3.png){kind=logo}
EFL PHONOLOGY: A CASE STUDY OF ENGLISH FRICATIVE PRODUCTION BY INDONESIAN LEARNERS/FONOLOGI BAHASA INGGRIS SEBAGAI BAHASA ASING: STUDI KASUS PELAFALAN BUNYI GESER OLEH MAHASISWA INDONESIA
Abstract
Abstract
This study reports the difficulties 40 first-year Indonesian college students, majoring in English, had in pronouncing the English fricatives. The aim of this paper is, first, to reveal how these Indonesian EFL learners produced English fricatives, the order of difficulties, and the pronunciation constraints they experienced. The second aim is to identify the possible causes of the pronunciation difficulties. In collecting the data, two types of tasks were administered: a word-list-reading task (Task 1) and a sentence-list-reading task (Task 2). By using Wilcoxon based T-Test, it was revealed that there was a significant difference in the number of errors in Task 1 and Task 2. There was also an increase in errors in Task 2. The results show that the order of difficulties Indonesian learners had in producing fricative sounds (from the most to the least problematic) were: /v/, /ʃ/, /ð/, /θ/, /z/, /ʒ/, /f/, and /s/. It is likely that the influence of the challenging English spelling system played the most important role in the students’ errors. Other factors such as transfer of L1 and the developmental process also contributed to the errors. This research implies that teachers need to apply certain strategies to meet students’ needs.
Keywords: English, fricative, Indonesian students, errors
Abstrak
Penelitian ini melaporkan kesulitan yang dialami mahasiswa tahun pertama Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris dalam melafalkan bunyi geser , urutan kesulitan dan kendala dalam pelafalan bunyi tersebut. Tujuan kedua penelitian ini adalah mengidentifikasi kemungkian sebab-sebab dari kesulitan ini. Dua jenis tugas diberikan kepada siswa untuk mengumpulkan data yaitu tugas membaca daftar kata (Tugas 1) dan tugas membaca daftar kalimat (Tugas 2). Berdasarkan hasil Uji T Wilcoxon terungkap bahwa terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan dari segi jumlah kesalahan dalam mengerjakan tugas I dan tugas 2. Juga terdapat peningkatan kesalahan dalam Tugas 2. Hasil-hasil ini memperlihatkan bahwa urutan kesulitan yang dialami mahasiswa Indonesia dalam melafalkan bunyi frikatif ( dari yang paling bermasalah hingga yang kurang bermasalah ) adalah : /v/, /ʃ/, /ð/, /θ/, /z/, /ʒ/, /f/, dan /s/. Ada kecenderungan bahwa sistem ejaan Bahasa Inggris yang rumit sangat besar pengaruhnya terhadap kesalahan-kesalahan yang dibuat oleh mahasiswa. Faktor-faktor lain seperti transfer dari BI dan proses perkembangan juga berkontribusi terhadap kesalahan-kesalahan tersebut. Implikasi penelitian ini adalah dosen atau guru dapat menerapkan strategi-srategi tertentu untuk memenuhi kebutuhan mahasiswa atau siswa.
Kata kunci: bahasa Inggris, bunyi geser, mahasiswa Indonesia, kesalahan
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
REFERENCES
Adnyani, N., & Pastika, I. (2016). Phonological development in the early speech of an Indonesian-German bilingual child. Research in Language, 14(3), 329-350.
Alsadeqi, F. (2014). English pronunciations deviations among Gulf Arabs. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 7(3), 171–181. Retrieved from http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0703/html/P4RS309.xml
Alwi, H., Dardjowidjojo, S., Lapoliwa, H., & Moeliono, A. M. (2003). Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia (3rd ed.). Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.
Andi-pallawa, B. (2013). A comparative analysis between English and Indonesian phonological systems. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(3), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v1i3.3892
Chaira, S. (2015). Interference of first language in pronunciation of English segmental sounds. English Education Journal, 6(4), 469–483. Retrieved from http://www.jurnal.unsyiah.ac.id/EEJ/article/view/2856
Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. SSLA, 11, 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100008391
Dardjowidjojo, S. (2009). English phonetics and phonology for Indonesian students. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
Habibi, M. W. (2016). English pronunciation problems encountered by Indonesian advanced students. Thesis. Maulana Malik Ibrahim State Islamic University of Malang, Malang. Retrieved from http://etheses.uin-malang.ac.id/4094/1/12320063.pdf.
Hoque, M. A., & Begum, A. (2016). English pronunciation problems of the tertiary level students in Bangladesh: A case study. Journal of Arts, Science & Commerce, 7(4), 50–62. doi: 10.18843/rwjasc/v7i4/06.
Isarankura, S. (2018). The effects of stress and tones in Thai on the pronunciation of English poysyllabic loanwords among Thai EFL students. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network Journal, 11(2), 66-83. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/LEARN/article/view/161528/116480.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krzysik, I., & Lewandowska, H. (2017). English pronunciation training through the eyes of university graduates. Research in Language, 15(3), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2017-0017.
Lanteigne, B. (2006). Common, persistent errors in English by Brazilian Portuguese speakers. TEFL Web Journal, 4(1). Retrived from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282322167_Common_Persistent_Errors_in_English_by_Brazilian_Portuguese_Speakers.
Mathew, I. (2005). Errors in pronunciation of consonants by learners of English as a foreign language whose first languages are Indonesian, Gayo and Acehnese. Monash University Linguistics Papers, 3(2), 29–44. Retrieved from https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/904.
Nowacka, M. (2016). English spelling among the top priorities in pronunciation teaching: Polish Local Versus Global(ised) errors in the production and perception of words commonly Mispronounced. Research in Language, 14(2), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2016-0002
Pillai, S., Jayapalan, K., Hassan, E. M. I., & Rajadurai, J. (2014). Pronunciation problems: A case study of English language students at Sudan University of Science and Technology. English Language and Literature Studies, 4(4), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v4n4p31
Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010, 4, 721–737. Retrieved from http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/PDFs/SCHMIDT%20Attention,%20awareness,%20and%20individual%20differences.pdf.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 209–231. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/21533333/Selinker-Interlanguage.
Sridhanyarat, K. (2017). The acquisition of l2 fricatives in Thai learners’ interlanguage. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 23(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-02.
Szyszka, M. (2016). English pronunciation teaching at different educational levels: Insights into teachers’ perceptions and actions. Research in Language, 14(2), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2016-0007.
Tarone, E. (1983). On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics. Vol. 4(2), 142-164. doi: 10.1093/applin/4.2.142.
Tiono, N. I., & Yostanto, A. M. (2008). A study of English phonological errors produced by English department students. K@Ta, 10(1), 79–112. https://doi.org/10.9744/kata.10.1.79-112.
Yong, J. Y. (2001). Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference and other problems. In M. Swan & B. Smith (Eds.), Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference and other problems. (pp. 279–295). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667121.
Young, R. (1988). Variation and the interlanguage hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10(3), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100007464.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
