Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:21:20.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Acquisition of English Word-Final Consonants by Cantonese ESL Learners in Hong Kong

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Alice Y.W. Chan
Alice Y.W. Chan*
Affiliation:
City University of Hong Kong
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the acquisition of English word-final consonants by Hong Kong Cantonese learners of English as a second language and assesses the validity of the Markedness Differential Hypothesis for second language phonology acquisition by these learners. Twelve participants and three native speakers performed four speech tasks: reading a word list, reading three passages, describing pictures, and participating in a conversational interview. The results show that: (i) word-finally, more non-target laterals were produced than voiceless obstruents; and (ii) non-target productions of voiced obstruents were the highest. We argue that the Markedness Differential Hypothesis does not explain the acquisition of English word-final singleton consonants by Cantonese ESL learners in Hong Kong. We conclude that markedness alone cannot be used as a predictor for the relative difficulty of acquiring the target segments of a second language.

Résumé

Résumé

Cette étude examine l’acquisition des consonnes de l’anglais en position finale de mot par les apprenants cantonais de l’anglais comme langue seconde à Hong Kong et évalue la validité de l’hypothèse du marquage différentiel pour l’acquisition de la phonologie d’une langue seconde par ces apprenants. Douze participants et trois locuteurs natifs ont participé à quatre tâches : la lecture d’une liste de mots, la lecture de trois passages, la description de portraits et la participation dans une entrevue conversationnelle. Les résultats démontrent que : (i) en position finale de mot, plus de latérales non cibles étaient produites que d’obstruents non voisés; et (ii) les productions non cibles d’obstruents voisés étaient les plus élevées. Nous proposons que l’hypothèse du marquage différentiel n’explique pas l’acquisition des consonnes simples de l’anglais en position finale de mot par les apprenants cantonais de l’anglais comme langue seconde à Hong Kong. Nous concluons que le marquage seul ne prédit pas la difficulté relative de l’acquisition des segments cibles d’une langue seconde.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , November 2007 , pp. 231 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2007 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Janet I: 1987. The markedness differential hypothesis and syllable structure difficulty. In Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system, ed. loup, Georgette and Weinberger, Steven, 279–291. Cambridge: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Anderson, Jennifer L., Morgan, James L., and White, Katherine S.. 2003. A statistical basis for speech sound discrimination. Language and Speech 46:155–182.Google Scholar
Bauer, Robert S., and Benedict, Paul K.. 1997. Modern Cantonese phonology. New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Benson, Bronwen. 1986. The markedness differential hypothesis: Implications for Vietnamese speakers of English. In Markedness, ed. Eckman, Fred R., Moravcsik, Edith A., and Wirth, Jessica R., 271–289. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Best, Catherine T. 1994. The emergence of native-language phonological influences in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. In The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words, ed. Goodman, Judith C. and Nusbaum, Howard C., 167–224. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Tej K. 1995. Acquisition of voicing and aspiration in second language development. In The teaching and acquisition of South Asian languages, ed. Gambhir, Vijay, 183–196. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Bolton, Kingsley, and Kwok, Helen. 1990. The dynamics of the Hong Kong accent: Social identity and sociolinguistic description. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 1:147–172.Google Scholar
Carlisle, Robert S. 1988. The effect of markedness on epenthesis in Spanish/English in-terlanguage phonology. Issues and Developments in English and Applied Linguistics 3: 15–23.Google Scholar
Chan, Alice Y.W., and Li, David C.S.. 2000. English and Cantonese phonology in contrast: Explaining Cantonese ESL learners’ English pronunciation problems. Language, Culture and Curriculum 13:67–85.Google Scholar
Cichocki, Wladyslaw, House, A.B., Kinloch, A.M., and Lister, A.C.. 1999. Cantonese speakers and the acquisition of French consonants. Language Learning 49, supplement 1:95–121.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan. 2001. Gimson’s pronunciation of English. 6th ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning 27:315–330.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1981a. On predicting phonological difficulty in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 4:18–30.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1981b. On the naturalness of interlanguage phonological rules. Language Learning 31:195–216.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1984. Universals, typologies and interlanguage. In Language universals and second language acquisition, ed. Rutherford, William E., 79–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1985. Some theoretical and pedagogical implications of the markedness differential hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7:289–307.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1987. The reduction of word-final consonant clusters in interlanguage. In Sound patterns in second language acquisition, ed. James, Allan and Leather, Jonathan, 143–162. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1991. The structural conformity hypothesis and the acquisition of consonant clusters in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13:23–41.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred R. 1996. A functional-typological approach to second language acquisition theory. In Handbook of second language acquisition, ed. Ritchie, William C. and Bhatia, Tej K., 195–211. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Edge, Beverly A. 1991. The production of word-final voiced obstruents in English by LI speakers of Japanese and Cantonese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13:377–393.Google Scholar
Flege, James E. 1995. Second language speech learning: Theory, findings and problems. In Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research, ed. Strange, Winifred, 233–277. Baltimore: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, James E., Munro, Murray J., and Skelton, Laurie. 1992. Production of the word-final English /t/ - /d/ contrast by native speakers of English, Mandarin and Spanish. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 92:128–143.Google Scholar
Flege, James E., and Wang, Chipin. 1989. Native-language phonotactic constraints affect how well Chinese subjects perceive the word-final English /t/-/d/ contrast. Journal of Phonetics 17:299–315.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Language universals: With special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Harnsberger, James D. 2001. On the relationship between identification and discrimination of non-native nasal consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 110:489–503.Google Scholar
Hume, Elizabeth. 2004. Deconstructing markedness: A predictability-based approach. In Berkeley Linguistics Society: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting 2004, 182–198. Department of Linguistics, University of California, Berkeley. (Also available at www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~ehume/papers/Hume_markedness_ BLS30.pdf.)Google Scholar
Hung, Tony T.N. 2000. Towards a phonology of Hong Kong English. World Englishes 19:337–356.Google Scholar
Kellerman, Eric. 1979. The problem with difficulty, Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 4:27–48.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 2006. A course in phonetics. 5th ed. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Leather, Jonathan. 1999. Second-language speech research: An introduction. Language Learning 49, supplement 1:1–56.Google Scholar
Levelt, Clara C., Schiller, Niels O., and Levelt, Willem J.. 2000. The acquisition of syllable types. Language Acquisition 8:237–264.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Major, Roy C. 1996. Markedness in second language acquisition of consonant clusters. In Second language acquisition and linguistic variation, ed. Bayley, Robert and Preston, Dennis R., 75–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Major, Roy C. 2001. Foreign accent: The ontogeny and phytogeny of second language phonology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Major, Roy C., and Faudree, Michael C.. 1996. Markedness universals and the acquisition of voicing contrasts by Korean speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18:69–90.Google Scholar
Major, Roy C., and Kim, Eunyi. 1999. The similarity differential rate hypothesis. Language Learning 49, supplement 1:151–183.Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 1989. Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roach, Peter. 2000. English phonetics and phonology: A practical course. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roark, Brian, and Demuth, Katherine. 2000. Prosodie constraints and the learner’s environment: A corpus study. In Proceedings of the 24th annual Boston University conference on language development, ed. Howell, S. Catherine, Fish, Sarah A., and Keith-Lucas, Thea, 597–608. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Yvan. 2003. Place specification and segmental distribution in the acquisition of word-final consonant syllabification. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 48: 409–435.Google Scholar
Rutherford, William E. 1982. Markedness in second language acquisition. Language Learning 32:85–108.Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 10:209–231.Google Scholar
Sproat, Richard, and Fujimura, Osamu. 1993. Allophonic variation in English /l/ and its implications for phonetic implementation. Journal of Phonetics 21:291–311.Google Scholar
Stites, Jessica, Demuth, Katherine, and Kirk, Cecilia. 2004. Markedness vs. frequency effects in coda acquisition. In Proceedings of the 28th annual Boston University conference on language development, ed. Brugos, Alejna, Micciulla, Linnea, and Smith, Christine E., 565–576. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Stockman, Ida J., and Pluut, Erna. 1992. Segment composition as a factor in the syllabification errors of second-language speakers. Language Learning 42:21–45.Google Scholar
Strange, Winifred. 1992. Language non-native phoneme contrasts: Interactions among subject, stimulus, and task variables. In Speech perception, production and linguistic structure, ed. Tohkura, Yoh’ichi, Vatikiotis-Bateson, Eric, and Sagisaka, Yoshinori, 197–219. Tokyo: Ohmsha.Google Scholar
Tarone, Elaine E. 1987. Some influences on the syllable structure of interlanguage phonology. In Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system, ed. loup, Georgette and Weinberger, Steven, 232–247. Cambridge: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Zobl, Helmut. 1983. Markedness and the projection problem. Language Learning 33:293–313.Google Scholar