Journal of Critical Reviews

ISSN- 2394-5125 Vol 7 , Issue 9, 2020

CONTRASTIVE PHONOLOGY OF PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF PERSIAN AND ENGLISH FOR PEDAGOGICAL PURPOSES

Akbar Solati *

North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, Bojnurd, Iran E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]

Received: 23.03.2020 Revised: 20.04.2020 Accepted: 24.05.2020

Abstract The present study aims to compare and contrast the phonological systems of Persian and English for pedagogical purposes. The consonants and vowels of the two languages are described, compared and contrasted to provide information about the facts of the phonological systems of English, to find the similarities and differences between the two systems and henceforth the potential areas of difficulty in teaching English to Persian learners of English. This study attempts to help teachers and textbook writers to anticipate the phonological problems that Persian students of English are likely to face while producing utterances in English. It also attempts to help Persian learners to improve their English pronunciation and spelling.

Keywords: Phonological system, Contrastive phonology, Persian learner, Pedagogical purpose.

© 2020 by Advance Scientific Research. This is an open-access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.09.166

INTRODUCTION easy and difficult items of second language learners. Therefore, a Almost all phonologists agree that phonology is phenomenon rather new area called "Contrastive Phonology (CP)" was different from phonetics, looking at the latter as a field involved in presented. "…describing the speech sounds that occur in the languages of the world" (Ladefoged, 1975, p.1; cf. Bronstein, 1960). Thus, This study tries to provide a qualitative analysis of phonological phonology is often said to deal with the systems and patterns of systems- i.e., consonants and vowels- of Persian and English for sounds which occur in particular languages. In more recent years, pedagogical purposes. It investigates how much phonological developments in the field of phonology have led it to a broader systems in Persian and English are similar or different and where area whereby the descriptions and explanation of the first is the problematic area in the production of these sound systems language are used to account for those of the second language for learners of any of these languages. Pedagogically the results pronunciation behavior. The reason is our involvement in two sets can be processed to be used in teaching pronunciation, spelling, of phonological categories; L1 and L2. Intending to learn the material development, and testing. pronunciation and spelling of a second/foreign language poses different problems which are not so seriously faced while LITERATURE REVIEW acquiring the phonology of a first language. Based on the CA assumption, the aim of CP is to analyze the differences between the sound patterns of any two languages, When we compare two languages, we are doing Contrastive prepare the land for a systematic error analysis, and tries to Analysis (CA). In fact, a set of procedures to compare and contrast correct the pronunciation problems of a second/foreign language the linguistic systems or subsystems of languages so as to learner. Yarmohammadi (1995, p. 19) defines CP as ''the process formulate their similarities and differences is known as CA. Gass of comparing and contrasting the phonological systems of and Selinker (2008, p. 96) defines CA as “a way of comparing languages to formulate their similarities and differences''. It is in languages in order to determine potential errors for the ultimate the area of phonology that as Ringbom (1994:738) claims "the purpose of isolating what needs to be learned and what does not predictions of CA work best". Richards (1971) also asserts that need to be learned in a second language learning situation”. In "studies of SLA have tended to imply that contrastive analysis may other words, as Mirhassani (2003) states, CA reveals similarities be most productive at the level of phonology (p.204)". As this study and differences between languages, describing and predicting aims for pedagogical purposes, the definition stated by Eliasson difficulties in foreign language learning and finally developing (1984, p. 7) is succinct "as most commonly understood, materials for language teaching. According to Fallahi (1991, p. 30) contrastive phonology compares phonological properties of two “the application of CA for English programs has to be a matter of languages in order to determine areas in phonological system of great importance in Iran because the L1 interference is quite one language which may create learning difficulties for speakers noticeable in an EFL environment”. Krzeszowski (1981, p.33) of the other language". Kohler (1971, p. 83) also provides the same states the term contrastive was first introduced in phonological kind of definition given by Eliasson (1984). Kohler says that "the studies, then extended to cover pedagogical comparative studies. aim of contrastive phonology seems to be straight forward and It is on this level of language i.e. phonology, that CA has shown to logical: it is to analyze the differences in sound structure between be more efficient. Richards (1971, p. 204) suggests that "studies of languages and thus lay the foundation for a systematic and second language acquisition have tended to imply that contrastive illuminating error analysis and correction of pronunciation in analysis may be most predictive at the level of phonology, and least foreign language learning". On the word of Eliasson & Kohler, in a predictive at the syntactic level". As a matter of fact, as Bugarski pedagogical CA, differences between the two systems are (1991, p. 73) mentions, "CA, in modern sense of this term, started highlighted and similarities are to some degree disregard. As out as the comparative study of grammatical and phonological stated by Yarmohammadi (2002, p. 23-24) a classical CA consists systems of pairs of languages for pedagogical purposes". That is of four steps: (1) Description; (2) Juxtaposition; (3) comparison why the direction of many studies was mostly led towards (4) prediction. These steps are relevant for all aspects of language contrasting the phonological systems of any two languages to find

Journal of critical reviews 893

CONTRASTIVE PHONOLOGY OF PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF PERSIAN AND ENGLISH FOR PEDAGOGICAL PURPOSES

structure: namely syntax, lexicon, phonology, pragmatics and In English and Persian with deep orthography, there is an indirect discourse. relationship between spelling and pronunciation and there are so many irregular and unusual pronunciation patterns. So, spelling As the phonological level is aimed in this study, Gui (1978) has and pronouncing the words is one of the main challenging for the compared Chinese sound system with English, based on learners of these languages. Due to the lack of research in this field phonemes, tone, intonation, etc. He (2002) and Wei (2003) did a on Persian learners of English for pedagogical purpose, this study comparison on Chinese and English word stress patterns. As is conducted to describe, compare and contrast the sound system Persian learners of English concerned, Wilson and Wilson (2001) of English and Persian and it also draws the differences and highlighted the most common pronunciation errors produced by similarities of the Persian sound system and that of English. Persian speakers and asserts that the vowels, consonants and Pedagogically the results can be processed to be used in teaching diphthongs which are not shared in both languages can become pronunciation, material development, and testing. problematic for Persian speakers. Hall (2007) in her study to investigate "phonological characteristics of Farsi speakers of COMPARISON BETWEEN PERSIAN AND ENGLISH SOUND English and L1 Australian English speakers’ perceptions of SYSTEM proficiency" showed that the phonemes and consonant clusters The first step in executing a CA is to provide description of the absent in the Persian sound system and syllable structure make aspects of the languages to be compared. Krzeszowski (1990, p.35) problem for Persian speakers of English to a varying degree. states "no comparison is possible without a prior description of Seddighi (2012) examined Iranian EFL pronunciation errors elements to be compared therefore; all contrastive study must be through L1 transfer. The result revealed that Persian English founded on independent descriptions of the relevant items of the language learners confront considerable problems in areas that languages to be compared. The fundamental demand is that they are absent in their mother tongue. Navehebrahim (2012) should be made within the same theoretical framework". In this researched the pronunciation of language learners of English in study a descriptive taxonomic framework is used to describe the Persian background and highlights that “some Iranian learners do sound systems of Persian and English. not have a fixed idea of English sound system and unfamiliarity with the English phonological rules is one of the factors that affects Persian and English, though belonging to the same language family learners’ errors in pronunciation (p. 524)”. Solati (2013) examined (Indo-European), are very different in alphabet, sound system and the nature of Persian learners' spelling errors in learning EFL and syllable structure. As mentioned before, the Modern Persian states that “some specific differences between the sound systems Alphabet is based on Arabic, which is a consonantal system and of English and Persian have affected the spelling ability of Persian contains thirty two letters: twenty three consonants and six learners of English (p. 203)”. Solati (2017) also undertook a vowels as well as two diphthongs and a total of 29 phonemes comprehensive analysis of spelling errors of Persian English (Samareh 2000; Windfuhr, 1979); whereas, the English alphabet language learners and indicated that the number of consonant is based on Latin, which contains twenty-six letters: twenty four errors is much bigger than the number of the vowel errors in consonants; twelve vowels; eight diphthongs and a total of 44 learning English spelling. Moradi & Chen (2018) analyzed the phonemes (Sousa, 2005). According to Yarmohammadi (2005), vowels and consonants in English and Persian, and states that there are three types of relationship between Persian and English "dissimilarities are especially important since they may result in sound system. First, there are sounds common to both languages. production of deviant sounds by foreign language learners (p. Second, there are sounds existent in English, but not in Persian. 125)". Third, there are sounds existent in Persian, but not in English. Table 1 illustrates these types of relationship.

Table 1: Types of Relationship between Persian and English Sound System

Types of English Persian Relationship 1 + + 2 + − 3 − +

Now, let us have a brief discussion on what these types of relationship offer. 1. Common consonants, vowels and diphthongs in Persian and English: There are twenty-one consonants, five vowels and four diphthongs common in both Persian and English. In Table 2 and Table 3, each of them has been exemplified.

Table 2: Common consonants in Persian and English sound system

Common English Persian Common English Persian Consonant Example Example Consonant Example Example

/vali/ ولی bam/ /v/ visit/ بام b/ bag/ /salam/ سالم pedar/ /s/ see/ پد ر p/ pen/ /zamin/ زمین tabar/ /z/ zoo/ تبر t/ ten/

/shab/ شب dar/ /∫/ shop/ در d/ day/

/zheyan/ ژیان kamar/ /ʒ/ measure/ کمر k/ car/ /haft/ هفت gol/ /h/ he/ گل g/ glass/

/cheshm/ چشم mard/ /t∫/ change/ مرد m/ man/

Journal of critical reviews 894

CONTRASTIVE PHONOLOGY OF PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF PERSIAN AND ENGLISH FOR PEDAGOGICAL PURPOSES

/jahan/ جهان narm/ /dʒ/ join/ نرم n/ new/ /lab/ لب sang/ /l/ long/ سنگ ŋ/ finger/ /rang/ رنگ Farsi/ /r/ room/ فارسی f/ fat/

- - - /yas/ یاس j/ yes/

Table 3: Common vowels and diphthongs in Persian and English sound system

Common English Persian Vowel Example Example /nam/ نم æ/ apple/ دارا /ɑ:/ car /dara/ /ruz/ روز u:/ two/ /miz/ میز ɪ:/ tea/ /ketf/ کتف e/ bed/ /ney/ نی eɪ/ say/ /jow/ جو əʊ/ go/ خوی /ɔɪ/ boy /khoy/ /vay/ وای aɪ/ five/

As there is no difference between Persian and English consonants difference or contrast in sounds between the two languages, the (Table 2) and vowel (Table 3), they are perceived and articulated assumption can be made that due to positive transfer, the learner without great difficulty by Persian English language learners, such will face no difficulties learning these elements of the L2. as /b/, /p/, /d/, /t/, /g/ and /k/. In other words, where the first language has feature in common with the target language, L1 2. Consonants, vowels and diphthongs restricted to English: There knowledge can assist in L2 learning. This relationship in most are three consonants, seven vowels and four diphthongs that exist cases does not cause interference problems and for this reason it in English, but absent in Persian. In Table 4, they are each will not be a main concern of this study. In short, when there is no exemplified.

Table 4: Consonants, Vowels and Diphthongs Restricted to English Sound System

English English English Consonants Vowels Diphthongs Example Example Example /w/ well /ɪ/ happy /aʊ/ now /θ/ think /ɒ/ got /ɪə/ near /ð/ they /ɔ:/ more /eə/ hair - - /ʊ/ good /ʊə/ pure - - /ʌ/ sun - - - - /ɜ:/ her - - - - /ə/ about - -

Table 4 shows that the consonants /w/, /θ/ and /ð/ are absent in b) /e/ instead of /ɜ:/. For example, "bird" is articulated as Persian. It should be noted that Persian learners of English have [berd] instead of [bɜ:rd]. difficulties in articulating these consonants, which are absent in c) /u:/ instead of /ʊ/. For example, "foot" is articulated as [fu:t] Persian; therefore, English contrasts such as think-sink, bath-bass, instead of [fʊt]. breathe-breeze, they-day, west-vest and ten-then are troublesome d) /æ and ɑ:/instead of /ə/. For example, "America" is and probably contributes to misunderstanding in communication articulated as [æmerɪkɑ:] instead of [əmerɪkə]. with English speakers. e) /o and ɑ:/ instead of /ɔ:/. For example, "walk" is articulated as [wɑ:k or wok] instead of [wɔ:k]. Table 4, vowels (/ɪ/, /ɒ/, /ɔ:/, /ʊ/, /ʌ/, /ɜ:/, /ə/) and diphthongs f) /ɪ:/ instead /ɪə/. For example, "near" is articulated as [nɪ:(r)] (/aʊ/,/ɪə/,/eə/,/ʊə/) restricted to English also cause problems for instead of [nɪə(r)]. Persian learners of English. Therefore, English contrasts such as g) /əʊ/ instead of /aʊ/. For example, "shout" is articulated as sheep-ship, seen-sin, fool-full, cot-cut are troublesome. This means [ʃəʊt] instead of [ʃaʊt]. that differences will pose learning difficulties and learning h) /e or æ/ instead of /eə/. For example, "parent" is articulated difficulties will produce errors. Examples of some vowels and as [peret or pærent] instead of [peərət]. diphthongs errors: i) /ɑ:/ instead of /ʌ /. For example, "sun" is articulated as [sɑ:n] a) /ɪ/ instead of /ɪ:/. For example, “sheep” is articulated as [ʃɪp] instead of [sʌn]. instead of [ʃɪ:p].

Journal of critical reviews 895

CONTRASTIVE PHONOLOGY OF PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF PERSIAN AND ENGLISH FOR PEDAGOGICAL PURPOSES

This kind of relationship will be marked difficult but not more difficult than a total new learning problem. Persian consonants, To sum up, this study attempts to help textbook writers and vowels and diphthongs will not interference with English ones in teachers of English to anticipate the pronunciation and spelling this relationship and; therefore, it will neither hinder nor facilitate errors that Persian learners of English are likely to commit while the acquisition of the structure by the learner. The identification of producing utterances in English. It also attempts to help Persian structure, however, is highly demanded for the purpose of learning learners of English to improve their English pronunciation and (Fallahi, 1991). In short, in the cases that a new item in L2 is spelling. Consistent with this study, several tasks must be included completely absent from L1, learners are required to learn the new in Persian learners of English materials to improve learners’ item. For example, the Persian learner of English must learn awareness of spelling pronunciation rules and errors. consonants, vowels and diphthongs in Table 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 3. Consonants and vowels restricted to Persian: There are three I would like to thank all my colleagues for their helpful comments. consonants and one vowel that exist in Persian, but absent in English. In Table 5, they are each exemplified. CONFLICT OF INTEREST There is no conflict of interest for this study. Table 5: Consonants and vowels restricted to Persian sound system AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTION: Akbar Solati designed the study, collected the data and wrote the Persian Persian Consonant Vowel article. Example Example قلب mar/ REFERENCES/ مار /ɢ/ /ɒ/ /qalb/ 1. Bronstein, A. J. (1960). The Pronunciation of American .abr/ - - English. Appleton Century Crofts, New York/ أبر /ʔ/ Bugarski, R. (1991). Contrastive analysis of terminology and .2 خبر /x/ - - /xabar/ terminology of contrastive analysis. In I. 3. Vladimir and K. Damir (Ed.). Language in contact and The interest for contrastive analysis in this case, consonants and contrast: Essays in contact linguistics. Mouton de Gruyter, vowels restricted to Persian, is major because it may provide some Berlin. implications for learning English as a foreign language. 4. Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Errors and strategies in child second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 8 (2), 129- CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS 136. Persian and English sound systems differ in their range of sounds. 5. Eliasson, S. (1984). Toward a theory of contrastive phonology. Therefore, Persian learners of English will have difficulties in In S. Eliasson (ed). Theoretical issues in contrastive learning English pronunciation and spelling, especially during the phonology. Heidelberg: Julius Groosverlag. early stages, largely because of the unfamiliar Latin script and 6. Fallahi, M. (1991). Contrastive linguistics and analysis of differences of Persian and English sound systems, the absence of errors. Tehran: Iran University Press. some target language phonemes (vowels or consonants) in 7. Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: Persian; the learners' tendency to pronounce words exactly the An introductory course. 3rd edition. ways they are written, and the learners' tendency to pronounce 8. New York and London: Routledge. the silent letters in words. It is hoped that the results of this study 9. Gui, C. K. (1978). A comparison of Chinese and English sound set off general ideas about the likely difficulties and the system. Modern Foreign Languages, 1,44-50. phonological errors that Persian learners of English may come 10. Hall, M. (2007). Phonological characteristics of Farsi speakers upon in spelling and pronunciation of the segmental features. of English and L1 Australian English speakers’ perceptions of According to the present study, the following pedagogical proficiency. Master of Arts, Curtin University. implications are drawn: 11. He, S. F. (2002). Contrastive analysis of English and Chinese. 1. This study shows that CA will help to reduce the errors that Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. Persian English language learners commit in enunciating 12. Kohler, K. (1971). On the adequacy of phonological theories vowels and consonants. for contrastive analysis. In G. Nickel (Ed.) 2. The results of present study can be applied in preparing 13. Papers in contrastive linguistics. (pp. 83-88). Cambridge: teaching and complementary materials and diagnosing Cambridge University Press. learning and teaching problems. 14. Krzeszowski, T. P. (1981). What do we need Lexical 3. Teachers should be aware of the problem in learning and Contrastive Studies for? Papers and Studies in Contrastive teaching caused by the linguistic contrasts between Persian Linguistics, vol. 13. and English sound system. 15. Krezeszowski, T. P. (1990). Contrasting languages: The scope 4. The teachers should make their students aware of the of contrastive linguistics. Berlin: Moution. problems and give them adequate practice to avoid being 16. Mirhassani, A. (1983). Pronunciation problems of Iranian fossilized and become a habit. students learning English. IRAL, 21:4, 320- 330. 5. The syllabus should cover the phonological items that 17. Mirhassani, S. A. (2003). A contrastive analysis of Persian and Persian English language learners find problematic and/or English parts of speech. Tehran: Zabankadeh. needs to learn. 18. Moradi, Hamzeh & Chen, Jianbo. (2018). A contrastive 6. To improve Persian English language learner's analysis of Persian and English vowels and consonants. Lege pronunciation, they should be continually exposed to English Artis. 3. 105-131. language. 19. Navehebrahim, M. (2012). An investigation on pronunciation 7. Teaching pronunciation should be integrated with grammar, of language learners of English in Persian background: vocabulary, and conversations. deviation forms from the target language norms. Procedia- 8. Students should be patient and persistent throughout the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69,518-525. whole process of learning pronunciation because it is a long- 20. Richards, J. C. (1971). A non-contrastive approach to error standing task. analysis. English Language Teaching Journal, 25(2), 204-219. 9. The teachers should be aware of and also be able to deal 21. Ringbom, H. (1994). Contrastive analysis. In R. Asher & J. positively and effectively with the linguistic differences of L1 Simpson (Eds.) The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics. (Persian) and L2 (English) sound systems. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 2, 737-742.

Journal of critical reviews 896

CONTRASTIVE PHONOLOGY OF PHONOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF PERSIAN AND ENGLISH FOR PEDAGOGICAL PURPOSES

22. Samareh, Y. (2000). The Arrangement of Segmental Phonemes in Farsi. Tehran UP. 23. Seddighi, S. (2012). An account of Iranian EFL pronunciation errors through L1 transfer. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 2(2), 197-214. 24. Solati, A. (2013). Identify Persian Learners’ Linguistic Deficits in Learning EFL through Spelling Error Analysis. Frontiers of Language and Teaching, 4(54), 206- 196. 25. Solati, A. (2017). A comprehensive analysis of spelling errors of Persian English language learners. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 7(7), 238-249. 26. Sousa, A. D. (2005). How the brain learns to read. California: Crowin Press. 27. Wei, Z. C. (2003). An introduction to comparative studies of Chinese and English. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. 28. Wilson, L., & Wilson, M. (2001). Farsi speakers. In M. Swan and B. Smith (Eds.), Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference and other problems (pp.179-194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 29. Windfuhr, G. L. (1979). Persian. In B. Comrie (Ed.). (1987). The World’s major language. Oxford UP. 523-547. 30. Yarmohammadi, L. (1996). A contrastive phonological analysis of English and Persian. Shiraz: Shiraz University Press. 31. Yarmohammadi, L. (1995). Fifteen articles in contrastive linguistics and the structure of Farsi: Grammar, text and discourse. Tehran: Rahnama. 32. Yarmohammadi, L. (2002). A contrastive analysis of Persian and English. Payame Noor University Press. 33. Yarmohammadi, L. (2005). A contrastive phonological analysis of English and Persian: A course book in applied phonological studies. Shiraz, Iran: Shiraz University Press.

Journal of critical reviews 897