A study of interlanguage word final consonant pronunciation by vietnamese learners and the degree of intelligibility as judged by native and non native english speakers

A S TUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD-FINAL CONSONANT PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAMES E LEARNERS AND THE D EGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLIS H S PEAKERS Hanh Duc Nguyen I.D No 5729401 A Dissertation Submitted in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in English Language Teaching Graduate S chool of Human S ciences ASS UMPTION UNIVERS ITY OF THAILAND 2019 ii Copyright by ASS UMPTION UNIVERS ITY OF THAILAND 2019 Title: A STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD-FINAL CONSONANT PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAM ESE LEARNERS AND THE DEGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS By: HANH DUC NGUYEN Field of S tudy: DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING Dissertation Advisor: ASSOC PROF DR JOSEPH FOLEY Accepted by the Graduate S chool of Human S ciences, Assumption University in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in English Language Teaching ………………………………………… (Assoc Prof Dr S uwattana Eamoraphan) Dean of the Graduate S chool of Human S ciences Dissertation Examination Committee ……………………………………………… Chair/External Expert (Assoc Prof Dr Supong Tangkiengsirisin) ……………………………………………… Advisor (Assoc Prof Dr Joseph Foley ) ……………………………………………… Faculty Member (Assoc Prof Dr Suwattana Eamoraphan) ……………………………………………… Faculty Member (Asst Prof Dr Kulaporn Hiranburana) ………………………………………… … Faculty Member (Dr Andrew Anthony Jocuns) ABS TRACT I.D No.: 5729401 Key Words: PRONUNCIATION , WORD-FINAL CONSONANT, INTELLIGIBILITY, INTERLANGUAGE, NATIVE, NON-NATIVE Name: HANH DUC NGUYEN Dissertation Title: A STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD-FINAL CONSONANT PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAM ESE LEARNERS AND THE DEGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS Dissertation Advisor: ASSOC PROF DR JOSEPH FOLEY This research investigates word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese learners and the degree of intelligibility as evaluated by native and non-native English speakers Both the quantitative approach and the qualitative approach were used There were two groups of students and thirty-five judges of the intelligibility This research had two smaller studies Research instruments of the production study were the English language experience questionnaire, the wordlist reading, the text reading, and the picture description The current research adapted Nguyen and Brouha’s (1998) framework and Sato’s (1984) to analyze the data In the perception study, research tools were the non-native English speaker background questionnaire, the native English speaker background questionnaire, and the intelligibility test Moreover, Dang’s (2018) framework was adapted to become an analysis framework of this study The findings showed that regarding the single word-final consonants, the final consonant /s/ was pronounced the best, followed by the word-final consonant /f/ The final consonants /v, ð, z, ʒ, ʤ, p, l, d, lp, vz, nts, ldz, nd, sk/ were problematic Regarding the v single word-final consonants, the students’ pronunciation was categorized into targets and variations Among these variations, the substitution was the most common, followed by devoicing and deletion As to the word-final clusters, the informants’ production was classified into targets and modification strategies The informants omitted one or two consonants (not all consonants) the most frequently and the reduction was the most common followed by omission plus devoicing and substitution of all consonants Furthermore, in respect of the single word-final consonants, there were the most targets in the wordlist reading, followed by the picture description and by the text reading With reference t o the word-final clusters, the wordlist reading had the most targets, followed by the text reading, and by the picture description There were similarities and differences in word-final consonant production between the L-group and the H-group The similarities were in production categories and in problematic final consonants which were /ʒ, ʤ, d, ð, v, l, p, ldz, vz, lp, nd/ M oreover, these two groups had the word-final consonant /s/, which was performed the best As regards production tasks, both groups had similarities in rank order of tasks based on targets as to the single final consonants and the final clusters However, there were some differences in the number of tokens of production categories between these two groups With reference to the production tasks, the L-group was different from the H-group in the number of targets in the same task In respect of the intelligibility, the Vietnamese listeners gave the most targets in both groups compared to other listeners M ore importantly, the judges from native and the non-native English speaking countries recognized more word-final consonants in the Hgroup than those in the L-group In addition, the research had some implications for teaching and learning pronunciation, material design, and curriculum design Finally, it mentioned few limitations and suggested some future areas of research ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS One of my former supervisors commented that doing research was like raising a child The implication is that I have my own ways to raise my children, who are directly connected with the community and their success greatly depends on the community My doctoral dissertation – my ‘mental’ child – was no exception It could not have been completed had there not been assistance from the community, to which my heartfelt acknowledgements go I would first like to express my deepest gratitude to Assoc Prof Dr Joseph Foley, my current dissertation advisor, not only for his constructive, specific comments but also for his empathy, enthusiasm and belief in my ability He gave me invaluable advice even when he was not my dissertation supervisor I also wish to thank all of my former advisors, Dr Arthur M cNeill, Asst Prof Dr Soisithorn Isarankura, Asst Prof Dr Ratchaporn Rattanaphumma, and Dr Rajeevnath Ramnath, for their support and strategic suggestions related to my research I would like to express my special regards to my dissertation committee, including Assoc Prof Dr Suwattana Eamoraphan, Asst Prof Dr Kulaporn Hiranburana, Assoc Prof Dr Joseph Foley, Assoc Prof Dr Supong Tangkiengsirisin, and Dr Andrew Anthony Jocuns, for their valuable time and helpful feedback on my work I am grateful to the M inistry of Education and Training, Vietnam, managing the Scholarship 911, for sponsoring me through my Ph.D program in English Language Teaching at the Graduate School of Human Sciences, Assumption University, Thailand There were many people who helped me during the period of this research These include Asst Prof Dr Nussara Wadsorn, Dr M arilyn Fernandez Deocampo, Assoc Prof Dr Thang Van Vo, Dr Loi Van Vo, M s M inh Thi Nhat Nguyen, M r Hung Thai Le, M r Ha Van vii Ly, M r Hoa Ngoc Ngo, M s Nguyet Anh Pham, M iss Vi Thi Xuan Truong, staff members of St Gabriel’s Library, Hua M ak Campus, Assumption University, Thailand I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to judges from the US, the UK, Australia, Canada (for the pilot study only), Myanmar, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam for the main study and the pilot study ; and to English major students in the following classes: 19AV, 19TA1, 19TA2, 18AV, 18TA, 17AV, 17TA, 16AV, 16TA, 43AV, 42AV, 41AV in the first semester, the academic year 2018 – 2019, An Giang University, Vietnam (for the main study); the first-year students (English Teacher Education, K43), the second-year students (English Teacher Education, K42), the third-year students (English Teacher Education, K41), the fourth-year students (English Language, K40) in the second semester, the academic year 2017 – 2018, Can Tho University, Vietnam (for the pilot study) My special thanks go to all of my family members for supporting me emotionally and financially To my wife, I would like to say , “Thank you very much” Without her unconditional love and encouragement, I definitely would not have been able to finish my Ph.D dissertation To my two children, Quynh Duc Hanh Nguyen and Quan Duc Anh Nguyen, I wish to express my great appreciation of their efforts to overcome difficulties during the time when my wife and I were both in Bangkok to pursue our Ph.D studies Last but not least, I wish to recognize the valuable assistance provided by my fellow Ph.D warriors, i.e Warlito Jr Sanchez Caturay, Haide Estudillo, M aria Shiela Sapul, Bun Hoeun Philip Chhourn, Emmanuel M ushi, Roche M agsayo, Loan Nguyen Phuong To, Dung Thi Nguyen, among others Talking to them and hanging out with them was really fun and informative, which helped to reduce any feelings of homesickness and stress, and massively helped me improve my research CONTENTS Page COPYRIGHT ii APPROVAL iii ABSTRACT iv ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS vi CONTENTS viii LIST OF TABLES xii LIST OF FIGURES xv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background of the Study Statement of the Problem Research Questions Research Objectives Theoretical Framework Conceptual Framework Scope of the Study Definitions of Terms Significance of the Study 10 ix Page CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Dispersal of English 12 Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage 21 The Vietnamese Language 33 English Consonants and Vietnamese Consonants 35 Thai Consonants and English Consonants 39 Burmese Consonants and English Consonants 41 Cambodian Consonants and English Consonants 43 Research on Influence of English Language Experience on English Proficiency 45 Previous Studies of Vietnamese Learners’ Production of Word-final Consonants 49 Previous Studies of Intelligibility of ESL Speakers 57 Summary 64 CHAPTER III RES EARCH METHODOLOGY Research Design 65 Production Study 67 Population 67 Sample 68 Research Instruments 72 Collection of Data 79 Data Analysis 80 Perception Study 84 227 INDEPEND ENT S AMPLES T-TES T VALUES OF THE INTELLIGIBILITY TES T JUDGED BY NATIVE ENGLIS H S PEAKERS Group S tatistics – Native English Judges Std Std Error Group N M ean Deviation M ean L-group 30 112.70 57.548 10.507 Level H-group 30 177.33 49.126 8.969 Independent S amples Test – Native English Judges Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of M eans Equality of Variances 95% Confidence Interval of the Sig M ean Std Error F Sig t df Difference (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper Equal variances assumed Level Equal variances not assumed 1.812 183 -4.679 58 -4.679 56.606 000 -64.633 13.814 -92.286 -36.981 000 -64.633 13.814 -92.300 -36.966 228 INDEPEND ENT S AMPLES T-TES T VALUES OF THE INTELLIGIBILITY TES T JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLIS H S PEAKERS Group S tatistics – Native and Non-native English S peakers Std Std Error Group N M ean Deviation M ean L-group 30 220.73 98.954 18.066 Level H-group 30 325.73 86.190 15.736 Independent S amples Test – Native and Non-native English S peakers Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of M eans Equality of Variances Equal variances assumed Level Equal variances not assumed F Sig t df 1.669 201 -4.383 58 000 -105.000 23.959 -152.959 -57.041 000 -105.000 23.959 -152.978 -57.022 -4.383 56.928 M ean Difference Std Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Sig (2-tailed) 229 PAIRED S AMPLES T-TES T VALUES OF THE WORD LIS T READ ING The Pilot S tudy Paired S amples Statistics – The Wordlist Reading Std Std Error M ean N Deviation M ean Rater1 25.00 10 000 000 Pair Rater2 24.90 10 316 100 M ean Pair Rater1 - Rater2 100 Paired S amples Test – The Wordlist Reading Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval of the Std Error Std Deviation Difference M ean Lower Upper 316 100 -.126 326 t df Sig (2-tailed) 1.000 343 230 PAIRED S AMPLES T-TES T VALUES OF THE TEXT READING The Pilot S tudy Paired S amples Statistics – The Text Reading Std Std Error M ean N Deviation M ean Rater1 25.00 10 000 000 Pair Rater2 24.80 10 422 133 M ean Pair Rater1 - Rater2 200 Paired S amples Test – The Text Reading Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval of the Std Error Std Deviation Difference M ean Lower Upper 422 133 -.102 502 t df Sig (2-tailed) 1.500 168 231 PAIRED S AMPLES T-TES T VALUES OF THE PICTURE D ES CRIPTION The Pilot S tudy Paired S amples Statistics – The Picture Description Std Std Error M ean N Deviation M ean Rater1 25.00 10 000 000 Pair Rater2 24.20 10 1.317 416 M ean Pair Rater1 - Rater2 800 Paired S amples Test – The Picture Description Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval of the Std Error Std Deviation Difference M ean Lower Upper 1.317 416 -.142 1.742 t df Sig (2-tailed) 1.922 087 APPENDIX L RECRUITMENT OF LIS TENERS 233 APPENDIX M CONS ENT FORM FROM CAN THO UNIVERS ITY, VIETNAM FOR THE PILOT S TUDY 235 APPENDIX N CONS ENT FORM FROM AN GIANG UNIVERS ITY, VIETNAM FOR THE MAIN S TUDY 237 Abbr Tar Del Epen Dev Unrel Ro-Vow+ Del Sub+ Epen Sub Ro-Vow+ Sub Epen+ Dev List of Notations (Single Word-final Consonants) Words Explanations Target A word-final consonant is pronounced correctly Deletion A single word-final consonant is deleted completely For example, /laIt/ in ‘light’ becomes [laI] Epenthesis A sound is added to the end of/before a word-final consonant For example, /laIt/ in ‘light’ becomes [laIts] Devoicing A voiced word-final consonant is changed to a voiceless one For instance, /z/ becomes [ ] Unreleasing A word-final consonant is enunciated but it is not released For example, /ʃɒp/ in ‘shop’ is pronounced as [ʃɒp˺] Rounded vowel A vowel is rounded and a word-final consonant is deleted For plus deletion instance, /hæv/ in ‘have’ is pronounced as [h ] Substitution plus A word-final consonant is replaced by a sound and another sound epenthesis is added to the end of/before the word-final consonant For example, /li:f/ in ‘leaf’ is enunciated as [li:ps] Substitution A word-final consonant is replaced by another sound For example, /li:f/ in ‘leaf’ is enunciated as [li:p] Rounded vowel A vowel is rounded and a word-final consonant is replaced by plus substitution another sound For instance, /hæv/ in ‘have’ is pronounced as [h ] Epenthesis plus A sound is added to the end of/before a word-final consonant devoicing which is devoiced For example, /reIʤ/ in ‘rage’ becomes [reInʤ˳] Abbr Tar Red Words Target Reduction Om+ Unrel Omission plus unreleasing Om+Dev Omission plus devoicing Om+ Epen Omission plus epenthesis Sub+Dev Unrel Del Substitution plus devoicing Unreleasing Deletion Epen Epenthesis Dev Devoicing Sub+Om Substitution plus omission Epen+ Dev Epenthesis plus devoicing Sub+Om +Dev Substitution plus omission plus devoicing All-consonant substitution Substitution All-sub Sub Om+S ub +Epen Sub+ Epen Omission plus substitution plus epenthesis Substitution plus epenthesis List of Notations (Word-final Clusters) Explanations All the consonants of a word-final cluster are pronounced accurately One or more consonants of a cluster are omitted For example, [mInts] in ‘mints’ is pronounced as [mIn_s] One or more consonants are omitted and one or more consonants left are unreleased For example, /pʌlp/ in ‘pulp is pronounced as [pʌ_p˺] One or more consonants are omitted and one or more consonants are devoiced or vice versa For example, /ləʊvz/ in ‘loaves’ is pronounced as [ləʊ _] or [ləʊ ] One or more consonants are omitted and one or more sounds are added to the end of a word For example, ‘mask’ /ma:sk/ is pronounced as [ma:_kə] One or more consonants are substituted and one consonant or more consonants are devoiced or vice versa For example, ‘loaves’ /ləʊvz/ is pronounced as [ləʊp ] or [ləʊ ] One or more consonants are unreleased For example, ‘pulp’ /pʌlp/ is pronounced as [pʌlp˺] All the consonants of a cluster are deleted For example, ‘wilds’ /waIldz/ is produced as [waI ] One or more sounds are added to a word-final cluster For example, ‘band’ /bænd/ is pronounced as [’bændə] one or more consonants of a cluster are devoiced, e.g ‘band’ /bænd/ pronounced as [bæn ] One or more consonants are substituted and one or more consonants are omitted or vice versa For example, ‘mints’ /mInts/ is pronounced as [mInθ ] or as [mIn_k] One or more sounds are added to a word-final cluster and one or more consonants are devoiced For example, ‘loaves’ /ləʊvz/ is pronounced as [‘ləʊvI ] In a cluster, one consonant is substituted; one consonant is omitted; and one consonant is devoiced For example, ‘wilds’/waIldz/ is pronounced as /waIə / All the consonants of a final cluster are replaced by different sounds, e.g ‘band’ /bænd/ pronounced as [bæŋk] One or more consonants of a cluster are replaced by one or more different sounds, e.g ‘mints’ /mInts/ pronounced as [mInst] In a cluster, one consonant is omitted; one consonant is replaced; and one or more sounds are added For example, ‘wilds’/waIldz/ is pronounced as [‘waI_dI ] One or more consonants are substituted and one or more sounds are added vice versa, e.g ‘minced’ /mInst/ pronounced as [‘mInsId˺] BIOGRAPHY NAME AND S URNAME: Hanh Duc N guyen DATE OF BIRTH: 19/02/1981 POS ITION: Instructor of English, An Giang University, Vietnam EDUC ATION: M aster of Arts in English Language and Literature Teaching issued by Ateneo De M anila University, Philippines in 2010 Bachelor of English Teacher Education issued by Can Tho University, Vietnam in 2003 WORK EXPERIENCE: Full-time instructor of English, Department of Linguistics and Interpretation, Faculty of Foreign Languages, An Giang University, 2003 – present AWARDS AND S CHOLARS HIPS : Recipient, Scholarship 911, M inistry of Education and Training, Vietnam, 2015 – 2017 Recipient, The Whole Person Education, United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia, 2015 Recipient, Faculty Scholarship, United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia, 2008 - 2010 ... Dissertation Title: A STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD- FINAL CONSONANT PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAM ESE LEARNERS AND THE DEGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON -NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS Dissertation... participants, English major students at An Giang University, and the native and non -native English speakers as judges The native and non -native English speakers were judges of intelligibility related... Pongprairat (2011: 17) gave a summary of theoretical assumptions and characteristics of Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and interlanguage in the table below Table Theoretical Assumption and