วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

ED062 Interlanguage consonant production of Thai – Loei and Lao second language learners of English

Dr. Prakorb Phon-ngam1

Abstract An individual’s distinctive use of language that has been developed by a learner of a second language is known as “Interlanguage.” Challenges for learners in the acquisition of a second language phonological system are to perceive and produce new sounds that do not exist in their first language. This paperpresents1) the interlanguage consonant pronunciation of Thai–Loei and Lao second language learners of English; 2) pronunciation exercises created for developing their pronunciation skills, 3) their learning achievements in consonant pronunciation before and after using the exercises, and 4) their satisfaction towards the appropriateness of the exercises developed. The subject used for surveying the interlanguageconsonant pronunciation of Thai – Loei and Lao second language learners of English was 40 students; 20 fromat LoeiRajabhat University (LRU) in and 20 fromNational University of (NUOL) in , Laos. The subject for the trail run was 30 students from LRU in the 2015 academic year, purposively selected from English majors who had attended the phonetic course but still had difficulties in pronouncing English consonants. The research tools comprised: 1) wordlists for investigating the interlanguage consonant pronunciation, 2) English consonant pronunciation exercises, 3) wordlists for studying their achievement, and 4) the appropriateness and satisfaction rating form. The qualitative content analysis and description was based on the of scope of the Articulatory Phonetics, and percentage, means, standard deviation and t-test for dependent samples were used in quantitative data analysis.The study found that Thai – Loei and Lao second language learners of Englishhad difficultiesand shared high ranked common pronunciation errors inpronouncing 10 English consonants that do not exist in their first language: [r]60%, [ð] 50%, []45%, [dӡ] 40%, [ӡ] 40%, [tʃ] 35%, [∫] 35%, [l] 35%, [z] 32.5%

1Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, LoeiRajabhat University, Thailand

372 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560) and[s] 25%.Thepercentage shown in each type of consonants was: (60%),Affricates (37.5%), Lateral, (35%) and (29.18%). They pronounced these 10 common problematic sounds with the interference of their native language phonological features in every position that these sounds occur. The pronunciation exercises developed for improving their pronunciation skills was the English pronunciation exercise book called “Trips to ’s Democratic Republic and Thailand: English Consonant Pronunciation.” The exercise book was divided into 5 units: (1) [dӡ] [ӡ], (2) [s] [z], (3) [tʃ] [ʃ], (4) [] [ð] and (5) [r], [l]. Each unit provided meaningful words, sentences, and short constructions with the target consonant sounds arranged in Thai- Lao tourism situations for pronunciation practice. Overall, each unit met the E1/

E2 preset 80/80criterion of efficiency. The students’ learning achievement score on English consonant pronunciation after using the exercises was higher than that before using them with a statistical significance at the .05 level. The students’ satisfaction towards the appropriateness of the exercises developed was at the highest level, ( =4.57, SD=0.72).

Keywords: Interlanguage, Consonant Production, Thai- Loei and Lao Second Language Learners of English

1. Introduction Southern China. Students in Thailand and Loei is a in Northern Laos study English as a foreign language. Thailand; it borders Sainyaboli and Vientiane Phonological system of Thai – Loei and Lao Province of Lao PDR (Laos). Loei native are very similar. Urairat Thongphiw (1989) language is Thai - Loei which is carried out a comparative study of Lao in phonologically different from the Central Roi-Et and Laoin Vientiane; and Siwaporn Thai but very similar to Lao language spoken Hasonnary(2000) compared phonological in Laos. Both Thai- Loei and Lao belong to systems of Lao spoken by native speakers in the Tai which also includes , Lao Dan Sai in Thai, Shan and other dialects spoken by and Lao Khrang in Thachin river basin. Both other related ethnic groups in Thailand, researchers found that all dialects in the Myanmar, Laos, Northern and studies had the same phonological systems.

373 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

There were 20 consonant phonemes: /b, p, developed by a learner of an L2. The h h h p , d, t, t , c, k, k , ʔ, f, s, h, m, n, ɲ, ŋ, l, w, j interlanguage can be fossilized or ceased /. All 20 phonemes could occur in the word- developing in any of its development stage. initial position, but only 9 phonemes could Fossilization may occur when learners have appear in the word – final position. Those adequate learning support or they could not phonemes were: /p, t, k, ʔ, m, n, ŋ, w, j/. overcome their goal of learning L2.

Erickson, Blain. (2001) mentioned about the Talking about errors in using English as an L2 origin of labialized consonant in Lao which by Thai learners, particularly in speaking, can be concluded that Spoken Lao had only Supaalux Vongsiribhisan (2005:2-3) found the labialized consonants that similar to the that English had more than 14 phonemes in -initial clusters [khw-]. word- syllable position that were different Mother tongue has a great influence on from Thai’s. Those phonemes were: /b, d, learning a second language. For those who g, f, , s, ∫, v, ð, z, ӡ, tʃ ,dӡ, l/. Thai learners start learning English as a second or a of English needed to practice seriously in foreign language (L2), interference of their order to be able to pronounce them mother tongue (L1) could make any errors at correctly. Also, Chusak Sarapol(1990: 60-74) any time, such as they may make their studied the problems of English consonant pronunciation different from what the native pronunciation of Mathayomsuksa3 students speakers do. In learning second language, at Kamalasai School in Karasin Province. He we believe that errors made by L2 learners found many errors as follows: 1) the /k/ in are very common. Such errors are caused by the word- syllable spelling with “c”,2) /f/ in the different system between L1 and L2. the words spelled with “gh” and “ph”, 3./z/ Selinker (1972) and Tar one (1979: 80-83) spelled with “”, “se.”, “s”, 4) the /, ʃ, ӡ called such different language forms used and dӡ / in all positions of the word,5)/-v/, by L2 learners an “Interlanguage.” The /- ӡ / and /n/ atword-final position,6) /r/ and interlanguage is an utterance produced by /l/ in word – medial and word- final

L2 learners which are different from those positions,7)/ ʔ/ in the words spelling with native speakers. It is an individual’s the letter “h”, 8) / ŋ / as in the word distinctive use of language that has been “singer”, 9) /j/ in “opinion” and “onion”, 10)

374 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

/ t / that followed “- ed”, and 11) the initial In second language learning, it is important clusters /pr- /, /r- / and the final clusters for the learners to have a good grasp of the such as/-ks/, /-kst/,/-rt ʃ /, /-rt/, /-lm/, /-kt/, language and to be able to distinguish the /-nt/, /rd/, /re/, /-ns/ and /-r ʃ /.These errors distinctive features of the linguistic elements occurred because these sound clusters did between those of the mother tongue and not exist in their mother tongue. Beside, the L2’s in order to use such knowledge in Thirapit Thapornpard (1995) studied the practicing language skills. Practice can help

English pronunciation problems L2 learners become proficient in using the Mathayomsuksa 3 students in Thai- Khmer correct language as well as native speakers speaking communities in Surin. He found do. Contrastive analysis of the L1 and L2can that the students had a high level of help learners know how both languages are difficulty in pronouncing the / dӡ / similar or different. Knowing differences of in every position of the word. In addition, the two language scan help teachers Phommachan, K. (2006) studied English provide proper teaching and learning pronunciation problems of Lao National materials and activities for classroom as University students. The results showed that well. Second language learning is a change students had difficulties pronouncing all of state of knowing a single language to consonants that did not exist in Lao spoken become bilingual. However, to use a second language, those sounds were /, ð, z, ʃ, t rʃ, language as well as native speakers is ӡ, dӡ, r/. Lastly, Phinthip Thuaicharoen difficult, as James (1980: 22) stated that it (2001:8) discussed problem of was difficult to use a second language well pronunciation of Thai second language because of the cultural background and learners of English which could be knowledge of the first language has concluded that Thai learners of English had embedded for a long time. When the difficulties in producing /v, s, z, r, sh, ch / learner finds out that the second language and clusters / sp-, tr-, -ts, -ls /. Since such has some characteristics that are different sounds did not exist in Thai or they occur in from their mother tongue, learners often different word- position in their L1. use what exist in their mother tongue

instead of using what really exist in L2 which

375 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560) may be hard for them to perceive or Rajabhat University, and Lao students in produce. Therefore, it might be hard to use National University of Laos(NUOL) who the second language as well as native speak a dialect with a similar consonant speakers. Anyway, knowing how mother system in order to get real facts and tongue and second language different, it can information about their errors to provide help L2 learner achieve goal of studying the proper teaching and learning material to suit second language faster. For the their problems which can help improve their development of the learning material for pronunciation skill faster. learning skill improvement, Chaiyong Promvong (2520: 123) states that creators, in 2. Objectives of the Study : the process of creating and testing media The objectives of this research were to effectiveness, should adapt their methods 1) analyze the interlangauge consonant and procedures to suit the level of learners’ pronunciation of Thai–Loei and Lao second competence. language learners of English Theoretically, and practically, Thai–Loei and 2) create pronunciation exercises for Lao languages have the same phonological developing their pronunciation skills system of consonants. For this reason, the 3) compare their learning achievements in native speakers of both languages share the consonant pronunciation before and after common difficulties in producing English using the exercises consonants, as mentioned above. They 4) study their satisfaction towards the produced those English sounds which do appropriateness of the exercises developed. not exist in their mother tongue as what The researcher hypothesized that after using they are familiar with in their first language. the pronunciation exercises to develop their To help them improve the consonant English consonant pronunciation skills, the pronunciation skills, researcher as an students would have a higher learning instructor of English Phonetics in Loei achievement inconsonant pronunciation Rajabaht University (LRU) was interested to than what they had got before the study the real problem of English consonant development. However, this paper mainly pronunciation of Thai students in Loei focuses on details of errors in pronouncing

376 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560) consonants of Thai-Loei and Lao learners of 4.1 The subject used for surveying the English. interlanguage consonant pronunciation of Thai – Loei and Lao second language learners of English was 40 students; 20 3. Theoretical Frameworks fromat Loei Rajabhat University (LRU) in The theoretical frameworks used in this Thailand and 20 fromNational University of research based on the interlangauge Laos (NUOL) in Vientiane, Laos. The subject concept in second language acquisition in for the trail run was 30 students from LRU in which the mother tongue has a great the 2015 academic year, purposively influence on learning the second language. selected from English majors who had

In learningL2, interferences of theL1 could attended the phonetic course but still had make any errors at any time. In addition, difficulties in pronouncing English the study also used the method of consonants. contrastive analysis to analyze phonetic 4.2 There were 4 pieces of research tools, features of each English consonant details of each tool were as follows: produced by Thai- Loei and Lao speakers in 1) Wordlists for investigating the term of voicing, points of articulation and interlanguage consonant pronunciation manners of articulation. The study mainly covered 27 sounds from 24 English focused on the controlled speech of the consonant phonemes: 1) Stops / p, b, t, d, k, research subject. g /, 2) Fricatives /f, v,  , ð, s, z, ∫, ӡ, h/, 3) Affricates /t∫, dӡ /, 4) Nasals /m, n, ŋ /, 5) 4. Research Methodology Lateral /l/ and 6) /w, r, j/. This quasi - experimental research The phonetic allophones [ph, th, kh] were followed a single group, pre- and post – test included to the phonemes /p, t, k/. Each research design. The study was primarily sound included 6 isolated words in which it carried out in 2008 and it was expanded and appears as an onset (initial consonant revised in 2015. Details of the methodology including cluster) of the first syllable, an were as follows: onset of the second syllable and a coda(final consonant).

377 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

2) English consonant pronunciation 1.00 – 1.50 lowest exercises included 5 units covering 10 appropriateness / satisfaction problematic sounds for Thai–Loei and Lao From such processes mentioned above, the second language learners of English. Those appropriateness level of the exercises was sounds were [dӡ] [ӡ], [s, z], [t∫,∫], (4) [, ð] high. ( =4.44, SD = 0.56), Moreover, the and [r, l]. The quality of the exercises process found that the quality of each unit developed was determined by the met the E1/ E2preset 80/80criterion of appropriateness mean and the E1/ E2 efficiency. efficiency. The appropriateness of each unit 3) Wordlists for studying their was to review by 5 experts using the form achievement were used as the pre-and with5 point rating scales as; 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 each post– test to study student’s learning of which represented the highest achievement in pronouncing English satisfaction, high satisfaction, moderate consonants. Both tests covering 10 satisfaction, low satisfaction and the lowest problematic sounds [dӡ] [ӡ],, [s, z], [t∫,∫],, (4) satisfaction, respectively. Finally, the [, ð] and [r, l]. Each sound included 6 quantitative data from isolated words in which it appears as an Satisfaction survey with such five- point onset of the first syllable, an onset of the rating scale (Boonchom Srisa-art. 2000: 100) second syllable and a coda. was interpreted as follows: 4) The satisfaction survey form with Mean Interpretation 5 point rating scales. The rating scale 4.51 – 5.00 highest representation and interpretation criteria appropriateness / satisfaction followed the method used for the tool in 3.51 – 4.50 high number 2 as mentioned above. appropriateness / satisfaction Data collection was 1) to primarily 2.51 – 3.50 moderate schedule with a pronunciation survey in appropriateness /satisfaction which a set of wordlists for studying 1.51 – 2.50 low interlanguage consonant pronunciation was appropriateness / satisfaction given to all 40 sample students whowere classified as 20 Thai students at LRU and 20

378 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Lao students at NUOL.Each student then analysis, percentage, means, standard read the words aloud, and the researcher deviation and t-test for dependent samples listened, tapedand noted down individual were used. phonetic features of their pronunciation of each consonant. It took about 15 minutes 5. Findings each, and the researcher had research Results of the study including the peers, the native speakers of English and survey of consonant pronunciation of Thai– research assistants to help listen, tape, Loei and Lao second language learners of analyze students’ pronunciation. 2) To have English, the learning material created to the subject for the trail run who were 30 help them improve their consonant students at LRU do the pre-test, 3) to have pronunciation skill, the achievement of the them develop their consonant development and their satisfaction can be pronunciation skill by using the exercises shown as follows: created, 4) to have them do the post – 5.1 Interlanguage consonant test, and 5) to have them answer the pronunciation of Thai–Loei and Lao satisfaction questionnaire. second language learners of English The qualitative content analysis and The study found percentage of description was based on the scope of the learner’s errors in the interlanguage Articulatory Phonetics including voicing, consonant pronunciation of Thai–Loei and points of articulation and manners of Lao second language learners of English as articulation. For the quantitative data shown in table 1.

379 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Table 1 Percentage of errors in the interlanguage consonant pronunciation of Thai–Loei and Lao second language learners of English

Percentage of Errors No Stops Fricatives Affricates Nasals Lateral Approximant

1. [p] 14.50 [f] 12.50 [t∫] 35.00 [m] 0.00 [l] 33.75 [w] 0.00 2. [pʰ] [v] 17.50 [dӡ] 8.75 [n] 0.00 [r] 61.25 3. 14.5 [] 47.50 [ŋ 7.50 [j] 0.00 4. 0 [ð] 50.00 5. [t] [s] 27.50 6. 16.7 [z] 30.00 7. 5 [∫] 35.00 8. [tʰ] [ӡ] 37.50 9. 15.5 [h] 0.00 0 [k] 15.0 0 [kʰ] 15.0 0 [b] 7.50 [d] 7.50 [g] 12.5 0

380 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

According to the Table 2 above, three language, and the learners had difficulty groups of consonants could be grouped pronouncing them in any word– syllable together, as follows: position the sounds occur. Those

1) There were 5 consonants that the L2 consonants shown according to the error learners could produce in any word-syllable percentage were as follows: position without any difficulty which were (1) [r] 61.25 % the consonants that exist in their first (2) [ð] 50.00% language. Those consonants were:[m], [n], (3) [] 47.50% [h], [w] and[j]. (4) [dӡ] 38.75 % 2) There were 12 consonants that most of (5) [ӡ] 37.50% them have been existed in their first (6) [t∫] 35.00% language, but the learners still had difficulty (7) [∫] 35.00% producing them since such sounds never (8) [l] 33.75 % occur in certain position as those in the L2. (9) [z] 30.00% Those consonants were[p], [ph], [b], [ t ], [ (10)[s] 27.50% h h t ], [d ], [k], [ k ], [g ], [f ], [v] and [ŋ]. Illustration of their errors in producing each 3)There were 10 consonants that consonant which did not exist in Thai- Loei most of them did not exist in their first and Lao language are shown in the table 2.

Table 2 Phonetic features of the Interlanguage consonant pronunciation of Thai- Loei and Lao learners of English Consonant sounds Phonetic features of the Interlanguage consonant Manners / Point of pronunciation Articulation of Thai- Loei and Lao learners of English Onset 1 Onset 2 Coda

[r] Voiced alveolar [ l- ] Voiced lateral [ -l- ] Voiced lateral [-ø] Zero approximant [-ø-] Zero

381 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

[ ð ] Voiced dental [d -] Voiced [d ] Voiced alveolar [-t`] Voiceless fricative alveolar stop alveolar unreleased stop stop [-s] Voiceless alveolar fricative [] Voiceless dental [t- ] Voiceless [-t- ] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless fricative alveolar stop alveolar stop alveolar unreleased stop [s-] Voiceless [-s-] Voiceless [-s] Voiceless alveolar fricative alveolar fricative alveolar fricative

[dӡ]Voiced palatal [j-] Voiced dorso [j-] Voiced dorso [-t`] Voiceless affricate velar velar alveolar unreleased [-c-] Voiceless stop alveolar unaspirated stop

[ӡ] Voiced post- [ch-] Voiceless [-ch-] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless alveolar fricative alveolar stop alveolar stop Alveolar unreleased stop [-s-] Voiceless [-ch] Voiceless alveolar fricative alveolar stop

[ t∫] Voiceless [ch-] Voiceless [-ch-] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless palatal affricate alveolar stop alveolar stop Alveolar [s-] Voiceless [-s-] Voiceless unreleased stop alveolar fricative alveolar fricative [-s] Voiceless alveolar fricative

382 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Table 2 (Cont.) Phonetic features of the Interlanguage consonant pronunciation of Thai- Loei and Lao learners of English Phonetic features of the Interlanguage consonant Consonant sounds pronunciation Manners / Point of of Thai- Loei and Lao learners of English Articulation Onset 1 Onset 2 Coda [∫] Voiceless post- [-ch] Voiceless [-ch-] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless alveolar fricative alveolar stop alveolar stop Alveolar [s-] Voiceless [-s-] Voiceless unreleased alveolar fricative alveolar fricative stop [-s] Voiceless alveolar fricative - [l ] Voiced alveolar [-ø-] Zero [-n] Voiced lateral alveolar nasal [-ø] Zero [-w] Voiced labio- velar

[z ] Voiced alveolar [s- ] Voiceless [-ch-] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless fricative alveolar fricative alveolar stop alveolar [ch-] Voiceless [-s- ] Voiceless unreleased alveolar stop alveolar fricative stop [-s] Voiceless alveolar fricative

383 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

[s] Voiceless [ch-] Voiceless [-ch-] Voiceless [-t`] Voiceless alveolar fricative alveolar stop alveolar stop alveolar unreleased stop

Table 2 shows errors occurred by 2) Voiced apico-dental fricative, [ð],errors interference of L1. Common phonological occurred by the processes substitution processes of the changed were substitution, andnon-release of the final sound. (50 %) deletion and non- release the final sound.  In word- initial position, it was Percentage of learners’ errors in mispronounced as[d-]:‘this,’ ‘that,’ ‘than.’ producing each consonant, and examples of  In word–medial position, it was words used in the test are as follows: mispronounced as [-t-], [-s-]and [-d-]: 1) Voiced apico-alveolar approximant ‘father,’ ‘mother,’‘brother’, ‘weather’ [r],errors occurred by the processes ‘other.’ substitution and deletion. (61.25 %)  In word–final position, it was  In word- initial position, it was mispronounced as[-t`] and [-s]: ‘clothe,’ mispronounced as[l-]:‘rice’,‘read,’‘rat,’ ‘breathe,’ ‘bathe,’‘smooth.’ ready.’ 3) Voiceless apico-dentalfricative, [],errors  Incluster and word–medial position, occurred by the processes substitution it was mispronounced as[Cl-],[-l-],[-ø-]: fry’, andnon-release of the final sound.(47.5 %) ‘pray,’ ‘arrive,’ ‘corruption.’  In word- initial position, it was  In word – final position, it was mispronounced as[t-] and [s-]: ‘think,’ mispronounced as[-ø-]: ‘war,’ ‘chair,’ ‘deer.’ ‘thank,’ ‘theme.’ The sound [r]was mostly deleted  In word– medial position, it was when it occurred as second member of mispronounced as [-t-] and [-s-]: ‘Gothic,’ clusters, and sometime it was pronounced ethanol.’ as [Cl-].

384 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

 In word–final position, it was substitution andnon-release of the final mispronounced as[-t`] and [-s]: ‘month,’ sound.35 %) ‘breath,’ ‘mouth,’ ‘cloth.’  In word- initial position, it was 4) Voiced palato-alveolar affricate, mispronounced as[ch-] and[s-]: ‘chicken,’ [dӡ],errors occurred by the processes ‘champion,’ ‘cheap.’ substitution andnon-release of the final  In word–medial position, it was sound.(38.75%) mispronounced as [-ch-] and [-s-]: ‘question,’  In word- initial position, it was ‘merchant,’ ‘departure.’ mispronounced as[j-] and [c-]: ‘Jam,’ ‘John.’  In word–final position, it was  In word – medial position, it was mispronounced as[-t`]and [-s]: ‘March,’ mispronounced as [-j-] and[-c-]: ‘engine,’ ‘rich,’ ‘watch,’ ‘church.’ ‘soldier.’ 7) Voiceless palato-alveolar fricative,  In word – final position, it was [∫],errors occurred by the processes mispronounced as[-t`]: ‘stage,’ ‘knowledge.’ substitution andnon-release of the final 5) Voiced palato-alveolar fricative,[ ӡ],errors sound. (35 %) occurred by the processes substitution  In word- initial position, it was andnon-release of the final sound. (37.5 %) mispronounced as[ch-]and [s-]:‘she,’ ‘short,’  In word- initial position, it was ‘shadow,’ ‘share.’ mispronounced as[ch-]: ‘genre,’ ‘beige.’  In word–medial position, it was h  In word – medial position, it was mispronounced as [-c -] and[-s-]: ‘fashion,’ mispronounced as[-ch-] and [-s-]: ‘casual,’ ‘ocean,’ ‘Asian,’ ‘racial.’ ‘decision.’  In word – final position, it was  In word – final position, it was mispronounced as[-t`]and [-s]: ‘cash,’ ‘fish,’ mispronounced as[-ch] and[-t`]: ‘garage,’ ‘fresh,’ ‘brush.’ ‘massage.’ 8) Voiced apico-alveolar lateral,[l],errors 6) Voiceless palato-alveolar affricate,[t∫] occurred by the processes substitution, ,errors occurred by the processes deletion andnon-release of the final sound.(33.75 %)

385 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

 In word- initial position, no problem  In word- initial position, it was was found. mispronounced as[ch-]: ‘sea,’ ‘saw.’  In the cluster and word– medial  In word–medial position, it was position, it was mispronounced as [-ø-]: mispronounced as [-ch-]: ‘decision,’ ‘clever,’ ‘bleed,‘play,’ ‘talk.’ ‘consumption.’  In word–final position, it was  In word–final position, it was mispronounced as[-n], [-w]and[-ø]:‘football,’ mispronounced as[-t`] : ‘face,’ ‘dose,’ ‘handful,’ ‘skill,’ ‘drill,’ ‘pool.’ ‘practice.’ The sound [l]was mostly deleted when it 5.2 Exercises developed to improve occurred as second member of clusters interlanguage consonant pronunciation while in the final position it was substituted skills of Thai- Loei and Lao second by [-w] which was considered marked. language learners of English 9) Voiced apico-alveolar fricative [z],errors The pronunciation exercises developed for occurred by the processes substitution improving the consonant pronunciation skills andnon-release of the final sound.(30 %) of Thai-Loei and Lao second language  In word-initial position, it was learners of English was the English mispronounced as[s-] and[ch-]: ‘zoo,’ ‘zinc,’ pronunciation exercise book called .“Trips ‘zebra.’ to Lao People’s Democratic Republic and  In word – medial position, it was Thailand: English Consonant mispronounced as [-ch-] and[-s-]: Pronunciation.” The exercise book was ‘busy,’‘wizard,’ ‘advisor.’ divided into 5 units. The E1/E2 Efficiency  In word–final position, it was preset criteria of each unit was 80/80; its mispronounced as[-t`] and [-s]: details were as follows: ‘jazz,’‘rose,’‘close,’ ‘quiz,’ ‘because.’ 1) [dӡ, ӡ], its E1/E2 Efficiency was 80/80 (10) Voiceless apico-alveolar fricative, which was equivalent to the preset criteria. [s],errors occurred by the processes 2) [s, z], its E1/E2 Efficiency was substitution andnon-release of the final 80/80which was equivalent to the preset sound.(27.5 %) criteria.

386 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

3) [[t∫] , its E1/E2 Efficiency was 80/80which 5.3 Learning achievement in consonant was equivalent to the preset criteria. pronunciation of Thai- Loei and Lao

4) [,ð],its E1/E2 Efficiency was 80/80 which second language learners of English was equivalent to the preset criteria. before and after using the exercises

5) [r, l],its E1/E2 Efficiency was 80/80which developed was equivalent to the preset criteria. Learning achievement in consonant Each unit provided meaningful words, pronunciation of Thai- Loei and Lao second sentences, and short constructions with the language learners of English before and after target consonant sounds arranged in Thai- using the exercises is shown in table 3. Lao tourism situations for pronunciation practice

387 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Table 3: Comparison of Learners’ pre- and post- tests

Unit Pre- Post- test t test S.D. S.D. 1. [dӡ, ӡ] 4.1667 .37905 8.4333 .44978 -54.325* 2. [s, z] 4.,9667 .66868 8.6833 .53310 -55.931* 3. [t∫,∫] 4.5667 .50401 8.5667 .46855 -52.764* 4. [, ð] 3.8000 .80516 8.4500 .46144 - 42.177* 5. [r, l] 3.1667 .379905 8.2667 .36515 -155.373*

*Statistically significant at an alpha level of 0.05

Table 3 shows that learners’ skill safter the 5.4 Learners’ satisfaction towards the treatment were getting better, as the figures appropriateness of the exercises show the students’ learning achievement developed mean score on English consonant Learners‘satisfaction towards the pronunciation after using the exercises was appropriateness of the exercises developed higher than that before using them with a are shown in table 4. statistical significance at the 0.05 level.

388 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Table 4 : Learners’ satisfaction towards the appropriateness of the exercises developed

No Level of Items S.D. satisfaction Appropriateness of the target sounds regarded as 1 the top ten problem sounds for Thai and Laos 4.73 0.52 highest native speakers Appropriateness of the contents in reading 2 4.53 0.57 highest passages for pronunciation practices Clearness of pronunciation explanation for each 3 4.43 0.77 high sound Appropriateness of pictures and captions used in 4 4.37 0.76 high the pronunciation explanation Correctness of pronunciation problem explanation 5 4.63 0.67 highest for each sound Appropriateness of words used for practices the 6 problem sound occurred in the level of word 4.53 1.26 highest context Appropriateness of words used as example to 7 4.67 0.61 highest differentiate sounds in the minimal pair section Appropriateness of words used for practices the 8 4.53 0.63 highest problem sound in the level of word in sentences Appropriateness of the pronunciation test in each 9 4.60 0.62 highest unit Overall appropriateness of the pronunciation 10 4.67 0.61 highest exercise book Average 4.57 0.72 highest

389 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

The table 4 shows that the overall consonants: [r], [ð], [],[dӡ], [ӡ],[ t∫], [∫], [l], students’ satisfaction towards the [z], and[s]. They pronounced these 10 appropriateness of the exercises developed common problematic sounds with the was at the highest level, ( = 4.57, interference of their native language SD=0.72).Appropriateness of the target phonological features in every position of sounds regarded as the top ten problem the word that these sounds occur. This sounds for Thai and Laos native speakers phenomenon could occur because most of had the highest mean score which was at such sounds did not exist in their native the highest level,( =4.73, SD=0.52), while language; only [l] in the group exists in Thai the appropriateness of pictures and captions – Loei and Lao. However, [-l-] never occur as used in the pronunciation explanation had the cluster member or in the final positions the lowest mean score but in the high level, in their L1This is similar to Supaalux ( =4.37, SD=0.76). Vongsiribhisan(2005), Chusak Sarapol (1990) and especially to Phinthip Thuaicharoen 6. Discussion (2001:8) in which she had discussed that This study had been carried out for Thai second language learners of English many years since the research sites, research had difficulties in producing /v, s, z, r, sh, subjects and people involved were in two ch/ and clusters / sp-, tr-, -ts, -ls / since such countries, Thailand and Laos. The researcher sounds did not exist in Thai or they occur in had to arrange, plan, and rearrange the different word- position in the L1. plans and research schedules many times to The sound [r] and [l] were mostly meet the situation changed. However the deleted when they occurred as a second researcher had gained lot of useful data for member of cluster; this is plausible, the research and for everyday usage in the according to the influence of L1. Consonant classroom when the all the work had been clusters are considered a marked feature in completed. Thai–Loei and Lao language, since there The research found that Thai–Loei were no consonant clusters with [Cr-], [ Cl-] and Lao second language learners of English nor [-rC],[-lC] in spoken Lao, as Erickson, had difficulties producing 10 English Blain. (2001) mentioned about the origin of

390 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560) labialized consonant in Lao which can be what exist in their mother tongue instead of concluded that Spoken Lao had only the using what really exist in L2 which may hard labialized consonants that similar to the for them to perceive or produce. syllable-initial clusters [kʰ w-]. Learning L2, even though they could perceive the 7. Conclusions and Suggestions sounds, they found it was hard to produce This paper presents the them. Hence, in both in casual and interlanguage consonant pronunciation of controlled speech, they simply delete the Thai–Loei and Lao second language learners sounds as what they did in their native of English, The study found that Thai–Loei language. and Lao second language learners of English According to the principle of shared common difficulties producing speech production, it would be considered English consonant which did not exist in marked for the final[-l] to be substituted their L1; those consonants were: [r], [ð], by the labio-velar [-w], since their phonetic [],[dӡ], [ӡ],[ t∫], [∫], [l], [z], and[s]. features are different. Both sounds do not The research had brought those share any articulation. However, native consonants with pronunciation difficulties of speakers of Thai-Loei and Lao commonly Thai–Loei and Lao second language learners use [-w] to substitute [-l]. It might be of English to create materials or improving occurred from reason that the final [- w] their pronunciation skills which were an exist in their L1, so they might simplify the exercise book. The book created was called final [-l] by substitute it with [-w], as James “Trips to Lao People’s Democratic Republic (1980: 22) mentions about to use a second and Thailand: English Consonant language as well as native speakers is Pronunciation.” It was divided into 5 units: difficult because of the cultural background (1) [dӡ] [ӡ], (2) [s] [z], (3) [t∫] [∫], (4) [] [ð] and knowledge of the first language has and (5) [r], [l]. Each unit provided meaningful embedded for a long time. When the words, sentences, and short constructions learners find out that the second language with the target consonant sounds arranged has some characteristics that are different in Thai- Lao tourism situations for from their mother tongue, they often use pronunciation practice. Overall, each unit

391 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

met the E1/ E2preset 80/80criterion of Province. Master Thesis. Bangkok: efficiency. The students’ learning Srinakharinwirot University, Prasarnmit. achievement score on English consonant 4. Eckman, F.R. (1977). pronunciation after using the exercises was “Markednessand the contrastive higher than that before using them with a analysis hypothesis”.Language statistical significance at the .05 level. The Learning 27, pp. 315-30. students’ satisfaction towards the 5. Erickson, Blain. (2001).On the origin appropriateness of the exercises developed of Labialized consonant in Lao. was at the highest level, ( = 4.57, SD=0.72). Hawaii: University of Hawaii at As for the current free-flowing Manoa.http://sealang.net/sala/archi workforce in ASEAN, it would be interesting ves/pdf4/erickson2001origins.pdf to study transnational English consonant 6. Hyme, Larry M. (1975). Phonology: pronunciation difficulties among those Theory and Analysis. New York: native speakers from different countries of Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sub-regions to develop the proper 7. James, C. (1980).Contrastive learning media for them. analysis. London: Longman. 8. ____. (1998). “Errors in language 8. References learning and use.”Exploring error 1. Boonchom Srisa-art. (2000). analysis: New York: Addison Statistical methods for research Wesley Longman Inc. (6thed.). Bangkok: Suviriyasarn 9. Mollerup, A. (2001). Thai – printing. Lao phrasebook. Bangkok: White 2. Chaiyong Promvong. (1977). Lotus. Amarin printing. Teaching aids system. Bangkok: 10. Phommachann, K. (2006). An Chulalongkorn University printing. investigation into the 3. ChusakSarapol. (1990). A study of pronunciation errors experienced English pronunciation problems by theLaotian students at of Mathayom 3 students at National University of Laos. Kamalasai School in Kalaasin

392 วารสารวิทยาลัยบัณฑิตเอเซีย ปีที่ 7 ฉบับพิเศษ (เดือนตุลาคม 2560)

Master Thesis. University of Wittaya School.Master Thesis Danang, Vietnam. Bangkok: Kasetsart University. 11. Phanithip Thuaicharoen. (2001). 16. Urairat, T. (1989).Aphonological Phapruamkhongkansuksaphasalae comparison of Roi-Et Thai and phasasat Bangkok. Thammasat Vientiane Lao. BKK: Mahidol University. University. 12. Praromrat Chotikastian. (1994). 17. Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as English phonological system. Chameleon.Language Learning Bangkok, Chulalongkorn University 29(1), 181–191. Press. 18. ____. (1987).“The Phonology of 13. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. Inter Language”: In Inter Language IRAL. 10 (3): 209-231. Phonology. Edited by George Ioup 14. Siwaporn Hasonnary.(2000). The and Steven H. Weinberger. Lao Luang Prabang phonology: a Cambridge: Newbury House comparative study with Lao Publishers. Khrang in Thachin river basin and 19. Thirapit Thapornpard. (1995). A Lao Dan Say in Loei. Master Thesis. Study of English pronunciation Bangkok. Silapakorn University. problems of Mathayomsuksa3 15. Supaalux Vongsiribhisan. (2005). students in Thai- Khmer speaking The pronunciation of English communities in Surin. Master fricatives in syllable final position Thesis: Mahasarakham: by Matthayom 6 Students, Nonsi Mahasarakham University.

393