View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE Jurnal SMART , Volume 4, No 1 (2018), Page. 61- 72 provided by E-Journal STKIP MPL (Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung) ISSN Cetak : 2356-2048 AnISSN Analysis Online of...... : 2356-203X DOI: https://doi.org/10.26638/js.511.203X

AN ANALYSIS OF PATTANI’S STUDENTS PRONUNCIATION IN PRONOUNCING ENGLISH AT UIN LAMPUNG

Wahyuni Wulandary Mulyadi 1), Fithrah Auliya Ansar 2), Idham Kholid 3) 1 Raden Intan State Islamic University, Bandar Lampung email: [email protected] 2 Raden Intan State Islamic University, Bandar Lampung email: [email protected] 3 Raden Intan State Islamic University, Bandar Lampung email: [email protected]

Abstract

This research is aimed to find out common pronunciation errors in pronouncing English fricative thus, to find how many global and local errors in pronouncing English fricative based on Communicative Effect Taxonomy, and to find the causes of pronunciation error made by Pattani’s students. This research used qualitative research. The result shows that the common error is fricative [ð]. Then, some causes of errors by the subjects according to interlingual and intralingual transfer, such as: first, fricative [θ], [ð], [Ʒ] are unshared sounds specific to English, [θ] and [ð] were realized as stop [t] and [d].

Keywords: Pattani’s Students, Pronunciation, Fricative Consonants.

1. INTRODUCTION as like English, linguistically the way Language is very important in they learn will be affected by both their human life that is needed for real tribe and national language. This communication among people. Ogden condition shows both tribe and national (2009) states language is one of language will make problem in learning distinctive characteristics of human new language. beings. The language may show The problems that usually arise people’s nationality. In the world, there are mistake and error in both verbal and are many countries that have many of non-verbal aspect. According to Brown cultural background with more than (2007) a mistake refers to a performance hundred of mother tongue. For example, error that is either random guess or a when an Indonesian learns new language slip, in that it is a failure to utilize a

Creation is distributed under the Creative Commons License Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Published in: http://ejournal.stkipmpringsewu-lpg.ac.id/index.php/smart

Jurnal SMART : Journal of Teaching and Applied Linguistics. 61

WahyuniAn Analysis Wulandary...... of......

known system correctly. In short, we b. How many global and local cannot deny mistake and error when we errors in pronouncing English learn new language because mistake and fricative based on error are the process of learning. For Communicative Effect example, people who still pronounced Taxonomy? invite as [ɪnvaɪt] instead of [ɪnfɪt]. They . What are the causes of errors change [f] sound of the word with [f] made in English pronunciation sound and omitting [a]. This condition of Pattani’s students? also occurs by Pattani’s students who study at English Study Program of English Tarbiyah and Teacher Training Faculty. In English there are mainly nine In learning process, most of them fricatives in English (Yahvas, 2011): [f], pronounced lose [lu:] as [lɒs]; they [v], [ϴ], [ð], [s], [z], [ʃ], [Ʒ], [h]. change [u:] into vowel [ɒ] and O’Grady (1996) states fricatives are changed voiced fricative [z] into consonants produced with a continuous voiceless fricative [s]. airflow through the mouth. In others From explanation above, this hand, Ladefoged and Sandra (2012) research will focus on Pattani’s students states that fricative is made by air being pronunciation especially in pronouncing forced through a narrow. English English fricative consonants. Due to fricatives are divided into two major know the specific information of categories of voicing quality (O’Grady, pronunciation the researcher needed 1996): voiced fricatives [v], [ð], [z], and phonology as a tool of the research in [Ʒ] and voiceless fricatives [f], [θ], [s], analyzing the data. According to Richard [ʃ], and the glottal [h]. The (2009) phonology is the study of sound distinguishing feature of fricatives systems Based on the background of the sounds occur when they are produced. study state earlier, the objectives of the The labiodental fricatives [f] and [v] are students are: produced when sounds involving lower a. What are the common lip and upper teeth. The pronunciation errors in [θ] and [ð] are produced when the pronouncing English fricative tongue placed against or near the teeth. produced by Pattani’s students? Alveolar fricatives [s] and [z] are produced when the tongue touching the

62

An Analysis of......

alveolar ridge behind the upper teeth. Phoocharoensih, 2014). Table 2 below Palato-alveolar fricatives [ʃ] and [Ʒ] are displays the transcription of Pattani produced when tongue curling behind Malay Fricatives. the alveolar ridge. Then, glottal fricative Table 2 The Transcription of Pattani Fricative [h] is produced by vocal folds.(O’Grady, Place of Glottal Transcriptio 1996). Table 1 below displays the Articulatio State n transcription of English Fricatives. n Labiodental Voiceles Faham [f] Table 1 The Transcription of English s (understand) Fricatives Voiced Van (van) [v] Place of Alveolar Glottal Transcriptio Articulatio Voiceles Siap (ready) [s] State n n s Gizi [z] Labiodental Voiced Voiceles Fat [f] (nutrient) s Velar Voiced Vat [v] Voiceles Khianat [x] Dental s (lie) Ghaib [ɤ] Voiceles Thin [ϴ] Voiced s (mystic) Voiced those [ð] Glottal Alveolar Voiceles Haus [h] Voiceles Sing [s] s (thristy) s Voiced zip [z] Error Analysis Palate-alveolar Jain in Richards (1974) stated the Voiceles Ship [ʃ[ s realization that the second learners’ Voiced azure [Ʒ] errors are potentially importance for the Glottal voiceless hat [h] understanding of the process of SLA. In O’Grady, et.al, 1996 addition, Corder in Allen (1974) stated Fricatives in Pattani Malay that the study of errors is part of the As Malay is one of the Indonesian investigation of the process of language branches of Austronesian language learning. Error analysis has played on member like the Indonesian language, it important role in study of language is spoken widely in South East Asian acquisition, because the leaners who countries, e.g. Malaysia, Indonesia, doing an error indicate the process of Singapore, Brunei Darussalam, and the SLA get success and achievement in Philippines (Le Roux in Jehma and learning. Then, by doing error analysis,

63

Wahyuni Wulandary...... An Analysis of......

one can determine the learners mastery they are developmental errors and level of language system. intralingual errors. Classification of Errors d. Communicative Effect Taxonomy These are four useful and commonly While the surface strategy and used taxonomies in analyzing error comparative taxonomies focus on the made by learners, based on descriptive aspect of the errors themselves, the classification. (Dulay, 1982). communicative effect taxonomy a. Linguistics Category Taxonomy deals with errors from the Linguistics category taxonomy perspective of their effect on the classifies error according to either or listener or reader. It focused on both the language components the distinguishing between errors that error aspects. Here language seem to cause miscommunication components include phonology and those to do that. This taxonomy (pronunciation), syntax and classifies errors in two types, global morphology (grammar), semantic and local error. and lexicon (meaning and This research focused on vocabulary), and discourse (style). communicative effect taxonomy b. Surface Strategy Taxonomy includes local and global error. The learners may omit necessary Communicative effect taxonomy focuses items or add unnecessary ones; they on the effect of errors on listener or may misform items or disorder them. reader. Therefore, the focus is on This taxonomy classified error in distinguishing between errors that seem four type, those are omissions, to cause communication focus on aspect additions, misfromation, and errors themselves. This taxonomy misordering. classifies errors in two types. They are c. Comparative Taxonomy as follows: The classification of errors in a a. Global Errors comparative taxonomy is based on Global errors that effect overall comparison the structure of the organization significantly hinder second language errors and certain communication. For example, in other types of constructions. These phonology aspect learner says [kɒt] comparisons have yielded two major for [kɒf] in cough, this condition can errors categories in this taxonomy;

64

An Analysis of......

cause miscommunication between Jean," and so forth. All these errors listener and speaker. are attributable to negative b. Local Errors interlingual transfer. While it is not Local errors do not cause always clear that an error is the miscommunication. Though, the result of transfer from the native speaker says incorrectly but listener language, many such errors are knows what speaker means. For detectable in learner speech. example, in phonological aspect b. Intralingual Transfer learner says [ɪnfaɪt] in invite. Learner may make errors in the Sources of Errors target language, since they do not Brown (2007) classified sources of know the target language very well. errors into four categories: (1) Brown (1980) said that it has been interlingual transfer, (2) intralingual found that the early stages of transfer, (3) context of learning, and (4) language learning are characterized communication strategies. In this by a predominance of interlingual research, the researcher focuses on transfer, but once that learner has interlingual and intralingual transfer as begun to acquire parts of the new sources of errors. system, more and more transfer a. Interlingual Transfer generalization within the target Brown (1980) most of the learners’ language is manifested. Richard errors in the second language result (1974) states intralingual primarily from the learner’s interference refers to items produced assumption that the second language by learner, which reflect not the forms are similar to the native structure of mother tongue, but language. Richard (1974) states that generalization based on partial if the learners of a foreign language exposure of the target language. In make mistake in the target language short, intralingual transfer means the by effect of his mother tongue that is sources of errors come from second called as interlingual. For example, language acquisition or target English learners say "sheep" for language. "ship," or "the book of Jack" instead of "Jackbook"; French learners may say "Je saisjean" for "Je connais

65

An Analysis of...... Wahyuni Wulandary......

First Language (L1) Transfer investigate the quality of relationships, According to Trask (1996) L1 activities, situations, or materials are transfer as the imperfections in the use frequently referred to as qualitative of one language as a result of the research (Frankel, 2009).Considering the influence of another language, such as a statement, the researcher just sees the foreign accent in speaking in second phenomenon of the research of the language. In other words, Dulay (1982) moment at certain time. In this way, the classified transfer into positive and data which gathered from Pattani’s negative transfer in referring to the students about the students errors in automatic and subconscious use of old pronunciation of fricative. behavior in a new learning situation. 3.FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION From the explanation above, the This research is a study of errors in researcher concludes that language colloquial language aspect that related transfer is influenced by source with pronunciation. Furthermore, this language. To illustrate, Gass and Larry research describes the errors in (2008) conformed that if a student pronouncing English fricative. The comes from a language that has no subjects of this research are 13 Pattani’s phonetic contrast between two sounds students who study at English Study e.g. [l] and [r] and is learning a language Program of UIN Raden Intan Lampung. where that contrast is obligatory, the Then, the researcher got the data from leaner will have difficulty. Nevertheless, Pattani’s students pronunciation task, the if the first language and the target researcher asked subjects to pronounce language both have the same contrast the text. The research was conducted in there will be little difficulty in learning. UIN Raden Intan Lampung on February The influence of L1 to L2 in 28th, 2017. The researcher got the pronouncing words can be seen by sample using the purposive sampling looking up the differences and the technique to collect the data, so that the relation between the phonetics symbol researcher was able to draw a of Pattani Malay and English. conclusion. Then, the researcher gave 18 lists of 2. RESEARCH METHODS words; each fricative has 2 words and This research used descriptive asked them to pronounce it individually. qualitative method. Research studies that In pronouncing those words, the

66

An Analysis of......

speakers made various errors depending on their knowledge and ability in pronouncing English words. Some of speakers made the same errors in pronouncing word and the others made different errors. In identifying the errors, the researcher was guided by online dictionary, Oxford dictionary and digital Cambridge dictionary to make contrast between native’s pronunciation and speaker’s pronunciation. Therefore, their errors in pronouncing those English fricative consonants grouped into table below.

67

WahyuniAn Analysis Wulandary...... of......

Table 3. The frequent of Global and Local Errors Made by Pattani’s Students

PHONEME OF FRICATIVE NO RESPONDENT [f] [v] [s] [z] [ʃ] [ʒ] [θ] [ð] [h] 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Respondent A       2 Respondent B       3 Respondent C          T 4 Respondent D       O Respondent E         5 T 6 Respondent F        A 7 Respondent G         L 8 Respondent H          9 Respondent I       10 Respondent J       11 Respondent K         12 Respondent L         13 Respondent M         60 TOTAL 1 5 13 12 2 7 1 13 7 37 TOTAL 2 1 7 13 8 6

TOTAL OF 0 18 0 13 0 22 16 26 0 Note: 1: indicates local error 2: indicates global error

68

An Analysis of......

Changing of Sound sound voiceless alveolar fricative [s]. Based on the result, the subjects That explanations also found in Jehma made various errors in pronouncing and Phoocharoensih’s research that English words. Some subjects made the replaced fricative [f] in the medial some errors in pronouncing words. They position with [s] and [ʃ]. changed sound of fricative with the c. [Ʒ] similar sound. Voiced palate-alveolar fricative [Ʒ] a. [v] occurs when the tongue curled behind Voiced labio-dental fricative [v] the alveolar ridge. Based on the data, occurs when the lower lip against the the subjects change voiced palato- upper front teeth. Therefore, [v] is alveolar [Ʒ] with voiceless alveolar voiced sound because any vibration fricative [s], voiced alveolar fricative when pronouncing that sound. Based [z], and voiceless palate-alveolar on the data, the subjects changed fricative [ʃ]. The result supported by voiced labio-dental fricative [v] with Tiono and Yostanto (2008) study voiceless labio-dental fricative [f]. shows [Ʒ] was replaced with [ʃ] That condition indicates the subjects occurred between a vowel and a were failed to produce [v] with , as in decision [dɪsɪ∫n]. vibration. The same result occurs in Jehma and Phoocharoensih (2014) also Enxhi et al (2012), [v] is not used found the same result, the speakers unless it is from a borrowed word; substituted the fricative [s] and [ʃ] for therefore, the sound is not native in fricative [Ʒ]. nature. It is then replaced with another d. [θ] labio-dental fricative sound [f] Voiceless dental fricative [θ] occur b. [z] when the tongue touching the upper Voiced alveolar fricative [z] occurs teeth. Based on the data, the subjects when the tongue touching the alveolar changed voiceless dental fricative [θ] ridge behind the upper teeth. with alveolar [t]. The result Therefore, [z] is voiced sound above is supported by Enxhi et al because any vibration when (2012), the replacement of [θ] with [t] pronouncing that sound. Based on the is expected from speakers who speak data, the subjects changed Voiced Malay and Mandarin as their first alveolar fricative [z] with the similar language.

69

AnWahyuni Analysis Wulandary...... of......

e. [ð] not exist in the Malay, some speakers Voiced dental fricative [ð] occur change fricative [ð] into plosive [d] and when the tongue touching the upper [t]. teeth. Based on the data, the subjects Next, the voiced fricative [θ] does not changed voiced dental fricative [ð] exist in Malay, some speakers changed with alveolar plosive [t] and [d]. The fricative [θ] into plosive [d] and [t]. same phenomenon occurs in Enxhi et From explanations above fricative [θ] al (2012), the voiced [ð] is also non- and [ð] are realized as stop [t] and [d]. existent in Malay and Mandarin As Hooi (2010) stated, six English languages and it is replaced with consonants [v], [z], [ʃ], [Ʒ], [ð], and [θ] another voiced sound [d]. do not exist in Malay. All errors above happened consciously by the Pattani’s The Causes of Errors in Pronouncing students at eighth semester of English English Fricative Consonants by Study Program of UIN Raden Intan Pattani’s Students Lampung. After the researcher conducted the b. Intralingual Transfer research, the researcher got information Intralingual transfer means a problem about factors that influenced Pattani’s in learning second language which is pronunciation in pronouncing English influenced by unsuccessfully in fricative consonants. The common learning second language. Based on the pronunciation errors of the speakers data, errors occur caused by the resulting from the influence of Malay subjects read English word as in a were diagnosed into two categories: written form. For example: the subject a. Interlingual Transfer pronounced genre as [jenre].  The absence of certain English sounds in Malay 4.CONCLUSION Substitution of English sound occurs After analyzing Pattani’s students due to the fact that some of the English pronunciation in pronouncing English sounds do not exist in the Malay. The fricative consonants, the researcher voiced fricative [Ʒ] does not exist in concludes: (a) the common error occurs in the Malay, some speakers changed voiced dental fricative [ð], (b) local error is phoneme [Ʒ] into [s], [z], and [ʃ]. higher than global error, it is indicates that Others, the voiceless fricative [ð] does the subjects made errors in pronouncing

70

An Analysis of......

English words without make Frankel, Jack R and Norman E Wellen. miscommunication, (c) error in (2009). How to Design and pronouncing English fricative consonants Evaluate Research in Education 7thedition. New York: McGraw made by Pattani’s students causes by Hill. interlingual and intralingual transfer; Gass, Susan M and Larry Selingker. interlingual transfer plays as a source of (2008). Second Language error because some English fricative Acquisition: An Introductory Course 3rd ed. New York: sounds do not exist in the Malay Pattani; Routledge/Taylor Francis. the lack of knowledge by the subjects also Hooi, Phoon San. (2010). The means the source of errors because the Phonological Development of subjects have problem in learning second Malaysian English Speaking Chinese Children: a language thus, error happen. Normative Study. New Zealand: University of Canterbury Te Whare Wānaga o Waitaha 5. REFERENCES Christchurch

Brown, H. D. (2007). Priciples of Jehma, Hambalee and Supakom Language Learning and Phoocharoensih. (2014), L1 Teaching: Fifth Edition, Transfer in the Production of New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Fricatives and Stops by Pattani-Malay Learners of ------1980. Priciples of Language Enhlish in Thailand, Asian Social Learning and Teaching, New Science. Vol. 10 No. 7. Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Ladefoged, Peter and Sandra F. D. (2012). Corder, S. P. (1974). Error analysis. In J. Vowel and Consonants. United L. P. City Wiley-Blackwell.

Allen, & S. P. Corder (1974). Techniques O’Grady, William et al. (1996). in applied linguistics. Oxford: Contemporary Linguistics: An Oxford University Press. Introduction. United City: Longman. Dulay, H. C. (1982). Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press. Ogden, Richard. (2009). An Introduction to English Phonetics. Edinburgh: Enxhi, S. Y., Tan, B. H., & Yong, M. Edinburgh University Press Ltd. F.(2012) Speech Disfluencis and Mispronounciations in English Richard , J. C. (1974). Error Analysis Oral Communication among Prespective on Second Language Malaysian Undergraduate, Acquisition. London: Longman International Journal of Applied Group. Linguistics and English Litetature. Vol.7. No. 2

71

An Analysis of......

Tiono, N. I., & Yosta, A. M. (2008). A Study of English Phonological Errors Produced by English Department Students, Surabaya: Petra Christian University

Trask, R.L. (1996). A dictionary of phonetics and phonology. London: Routledge.

Yahvas, Mehmet. (2011). Applied 2nded. United Kingdom: Blackwell.

72