English and Ijo segmental and suprasegmental features are presented and analyzed contrastively. This is to enable us to find out areas where
Ijo speakers who learn English as L2 encounter problems.
4.1 Presentation of Data
Presented below are data on English and Ijo segmentals and suprasegmentals. We shall start with the segmental phonemes of the two languages.
4.1.1 English and Ijo Segmental Phonemes
Phonemes are sets of smallest units of speech in a language that distinguish one word from another (Ladefoged, 1993:62). Any distinctive unit of sound that can distinguish meaning in a language is, therefore, known as a phoneme. Mbah and Mbah (2010:51) define
‘phoneme’ as a discrete sound that cannot be in any way decomposed further. Phonemes possess some phonetic properties which make them distinctive. These properties make them stand different from one another phonetically.
A phoneme is best described using a minimal pair. A minimal pair is a pair of words which differ only in one segment or phoneme in the same environment and the difference between them further brings meaning difference (Anagbogu, Mbah & Eme, 2010:69;
Omachonu, 2000:24).
Segmental phonemes include the consonantal phonemes and the vocalic phonemes.
4.1.1.1 English and Ijo Consonantal Phonemes
Consonants are speech sounds produced with some levels of obstruction to the airstream from the lungs at some point in the vocal tract (Ladefoged, 1993:67). Consonants in languages are classified based on their manner and places of articulation thus:
27
Fig. 1: English Consonantal Chart
velar
-
-
alveolar tal - Bilabial Labiodental Dental Alveolar Post Palato alveolar Pala Velar Labial Glottal Plosive p b t d k g Fricative f v θ ð ʃ ʒ Affricate s z h ʧ ʤ Nasal m n ŋ
Lateral l Approximant r J w
Fig. 2: Ijo Consonantal Chart (Kolokuma Dialect)
Bilabial Labiodental Alveolar Palatal Velar Labial velar Glottal Plosive p b t d k g kp gb Fricative f v s z ɣ h Nasal m n ŋ Tap r Lateral l Approximant j w
In the following section, English and Ijo consonantal phonemes are given using minimal pairing to show how they can bring about meaning change when they occur in the same environment. 4.1.1.1.1 English consonantal Phonemes
/p/ as in /pet/ pet
/b/ as in /bet/ bet
/t/ as in /kα:t/ cart
28
/d/ as in /kα:d/ card
/k/ as in /kəʊt/ coat
/g/ as in /gəʊt/ goat
/ʤ/ as in /ʤəʊn/ Jone
/z/ as in /zəʊn/ zone
/ʒ/ as in /leʒə/ leisure
/leʤə/ ledger
/ʃ/ as in / mӕʃ/ mash
/tʃ/ as in / mӕtʃ/ match
/m/ as in /met/ met
/n/ as in /net/ net
/ŋ/ as in /wɪŋ/ wing
/θ/ as in /wɪθ/ with
/f/ as in /fæn/ fan
/v/ as in /væn/ van
/s/ as in /sɪn/ sin
/tʃɪn/ chin
/h/ as in /heɪt/ hate
/l/ as in /leɪt/ late
/ð/ as in /ðəʊz/ those
/r/ as in /rəʊz/ rose
/j/ as in /jɔ:n/ yawn
/w/ as in /wɔ:n/ warn
4.1.1.1.2 Ijo Consonantal Phonemes
/p/ as in /pá/ pa –a kind of tree
29
/b/ as in /bá/ ba - kill
/t/ as in /tarí/ tari – love
/d/ as in /dari/ dari - boil
/f/ as in /fɒdí/ fọdị – squeez
/v/ as in /vɒdí/ vọdị - soften
/s/ as in /sí/ si – twenty
/z/ as in /zí/ zi – to give birth
/k/ as in /aká/ aka – tooth
/g/ as in /agá/ aga – a type of yam
/ɣ/ as in /ɣɒ/ ghọ - at / in / to
/gb/ as in/gbɒ/ gbọ-to shun
/h/ as in /έhέ/ ehe – oh
/d/ as in /έdέ/ ede –yam barn
/m/ as in /má/ ma- two
/n/ as in /ná/ na- to hear
/ŋ/ as in /fuŋú / fungu – spring up
/fumú/ fumu- dirt or dust
/kp/ as in /akpa/ akpa – bag
/gb/ as in /agba/ agba – a type of fishing tool
/r/ as in /oró/ oro – pronoun. You (plural)
/I/ as in /oló/ – joking
/j/ as in /ijé/ iye – thing
/w/ as in /iwe/ iwe - envy
4.1.1.2 English and Ijo Vocalic Phonemes Vocalic phonemes which are also known as vowels are speech sounds produced without obstruction to the airstream from the lungs (Mbah & Mbah, 2010).
30
Fig. 3: English Vocalic Chart
(a) Monophthongs u:
i: ʊ
ɪ
ɜ: e ə ɔ: ɒ ʌ æ
α:
(b) Closing Diphthongs
eɪ əʊ
ɔɪ
ąɪ aʊ
(c) Centering Diphthongs
ıə ʊə
ɛə
31
Fig. 4: Ijo Vocalic Chart (Kolokuma Dialect) u
i ʊ І
e o ɛ ɒ
a
English vowels are of two types. These are the single vowels, also known as monophthongs, and the glides also referred to as the diphthongs. The monophthongs of English are classified into long and short vowels, reason being that they differ in length and are represented thus: Long: / i:, α:, ɔ:, u:, ɜ: /
Short: /ɪ, e, æ, ɒ, ʊ, Ʌ, ə /
Ijo vowels Ijo has monophthongs alone in the language. The monophthongs are grouped into wide and narrow vowels. The wide vowels are: /e, i, u, o,/ While the narrow vowels are:/a ε, ɪ , ɒ, ʊ/. The wide vowels are made with expanded pharynx, while the narrow ones are produced with retracted pharynx. However, vowel harmony in Ijo allows only the wide vowels to co-occur in simple Ijo words and the narrow vowels to combine with one another. However, the narrow vowel /a/ is neutral and can co-occur with wide vowels, hence the following: Narrow (-ATR) wide (+ATR) ɪ i ε e ɒ o ʊ u a
32
Examples:
Wide vowels Narrow vowels tei /téi/ play eri /εri/ see bolou /bólóu/ inside ari /ári/ you. uzu /uzú/ festival bʊrʊ /bʊrʊ/ rotten
Considering the above, the vocalic phonemes of English and Ijo languages are presented using minimal pairs. 4.1.1.2.1 English Vocalic Phonemes
/i:/ as in /si:t/ seat
/Ι/ as in /sɪt/ sit
/æ/ as in /kæt/ cat
/α:/ as in /kα:t/ cart
/ ɔ / as in /pɔt/ pot
/ɔ: / as in /pɔ:t/ port
/ʊ/ as in /pʊl/ pull
/u:/ as in /pu:l/ pool
/ʌ/ as in /bʌtǝ/ butter
/bɪtə/ bitter
/ǝ/ as in /stᴂʧə/ stature
/stᴂʧu:/ statue
/e/ as in /bed/ bed
/ɜ:/ as in /bɜ:d/ bird
/ɪə/ as in /hɪə/ hear
/ɛə/ as in /hɛə/ hair
/aɪ/ as in /haɪ/ high
33
/aʊ/ as in /haʊ/ how
/ɔɪ/ as in /rɔι/ Roy
/eι/ as in /reι/ ray
/əʊ/ as in /ʃəʊ/ show
/ʊə/ as in /ʃʊə/ sure
4.1.1.2.2 Ijọ Vocalic Phonemes
/ɪ/ as in /akí/ aki – take
/u/ as in /akú/ aku - bitter
/a/ as in / ári/ ari – you
/ɛ/ as in /έri/ ɛri – see
/i/ as in /bí/ bi – to ask
/ ɒ / as in /bɒ/ bọ – agree
/o/ as in / kpó/ kpo – sound of explosion
/a/ as in /kpá/ kpa- smart, quick
/ʊ/ as in /bʊra/ bụra – cat-fish
/a/ as in /bara/ bara- hand
/e/ as in /éré/ ere- woman
/i/ as in/érí/ eri- thread
4.1.2 English and Ijo Suprasegmental Features
‘Supra-segmental’ in the words of Lyons (1981:64) in Okorji and Okeke (2009:26) refers to the superimposition of features on the segmentals (phonemes). While English has stress and intonation as its suprasegmentals, Ijo has tone as its only suprasegmental. Let us present them one after the other.
34
4.1.2.1 English Stress and Intonation
Stress and intonation are the two suprasegmentals in the English language. They contribute a lot to the meanings of words or sentences in English. The wrong use of English stress or intonation can mar the meaning of a word or sentence. Let us present these two
English suprasegementals one after the other.
4.1.2.1.1 Stress
Stress means the degree of prominence given to a syllable of a word. In English, stress is achieved either by length, higher pitch of the voice, greater amplitude, or a combination of any of the above.
In any word of more than one syllable, one syllable is always stressed while the other syllables have a lesser degree of stress or are not stressed at all (unstressed). There are basically three degrees of stress in English. They are: primary stress, secondary stress and weak stress Lyons (1981:65).
Primary stress is placed on the syllable that received the highest degree of prominence. This can be observed in the following words:
/ꞌa:tikəl/ - article
/ꞌfa:ð∂/ - father
Secondary stress is the degree of stress that is less in prominence than the primary one. This can be indicated in the following words:
/,edjʊ'keɪʃn/ - education
/,fəʊt∂'græfik/ - photographic
A weak stress is the one that does not receive any prominence; the syllable on which the degree of stress is neither primary nor secondary, is referred to as a weak syllable and therefore unstressed. The first syllable of the following word /rɪ'pɔ:t/ is unstressed. It is
35 unstressed because it does not receive any prominence. And a weak stress is usually unmarked to indicate that no degree of stress, primary or secondary is involved.
Note that the primary stress is marked / ꞌ/ before the syllable bearing it. And the secondary stress is marked /,/ before the syllable bearing it. However, an unstressed syllable is usually unmarked.
English stress has a number of linguistic functions. Stress performs both lexical and grammatical functions in English. That is to say that there are word stress and sentence stress in English. Stress can be used to distinguish word-classes; noun from verb, verb from adjective etc. The word “export” can either be a noun or a verb owing to stress placement. It is a noun when the first syllable receives the highest degree of stress and a verb when the second syllable is accented. However, this is not always the case because stress placement does not distinguish word classes in most cases.
4.1.2.1.2 Intonation
Intonation in English refers to the variations in pitch of the voice. This is very significant at the clause and sentence level. That is to say that intonation is clause or sentence-based. Intonation can be falling, rising, falling-rising or rising-falling.
Intonation pattern for a statement, command, or question beginning with an interrogative word is always a falling one. This is shown in the following sentence.
- [. . . - . . า̚ ]
“He told her to go to the market”
However, intonation pattern for a yes/no question is a rising one. A statement form on the other hand may be said with a rising intonation and a question is therefore realized
.Rising intonation is shown in the following sentences:
- . - . . . [ ╯ ]
“Are you coming tomorrow?”
36
(Yes/no question)
- . [. . . . ╯ ]
“She is leaving tomorrow?”
(A statement changed to a question)
In the above examples, the dot [. ] indicates unstressed or weak syllable. While the dash [-] indicates stressed syllable.
Intonation has communicative functions in English as put by Crystal (1992:37).
Intonation signals the grammatical structure; that is, it serves as punctuation in grammatical or syntactic structure. It denotes sentence and clause boundaries, where a sentence is distinguished from a clause. It establishes contrasts between grammatical structures like questions and statements; that is to say that a question can be formed from a statement using intonation.
4.1.2.2 Ijo Tone
Tone is the pitch variations applied to syllables or words in tone languages for meaning distinction. Pike (1948) sees tone language as a language having lexical significant contrastive but relative pitch on each syllable. Mbah and Mbah (2010:118) assert that, the tone of voice is as a result of a manipulation of the pitch of voice. Pitch is used in tone languages in other to achieve different meaning from a word with the same phonemic composition by modulating, using the pitch different ways on syllables.
However, languages that are using the above mentioned pitch form are classified as tonal languages. More so, among tone languages, there are some languages in the world that make use of contour tonal system, which involves the syllable undergoes a lot of glides in pitch during production in other to derive different meanings. On the one hand, in register tonal system, the syllable or pitch of the syllable does not undergo glide. This is more discrete because the tones fall on syllables. In other words register tonal system; tones of different
37 levels either high or low are perceptually steady in their production. An example of register tonal system is ijo; because it has high tone (H) and low tone (L). In a tone language, a single lexical item can be tone-marked differently to give several meanings. Different tone languages have different tone types; it varies from language to language.
In Ijo (Kolokuma dialect), there are two tone types. They are low tone (unmarked) and high tone (marked or represented as acute accent ′ ). The two tones in Ijo are shown in the following lexical items: aka – tooth aká – maize bụrụ́ – rotten bụ́rụ́ – prophesy bará – hand bárá – forgot temí – pound témí – inject ugé – eagle uge – celebration témé - mold téme – spirit or shadow póú – witch póu – press
From the above data, it is clear that tone contrast in Ijo brings about changes in the meaning of a lexical item. On grammatical function of tone in Ijo, the following illustrations are important:
Eri bede fi Ébi pre
38
He clothes bought Ebi give
“He bought clothes for Ebi” (statement)
Erĺ bede fi Ébi pre
He clothes bought Ebi give?
“He bought clothes for Ebi?”
It is evident therefore that the primary function of tone in a tone language is meaning distinction where one lexical item assumes different meanings owing to tone changes or differences which occur while such a lexical item is being pronounced. In Ijo, tone differences can lead one lexical item to have more than one meaning (its lexical function).
Grammatically, on the other hand, tone can distinguish between statement and question.
However, the lexical function of tone is more evident in Ijo than its grammatical function.
4.2 Comparison
The data presented in the previous section are compared here. Contrastively, the differences and similarities between English and Ijo consonantal and vocalic phonemes as well as the suprasegemental features are contrasted in this section with a view to identifying possible difficulties encountered by Ijo speakers learning English.
4.2.1 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijo Consonants
For easy analysis of the differences and similarities between the consonants of the two languages, the following table is important:
39
Table 1: A Contrastive Table of English and Ijo Consonants
S/N English Consonants Ijo Consonants 1 p p 2 b b 3 t t 4 d d 5 k k 6 g g 7 - kp 8 - gb 9 f f 10 v v 11 θ - 12 ð - 13 s s 14 z z 15 ʃ - 16 ʒ - 17 - ɣ
18 h h 19 ʧ - 20 ʤ - 21 m m 22 n n 23 ŋ ŋ 24 l l 25 r r 26 j j 27 w w
It is evident from the above table that while English has 24 consonants, Ijo has 21 consonants. The following consonants are found in English: /θ, ð, ʃ, Ʒ, ʧ, ʤ/ but not in Ijo. In the same vein, the consonants/ kp, gb, ɣ/ are found in Ijo but not in English.
However, the two languages have 18 consonants in common. They are: /p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, s, z, h, m, n, ŋ, ǀ, r, j, w/.
From the foregoing, it is axiomatic to say that the similarities between English and Ijo consonantal phonemes outweigh their differences. However, an Ijo learner of English will
40 find English consonants such as /θ, ð, ʃ, Ʒ, ʧ, ʤ/ difficult to pronounce since they are not realized in Ijo.
The issue of double articulation is another important difference between English and
Ijo phonemic entries. Double articulation occurs when two primary places of articulation have simultaneous strictures in the production of a speech sound. In ijo, there are two speech sounds of this kind. They are the labial-velar sounds /kp/ and /gb/.
An articulation of this type is predominant in most West African languages (Agbedo, 2000).
4.2.2 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijo Vowels
It is also easier to analyse the differences and similarities between English and Ijo vowels using a contrastive table as shown below.
Table 2: A Contrastive Table for English and Ijo Vowels
S/N English Vowel Ijo Vowels 1 i: i 2 ɪ ɪ 3 - e 4 ɛ ɛ 5 a a 6 α: - 7 ɒ ɒ 8 ɔ: - 9 - o 10 v v 11 u: u 12 ^ - 13 ə - 14 ɜ: - 15 ɪə - 16 ɛə - 17 aɪ - 18 aʊ - 19 ɔɪ - 20 eɪ - 21 əʊ - 22 ʊə -
41
From the contrastive table above, it is clear that there are a good number of differences between English and Ijo vowels. While English has 20 vowels, Ijo has only nine.
The following vowels are not found in Ijo /, ə, ɜ:, α:, ɔ: , ɪə, ɛə, aɪ, aʊ, ɔɪ, eɪ, əʊ, ʊə/ but they are in English. There are no diphthongs in Ijo.
Furthermore, Ijo does not differentiate between short and long vowels. What is observed in Ijo is vowel reduplication where a vowel is doubled in a word to stretch its pronunciation. Vowel reduplications are observed in the following Ijo words:
/opuú/ opu – to be big
/ehée/ eh – oh!
/akpaá/ akpa – bag
In the above words of Ijo, the sounds /u, e, a/ are reduplicated. On the contrary,
English distinguishes between short and long vowels. The English short vowels are:
/ɪ/ as in /pɪt/ pit /e/ as in /get/ get /æ/ as in /fæt/ fat /ɒ/ as in /pɒt/ pot /ʊ/ as in /pʊǀ/ pull /ʌ/ as in /ǀʌv/ love /ə/ as in /əbəʊv/ above
The following long vowels are evident in the English language:
/i:/ as in /bi:t/ beat
/α:/ as in /fα:t/ fart
/ɔ:/ as in /pɔ:t/ port
/u:/ as in /pυ:ǀ/ pool
/ɜ:/ as in /gɜ:ǀ/ girl
Following from the above, we understand that while English has both short and long vowels, Ijo has only short vowels. But vowel reduplication in Ijo is closely related tothe term
42
‘long vowel’. The issue of long vowels in English, therefore, may be confusing to Ijo speakers learning English. An Ijo speaker learning English may pronounce the English word
‘seat’ /sɪt/ instead of /si:t/
4.2.3 Analysis of Differences and Similarities between English and Ijo Suprasegmentals
We earlier established in 4.1.2 that both English and Ijo have suprasegmental features.
Stress and intonation are the English suprasegmentals while tone is the only suprasegmental feature in Ijo.
Thus far, we have seen that even though English and Ijo both have suprasegmentals, their operations differ; while stress and intonation are for English, tone is for Ijo. English is, therefore, a stress language while Ijo is a tone language.
Because of the differences between the suprasegmentals of the two languages, Ijo learners of English will find it difficult to learn English stress and intonation easily in that they would naturally and unconsciously try to pronounce English words as they do pronounce
Ijo words without taking into cognizance the suprasegmental differences between the two.
English and ijo languages have some similarities in their suprasegmental features.The major similarities in both languages are on the area of lexical and grammartical functions.
Stress in English has so many linguistic functions. For instance, stress can always be used to change a word to different word classes and meaning. Examples:
Noun Verb
ꞌConduct /ꞌkɒndʌkt/ Conꞌduct /kənꞌdʌkt/
ꞌContract /ꞌkɒntrækt/ Conꞌtract /kənꞌtrækt/
ꞌabstract /ꞌæbstrækt/ abꞌstract /əbꞌstrækt/
ꞌaffix /ꞌæfɪks/ aꞌffix /əꞌfɪks/
From the above illustrations, it is so glaring that the presences of stress in different position in a particular word created different meaning and word class.
43
Ijo tone equally has the function of stress in English. It performs grammatical and lexical functions. Tone in ijo can be used to change a word to different word classes. This is evident in the examples below:
aku /ӕku/ bitter
aku /ӕkú/ type of tree noun
amaa /amaa/ right adjective
amaa /amaá/ adultery noun
bɪrɪ /bírí/ wash (oneself) bath verb
bɪrɪ /bɪrɪ/ middle noun.
Apart from the grammatical functions found in both languages in the basis of stress and tone, stress is equally noticed or achieved either by length higher amplitude acoustically.
However, tone is achieved through the manipulation of the pitch of voice.
English intonation and Ijo Tone have some differing features. Intonation in English is achieved through pitch variations involving stretch of utterance. While tone early mentioned is by manipulation or modulation of the pitch of voice. Intonation can be falling, rising, falling rising or rising falling. Tone in the other hand is in high and low in ijo language.
Furthermore, intonation cannot be found in a single word or lexical item except in sentenced based, statement or questioning. Whereas tone can be derived from a single word or lexical item. Examples can be seen on pages (41) and (42) respectively.
Another important area of note is the area of showing intonation and tone. Intonation of an utterance in English is shown with a dash (_) to indicate stressed syllables and small dots are for unstressed syllables. See the above mentioned pages for evidence.
Diacritic marks are used to show whether a phoneme is high or low in Ijo tone to give meaning distinction. Intonation refers to the rise or fall of voice in either speech or song.
Intonation plays an important role in English because utterances are given on different tunes.
44
It is important to note that in the English Language intonation functions in word groups and not in isolated words or syllables unlike Ijo where focus is on isolated word or syllable by the use of tone. A change of tune in the production of word does not necessarily change its meaning in English but it does in Ijo. For example, the word ‘fari’ (to play music) in Ijo when said in a high tone means ‘to play music’ while the same word could be said in a low tone to mean (to sharp nife). However, in English a word retains its meaning whatever the tune used.
In the English Language sentence, lexical words are stressed while grammatical words are not. The lexical words are nouns, verbs, adjective and adverbs. While the grammatical words are prepositions, articles, auxiliary verbs, pronouns and conjunctions. The use of stress in English sentences gives rise and fall in voice pitch which leads to the rhythmic pattern of the language.
There are two major types of intonation in English language: Rising Tune and Falling
Tune. Rising tune is used for polar questions (Yes or No answer questions); it is also used for incomplete statement, surprise, list of items etc. This can be illustrated in the following sentences:
- Are you coming to class tomorrow / (polar question)
- When you come there / (incomplete statement)
- It has happened again / (surprise)
- Mariam has earrings, blous, head-tie and shoes / (list of items)
Falling tune, on the other hand, is used for statements, commands, exclamations, wh- questions, certainty etc. Let us exemplify with the following sentences:
- The boy is my friend\ (statement)
- Where are you now? \ (wh-question)
45
- The vice-chancellor of University of Nigeria Nsukka, professor Bartho N. Okolo is
from Enugu State\ (certainty)
- Come here\ (command)
- What a good job! \ (exclamation).
Generally, intonation plays an important role in the overall interpretation of sentence in English as it helps in conveying diverse grammatical interpretations to whatever is said in the language.
46
Chapter Five
Findings and Conclusion
5.1 Findings
This study has examined the segmental phonemes and suprasegmental features of
English and Ijo using CA as its tool. The study began with an introduction which captures the synopsis of the entire work. This is followed by a review of related literature where other scholars’ works were examined in relation to this present study. The method of data analysis comprises description, comparison and prediction as it is in the tradition of CA. Predictions were made based on the similarities and differences identified between the two languages’ segmentals and suprasegmentals.
The study shows that differences abound between English and Ijo segmental and suprasegmental features. English has a total of 44 phonemes: 24 consonants and 20 vowels;
Ijo has 30 phonemes: 21 consonants and 9 vowels. The English dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/, palato-alveolar fricatives /ʃ/ and /Ʒ/, palato-alveolar affricates /ʧ/ and /ʤ/ are lacking in Ijo.
The labial-velar plosives /kp/ and /gb/ which are present in Ijo, do not occur in English. In the same vein, Ijo velar fricative /ɣ/ is lacking in English. It is, therefore, difficult for Ijo speakers learning English as L2 to pronounce correctly the English words which contain such English consonantal phonemes lacking in Ijo.
It is also discovered in this work that there are a lot of differences between English and Ijo vocalic phonemes. While English has a total of 20 vowels: 12 monophthongs and 8 diphthongs, Ijo has only 9 vowels. Ijo does not distinguish between short and long vowels; what obtains here is vowel duplication. The English long vowels are: /i:, α:, ɔ:, ɜ:, υ:/. There are also no diphthongs in Ijo as they are in English. The English diphthongs are: /ɪə, ɛə, aɪ, eɪ, aʊ, ɔɪ, əʊ, ʊə/. What obtain in Ijo are vowel combinations which are similar to closing diphthongs. They are: [eɪ, ou, aɪ, aʊ, ɔɪ].The English vowels /ʌ, ɜ:, æ/ are not present in Ijo.
47
And this in conjunction with the earlier mentioned vocalic differences between the two languages constitutes pronunciation difficulties to Ijo speakers learning English.
On suprasegmentals, stress and intonation are English suprasegmental features, but Ijo has only one suprasegmental feature which is tone. While English is a stress-timed language,
Ijo is a syllable-timed language. This generates problems to Ijo learners of English because in trying to abide by the tonal features in their L1, there is usually a tendency to transfer such features to English while learning it as L2. To this end, Ijo speakers find it difficult to use the right English stress and intonation patterns, so that every English syllable is stressed by Ijo speakers and unnecessary pauses are made by them while reading English scripts or passages.
Furthermore, Ijo speakers learning English do not encounter problems where the two languages have similar phonemes. The English consonantal phonemes, /s,z,f,v,p,b,t,d,k,g/ do not constitute any pronunciation difficulties to Ijo speakers because they are equally present in Ijo. Difficulties are encountered in areas where the two languages operate differently
The differences between English and Ijo segmentals and suprasegmentals, therefore, may cause difficulties to Ijo learners of English phonology. The difficulties are enumerated below:
(1) There are no dental fricatives in Ijo, and this leads to Ijo speakers substituting /t/ for /θ/
and /d/ for /ð/. The words “tree” and “three”, “day” and “they” may be confused.
(2) The palato-alveolar fricatives /ʃ/ and / ʒ / do not occur in Ijo. They are usually replaced by
Ijo learners of English with alveolar fricative /z/, thus the word “measure” /meʒə/ is
pronounced /mezɒ /. Also, the palato-alveolar fricative /ʃ/ is replaced with alveolar
fricative /s/ by Ijo learners of English. The word “ship” /ʃɪp/, for instance, is pronounced
/sɪp/.
48
(3) Ijo does not have the palato-alveolar affricates /ʤ/ and /ʧ/. These are usually replaced by
/z/ and /s/, so that the words “rage” and “chip” are pronounced [rez] and [sΙp] instead of
/reɪʤ / and /ʧɪp/.
(4) Ijo speakers learning English have difficulty in distinguishing between English /i: / and
/ɪ/ because Ijo does not differentiate between short and long vowels. E.g. Ijo speakers of
English will pronounce the English word: seat /si:t/ as sit /sit/. However, it is observed
that Ijo /ɪ/ is closely related to English /ɪ/.
(5) The words “back” and “bark are usually confused because Ijo speakers have difficulty in
making distinction between the short and long vowels /ӕ/ and /ɑ:/.E.g. Ijo speakers will
pronounce the English word “ bark” /bɑ:k/ as /bӕk/ “back”.
(6) It is not also easy for Ijo speakers to make the distinction between English /ɒ/ and /ɔ:/,
thus confusing words like “pot” and “port”, “cot” and “caught”. This means that an Ijo
speaker of English will pronounce the above words thus: pot /pɒt/ and port as /pɒt/, cot as
/kɒt/ and caught as /kɒt/ instead of /pɒt/ and /pɔ:t/, /kɒt/ and /kɒ:t/
(7) Ijo speakers find it difficult to pronounce the English central vowels /ʌ/, /ɜ:/ and /ə/. The
Ijo vowel /ɔ/ is usually substituted for English /ʌ/, therefore confusing such words as
“cot” or “caught” with “cut”, “hot” with “hut”. The syllables in English words, which are
pronounced with vowels /ɜ:/ or /ə/, will have different vowels substituted by Ijo speakers
according to the spelling of those words, so that the words “turn” and “doctor” may be
pronounced /tɒn/ and /dɒktɒ/.
(8) Diphthongs are not present in the Ijo language, but there are vowel combinations similar
to the English closing diphthongs such as [eɪ, ou, aɪ, aʊ, ɔɪ]. The difference is that, in Ijo,
each vowel forms a syllable so that the sequence is disyllabic. This is common to most
tone languages the world over. The absence of diphthongs in Ijo, therefore, constitutes a
little problem to Ijo learners of English since there are combinations of vowels in Ijo
49
similar to English diphthongs. For instance, Ijo learners of English pronounce the English
words ‘go’ as I goo/ instead of /gəʊ/, buy as /bai/ instead of /baɪ/ bake /béìkí/ instead of
/beɪk/ ‘cow’ /káù/ instead of /kaʊ/, boy /bɔì/ instead of /bɔɪ/.
(9 However, the centring diphthongs of English are very difficult for Ijo speakers learning
English. The English /ɪə/ and /ɛə/ are frequently both pronounced [ɪ], thus confusing such
words as “shear”/ʃɪə/ with “share” /ʃeə/, “dear” /dɪə/ with “dare” /deə/. The English /ʋə/ is
usually replaced by [ʊa], so that the word “pure” is pronounced [pʊa] instead of /pjʋə/.
(10) Ijo speakers also tend to pronounce English words based on tonal features (the pitch of
the voice on each vowel of a word) and not on stress pattern as it is customary of the
English language. Examples
/ 'bæŋk/ bank /báὴkì/
/ 'læŋgwɪʤ/ language /láὴgwìzì/
/ 'ɒpəreɪt/ operate /ɒpèrátì/
/ 'rɑ:ðə/ rather /rádà/
/ ‚ͻ:gənaɪꞌzeɪʃn/ organization /ó:gènàzésǹ/
(11) Ijo speakers of English find it difficult to use stress patterns to determine English word
classes (parts of speech) e.g
Noun Verb ꞌConduct /ꞌkɒndʌkt/ Conꞌduct /kənꞌdʌkt/ ꞌContract /ꞌkɒntrækt/ Conꞌtract /kənꞌtrækt/ ꞌabstract /ꞌæbstrækt/ abꞌstract /əbꞌstrækt/ ꞌaffix /ꞌæfɪks/ aꞌffix /əꞌfɪks/
That is to say that an Ijo learner of English would pronounce, for instance, the word
‘content’ using the same stress pattern whether it is realized as a noun or verb as exemplified above.
50
(12) An Ijo learner of English does not differentiate between strong and weak syllables in
connected speech so that the utterances bellow would be erroneously realized.
It was an accident
/ꞌɪt ꞌwɒz ꞌæn ꞌæksɪdnt/instead of /ɪt wəz ən ꞌæksɪdnt/.
Give it to him
/ꞌgɪv ꞌɪt ꞌtu: ꞌhɪm/ instead of /gɪv ɪt tə hɪm/
(13) Ijo is a syllable- timed language while English is stress- timed. An Ijo speaker would
want to produce English words syllable by syllable as it is applicable in his language
thereby waving off the stress patterns in words and utterances given to him. Based on
this, it will be difficult for the Ijo native speaker to produce such words as:
/penltɪ/ “penalty” as /penaliti/
/bred/ “bread” as /buredi/
(14) The speaker’s mood or attitude is another area of difficulty. In English intonation, a
speaker’s attitude gives rise to a change in a word or utterance in an intonation pattern
and meaning of utterance. But in the Ijo language, the speaker’s state does not affect the
change of tone distribution in a word. In line with this, an Ijo learner of English does
not differentiate between the falling and rising of the pitch of voice in the following
utterances.
For example
No
No
The downward arrow indicates that the speaker’s refusal is definite while the upward arrow indicates that the speaker has not quite made up his/her mind. To an Ijo speaker of
English, ‘No’ remains ‘No’ irrespective of the pitch variation which could alter the semantic import of the word or utterance.
51
5.2 Conclusion
The thrust of this study is a contrastive analysis of English and Ijo segmental phonemes and suprasegemental features with the aim of finding out areas where Ijo speakers learning English as L2 encounter problems. From the data gathered and analysed, it is revealed that there are a good number of differences as well as similarities between the two languages’ segmental phonemes, that is consonantal and vocalic phonemes. The study also reveals that English suprasegmentals are totally different from Ijo suprasegmentals. The explanation of the phonological data of these two languages done in this study is, no doubt, valuable to the teaching and learning of English for both teachers and learners of English of
Ijo origin. Also worthy of note is the fact that the findings of this study will go a long way to improving upon the knowledge of curriculum planners and textbook writers.
Finally, it is evident from the foregoing discussion of English and Ijo segmental phonemes and suprasemental features that the set objectives of this research have been adequately met. And the tool of CA which this study adopts has been evidently utilized and contributed immensely to the success of the work.
5.3 Recommendations
All the assertions and/or findings in this research work are unreservedly open to further research for additions and amplifications where possible. That is to say that the researcher does not claim a complete survey of the topic under study.
However, the findings and/or predictions of this research should be given attention by curriculum planners, syllabus designers, textbook writers and teachers because they will enhance effective teaching and learning of the target language. More importantly, teachers should always lay emphasis on areas where differences abound between L1 and L2 because these constitute greater part of difficulties encountered by L2 learners.
52
Finally, government at various levels should set up language programmes which encourage teaching and learning of indigenous languages because a good knowledge of one’s
L1 even facilitates the learning of one’s L2.
53
References
Abbas, A. (1995). Contrastive analysis: Is it a living fossil? IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 33, 195-215.
Adimmuo, G.C. (1987). The phonology of English and Adazi Nnkwu Dialect of Igbo: A contrastive sketch. B.A. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Agbedo, C.U. (2000). General linguistics: An introductory reader. Nsukka: AC Resources konsult.
Aijmer, R. & Altenberg, B.R. (1996). The role of contrastive language teaching. www.Wikipedia.com.
Allen, J.P.B. (1975). A paper in applied linguistics. London: The Pitman Press.
Anagbogu, P.N; Mbah, B.M & Eme, C.A. (2010). Introduction to linguistics (2nd ed.). Awka: Amaka Dreams Limited.
Anasiudu, B.N. (1978). Nominal endocentric structures in English and Igbo. A contrastive study. B.A. Thesis, Department of Linguistics and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Anidobe, C.J. (2007). Contrastive analysis of Igbo and Hausa phonemes and phonotactics. An MA Thesis Submitted to the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Asadu, F. (2008). Mother-tongue interference: A case of Igbo speakers learning French adverb. Nkoa: Nkuzina Omumu Asusu. .1, 20-25.
Aura, K. (1991). A contrastive study of the phonology of Hausa and Yoruba. B.A. Thesis, University of Jos.
Ayegba, M. (2011). Contrastive analysis of English and Igala phonology and morphology. A Seminar Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment for the Award of M.A. in Linguistics.
Bamgbose, A. (1971). English language in Nigeria. London: Longman.
Bendo, S.R. (1974). Studies in Nigerian languages: Ten Nigerian tone systems. Jos: Institute of Linguistics.
Burens, P.V. (1980). Contrastive analysis. Current Issues in Linguistics Theory. Vol. 1. www.Wikipedia.com Retrieved on 5/06/2011 by 10.am.
Contrastive Analysis. www.Wikipedia.com the freecncyclopedia. Retrieved on 15/11/2011, by 3.30pm.
Contrastive analysis and second language. Retrieved on 7/06/2011 from www.wikipedia.com by 4PM.
Cook, T.L. (1967). The pronunciation of Efik for speakers of English. African Studies Programme and Intensive Language Training Center. 29-38.Indiana: University Press.
Corder, S.P. (1973). Introducing applied linguistics. London: Longman Group Ltd.
54
Dulay, A.C. & Burt, M.K. (1974). You can’t learn without goofing: An analysis of children’s second language errors. In J.C. Richards (Ed.). Error Analysis perspectives on second language acquisition (pp 95-123). London: Longman.
Dustan, E. (1969). A handbook on the sound systems for teachers of English. London: Green and Co Ltd.
Enem, I.C.O. (1999). Contrastive analysis of Igbo and Hausa phonology. B.Ed Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
English Phonology. www.Wikipedia.comthefreencydopdia. Retrieved on 16/11/2011, by 10am.
Finegan, E. (2008). Language: Its structure and use (5th ed). New York: Michael Rosenberg Publisher.
Fisiak, J. (1981). Some introductory notes concerning contrastive linguistics. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Contrastive linguistics and the language teacher (pp. 1-13). Oxford: Pergamon Press,.
Fries, C.C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Granger, C. (2003). Contrastive corpora and language teaching. www.wikipedia.com Retrieved on 1/06/2011, by 11:30am.
Greethaku, V. (2002). A contrastive analysis of Hindus and Malayalam. A PhD Dissertation, University of Kerala. Retrieved on 1/06/2011 from www.wikipedia.com by 4:30PM.
Hodne, B. (1985). Yet another look on inter-language phonology: The modification of English syllable structure by native speakers of Polish. Language Learning, 35, 405- 422.
Igwe, C.D. (1989). Derivational morphology in the Achi dialect of the Igbo language. B.A Thesis, Department of Linguistics and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Ike, B.O. (1998). A contrastive study of the phonology of English and Igbo. BA Thesis, Department of Linguistics and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Ikenna, E. (1999). A comparative study of the phonology of Igbo and Hausa. BA Thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of Jos.
James, C. (1980). Contrastive analysis. London : Longman.
Johannson, F. (1973). Immigrant Swedish phonology: A study of multiple contact analysis. Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Johnson, S. (1975). A paper in contrastive linguistics and language testing. London: Green and Company Limited.
Katamba, F. (1989). An introduction to phonology. London: Longman.
55
Klein, W. (1986). Second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ladefoged, p. (1993). A course in phonetics (3rd ed.). Malden: Harcourt.
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Lyons, J. (1981). Language and linguistics: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MacCarthy, P. (1978). The teaching of pronunciation. Cambridge: CUP.
Madobo, S.M. (1996). Contrastive analysis of Igbo and Hausa vowels. B. Ed Thesis, Department of Linguistics and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Matemilola, P. (2002). Contrastive linguistic analysis of Igbo and Yoruba. Journal of Education, Legal and Management Studies ( ABUJELMAS), 3(2), 36-40.
Mbah, B.M. & Mbah, E.E. (2010). Topics in phonetics and phonology: Contributions from Igbo. Nsukka: AP Express Publishers.
Mbah, D. (1988). Teaching Yoruba to Igbo speaking children: A contrastive analysis of the formal characteristics of Igbo and Yoruba. B.A. Thesis, Linguistics and Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Menyuk, P. (1977). Language and motivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ohari, N.R. (1998). A contrastive study of the segmental phonemes of English and Igbo languages. M.A. Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Okorji, R.I. & Okeke, C.O. (2009). The effects of the differences between the sound systems of English and Igbo on the effective learning of English in Nigerian schools. NKO: Nkuzi nà Ọmụmụ Asụsụ, 2,. 25-36.
Oldin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oluikpe, B.O. (1978). English in Igboland: A contrastive study of English and Igbo syntax. Onitsha: Africana Educational Publishers.
Omachonu, G.S. (2000). Fundamentals of phonology and the study of Igala language. Ankpa: Bencaz Printing Production.
Osgood, C.E. (1949). The similarity paradox in human learning. A Resolution Psychology Reviews, 56, 86-98.
Pike,K.L.(1948). Tone Language. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan press.
56
Politzer, R.L. (1970). Foreign language learning: A linguistic introduction. New Jersey Prince.
Quirk, R. & Greenbaum, S. (1973). A university grammar of English. London: Longman.
Rawoens, S.D. (2006). Language teaching. www.Wikipedia.com.
Schmitt, N. (2002). An introduction to applied linguistics (1st ed.). London: Hodder Education.
Schmitt, N. (2010). An introduction to applied linguistics (2nd ed.). London: Hodder Education.
Schuster, K. (1997). Lado and the contrastive analysis. Retrieved on June 6, 2011 from http://www.coas.unncc.edu/linguistics/courses/4263/4263lado.htm, by 7:45 PM.
Spencer, J. (1971). The English language in West Africa. London: Longman.
Tarone, E. (1978). The phonology of inter-language. In J. Richards (Ed.). Understanding second and foreign language learning (pp. 15-33). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Udegbunam, C.A. (2004). A contrastive study of the phonology of Igbo and Ngas. An MA Thesis Submitted to the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and other Nigerian languages, UNN.
Upshur, J. (1962). Language proficiency testing and contrastive analysis dilemma. Language Learning, 12, 2.
Wardhaugh, R. (1970). The contrastive analysis hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly, 4, 123-130.
Weinreich, U. (1953). Language in contact. The Hague: Malton
Whiteman, L. (1970). Contrastive analysis: Problems and procedures. Language Learning, 20, 191-197.
Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in language teaching. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.
Williams, D. (1990). English language teaching: An integrated approach. Ibadan: Spectrum Books.