Please enter verification code
Confirm
Phonological Awareness of English Phonemes by Kuwaiti Arabic Speakers with Evidence of Phonemic Hypercorrection
International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
Volume 5, Issue 6, December 2020, Pages: 126-136
Received: Oct. 17, 2020; Accepted: Nov. 2, 2020; Published: Nov. 11, 2020
Views 128      Downloads 102
Authors
Rahima Akbar, English Department, College of Basic Education, Ardiya, Kuwait
Hanan Taqi, English Department, College of Basic Education, Ardiya, Kuwait
Nada Al-Gharabally, English Department, College of Basic Education, Ardiya, Kuwait
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Research in the area of L2 phonological awareness continues to grow rapidly considering the importance of achieving proficient spoken English and ensuring being understood during communication, but most importantly on guaranteeing learners (worldwide) better professional opportunities. In Kuwait, conversing in English at a level at which the users can understand and be understood has become crucially important, regardless of the field in which the population studies or works. Within such intriguing context of phonological awareness in second language acquisition, the current study investigated the association of English phonemes production and perception by speakers of Kuwaiti Arabic and the main triggers of incorrect production. The present study looked specifically into the phonological errors made by Kuwaiti speakers of English when L1 has a parallel phoneme of only one of the two contrasting L2 phonemes in its L1 phoneme and/or orthography systems. The study was conducted on 244 Kuwaiti male and female participants between the ages of 18 and 30. The sample answered a 44 words questionnaire consisting of three English phonemes, namely, /p/, /v/ and /t∫/ and their counterparts /b/, /f/ and /∫/. The participants were asked to choose the correct sound they hear in word-initial and word-final positions. Findings of the study suggest that many Kuwaiti learners of English found it difficult to identify the English phonemes as a result of a deeper level of complications triggered by the occurrence of contrasting phonemes in both L1 and L2, hypercorrection, and interference of orthography. It is, hence, believed that perception is not the sole reason that causes Arabic learners of English to produce English sounds incorrectly.
Keywords
Second Language, Phonological Awareness, Production, Perception, Hypercorrection, Orthography, Sociolinguistics, English, Kuwaiti Arabic
To cite this article
Rahima Akbar, Hanan Taqi, Nada Al-Gharabally, Phonological Awareness of English Phonemes by Kuwaiti Arabic Speakers with Evidence of Phonemic Hypercorrection, International Journal of Education, Culture and Society. Vol. 5, No. 6, 2020, pp. 126-136. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20200506.13
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Morley, J. (1991). The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of other languages. TESOL quarterly, 25 (3), 481-520.
[2]
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y. I., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2003). A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87 (1), B47-B57. 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00198-1.
[3]
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989) The logical problem of second language acquisition. In S. Gass and J. Schachter (eds.), Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, pp. 41–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 20. 10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005.
[4]
Briere, E. (1966). An investigation of phonological interference. Language. 42: 769-96.
[5]
Flege, J. E. (1981). The phonological basis of foreign accent. TESOL Quarterly. 15: 443-55.
[6]
Wode, H. (1992) Categorical perception and segmental coding in the ontogeny of sound systems: A universal approach. In C. Ferguson, L. Menn and C. Stoel-Gammon (eds.), Phonological Development: Models, Research, Implications, pp. 605–31. Baltimore: York Press.
[7]
Brown, C. (2000). The interrelation between speech perception and phonological acquisition from infant to adult. In: Archibald J, editor. Second language acquisition and linguistic theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2000. Pp. 4-63. [Google Scholar].
[8]
Akbar, R. (2019). Arabizi Among Kuwaiti Youths: Reshaping the Standard Arabic Orthography. International Journal of English Linguistics 9 (1): 301.
[9]
Dashti, A. (2015). The role and status of the English language in Kuwait. English Today, 31 (03): 28-33. DOI: 10.1017/S026607841500022X.
[10]
Isbell, D. (2016). The Perception-Production Link in L2 Phonology. MSU Working Papers in SLS 2016, Vol. 7 ISBELL – PERCEPTION-PRODUCTION LINK.
[11]
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception. Language experience in second language speech learning: In honour of James Emil Flege, 13-34.
[12]
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233-276). Timonium, MD: York Press.
[13]
Flege, J. E., & MacKay, I. R. A. (2004). Perceiving vowels in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 1-34.
[14]
Weinreich, U. 1957. On the description of phonic interference. Word 13: 1-11.
[15]
Flege, J. E. (2003). Assessing constraints on second-language segmental production and perception. In A. Meyer & N. Schiller (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities (pp. 319-355). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
[16]
Takagi, N. 1993. Perception of American English /r/ and /1/ by adult Japanese learners of English: A unified view. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, University of California-Irvine.
[17]
Best, C. T. & Strange, W. (1992). Effects of phonological and phonetic factors on cross-language perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics, 20, 305-330.
[18]
Escudero, P. (2007). Second language phonology: The role of perception. In book: Phonology in Context (pp. 109-134). DOI: 10.1057/9780230625396_5.
[19]
Grosjean, F. (2001). The Bilingual's Language Modes. In J. L. Nicol (Ed.), Explaining linguistics. One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (p. 1–22). Blackwell Publishing.
[20]
Pennington, M. C. (1996). Phonology in English language teaching: An international approach. New York, NY: Longman.
[21]
Bassetti, B. (2017). Orthography affects second language speech: Double letters and geminate production in English. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43 (11), pp. 1835–1842. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000417.
[22]
Silveira, R. (2012). PL2 production of english word-final consonants: the role of orthography and learner profile variables. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada. 51. 13-34. 10.1590/S0103-18132012000100002.
[23]
Sipra, M. (2013). Contribution of Bilingualism in Language Teaching. English Language Teaching. 6 (3), 116-124. Doi: 6. 56. 10.5539/elt.v6n1p56.
[24]
Sokolović-Perović, M., Bassetti, B., & Dillon, S. (2019). English orthographic forms affect L2 English speech production in native users of a non-alphabetic writing system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1-11. 1-11. 10.1017/S136672891900035X.
[25]
Zampini, M. L. (1994). The Role of Native Language Transfer and Task Formality in the Acquisition of Spanish Spirantization. Hispania, 77 (3), 470-481. doi: 10.2307/344974.
[26]
Kenworthy, J (1987), Teaching English Pronunciation, Longman Handbooks for Language Teachers, Longman, London and New York.
[27]
Showalter, C. E., & Hayes-Harb, R. (2013). Unfamiliar orthographic information and second language word learning: A novel lexicon study. Second Language Research, 29 (2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658313480154
[28]
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns (No. 4). University of Pennsylvania Press.
[29]
Odlin, T. (1989). Language Transfer: Cross-Linguistic Influence in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524537
[30]
Janda, R. & Auger, J. (1992). Quantitative Evidence, Qualitative Hypercorrection, Sociolinguistic Variables--And French Speakers'"'eadhaches" with English h/O. Language and Communication. 12. 10.1016/0271-5309(92)90015-2.
[31]
Eckman, F. R., Elreyes, A., & Iverson, G. K. (2003). Some principles of second language phonology. Second Language Research, 19 (3), 169-208. DOI: 10.1191/0267658303sr2190a.
[32]
Siegel, J. (2003). Substrate influence in creoles and the role of transfer in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25 (2), 185-209.
[33]
John, P. and Cardoso. W. (2008). Francophone ESL learners and [h]-epenthesis. Concordia Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 1 (76-97).
[34]
Nickerson, C. and Camiciottoli, B. C. (2013). Business English as a Lingua Franca in advertising texts in the Arabian Gulf: Analyzing the attitudes of the Emirati Community. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 27 (3): 329-352. DOI: 10.1177/1050651913479930.
[35]
Shafiro, V., Levy, E. S., Khamis-Dakwar, R. & Kharkhurin, A. (2013). Perceptual confusions of American-English vowels and consonants by native Arabic bilinguals. Language and Speech. 56 (2): 145-6. DOI: 10.1177/0023830912442925.
[36]
Alshangiti, W. M. M. (2015). Speech production and perception in adult Arabic learners of English: A comparative study of the role of production and perception training in the acquisition of British English vowels (Doctoral dissertation, UCL (University College London).
[37]
Horn, C. (2015) Diglossia in the Arab World – Educational implications and future perspectives. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 5: 100-104. DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2015.51009.
[38]
Taqi, H. (2010). Two ethnicities, three generations: Phonological variation and change in Kuwait (Doctoral dissertation, Newcastle University).
[39]
Algharabali, N. & Taqi, H. (2018) Performing Speaking “Ungrammatical” American English: A Kuwaiti Linguistic Phenomenon. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics. Vol. 8, 242-261.
[40]
Dashti, A. (1997). Language choice in the State of Kuwait: A sociolinguistic investigation. PhD dissertation. Essex: University of Essex.
[41]
Cambell, L. (1998). Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh. 7th edition.
[42]
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15 (2) 325-340. DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1959.116597/02.
[43]
Almousawi, H., BinAli, S. and Alqallaf, B. (2019). Linguistic awareness and knowledge among prospective English teachers in Kuwait: Implications in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 9 (3): 125-138.
[44]
Kent, R. D. and Rosenbek, J. C. (1983). Acoustic patterns of apraxia of speech. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing, 26: 231-249.
[45]
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1979). Speech errors as evidence for a serial-ordering mechanism in sentence production. In: Sentence processing: Psycholoinguistic Studiespresented to Merrill Garrett, W. E. Cooper & E., C. T. Walker (eds) Lawrence Erlbarum.
[46]
Labov, W. (2001). Principles of Linguistic Change, Vol 2: External factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
[47]
Eckman, F. R., Iverson, G. K. and Song, J. Y. (2013). The role of hypercorrection in the acquisition of L2 phonemic contrasts. Journal of Second Language Research, 29 (3), p. 257-283.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186