Kussainova V.M., Yekibayeva N.A.

Eurasian National University

Astana, Kazakhstan

The problem cross-language interference in the teaching of English.

Abstract

The main goal of the study is oral fluency that is to assist students to achieve correct pronunciation by defining and preventing the errors in the speeches of the non-native speakers. A special attention is given to the pronunciation of mistakes in combinations of vowels. We present practical ways of preventing these problems in gaining acceptable pronunciation. Thus students will be able to express their thoughts intelligibly, reasonably, accurately and without too much hesitation with which communication breaks down.

Key-words: Interference, pronunciation, Alveolar sounds,

Speaking about the levels of interference Berthold and variety of analyses that were carried out in professionally-oriented cross-cultural communication sphere and professionally-oriented interpretation divided the interference into:

1)  Phonetic (phonological) interference;

2)  Orthographical interference;

3)  Grammatical interference (morphology, syntax, punctuation);

4)  Lexically-semantic interference;

5)  Stylistic interference.

Berthold et.al (1997) define phonological interference as items including foreign accent such as stress, rhyme, intonation and speech sounds from the first language influencing the second.

Orthographic interference includes the spelling of one language altering another.

Grammatical interference is defined as the first language influencing the second in terms of word order, use of pronouns and determinants, tense and mood.

Interference at a lexical level provides for the borrowing of words from one language and converting them to sound more natural in another.

Stylistic interference is manifested in writing and is usually indicated by influencing the style of the mother tongue on the target language.

In spite of the fact that all the levels of interference are quite important to be aware of what they are, but what the most significant in the first years of education is the phonological interference which is a problem number one and needs to be eliminated as fast as possible.

The mistakes we came across were related to the bilabial and partly labio-dental sounds: [b] [p] [w] and [v]. The following words contain the errors of four types:

1)  No aspiration is made while the word is being pronounced:

·  «pulp»:  [пʌlп] instead of [pʌlp];

·  «paradise»: ['пærədaɪs] instead of ['pærədaɪs];

·  «palm»: [пɑːm] instead of [pɑːm];

·  «person»: ['пɜːs(ə)n] instead of ['pɜːs(ə)n];

·  «petrol»: ['пetr(ə)l] instead of ['petr(ə)l];

2)  Complete deafening of the sound [b] in the end of the word:

·  «suburb»: ['sʌbɜːp] instead of ['sʌbɜːb];

·  «disturb»: [dɪ'stɜːp] instead of [dɪ'stɜːb];

·  «absorb»: [əb'zɔːp] instead of [əb'zɔːb];

·  «club»: [klʌp] instead of [klʌb];

3)  Pronouncing the voiced bilabial [w] instead of the labial-dental sound [v]:

·  «weep»: [viːp] instead of [wiːp];

·  «worse»: [vɜːs] instead of [wɜːs];

·  «wheel»: [viːl] instead of [wiːl];

4)  Complete devoicing the labial-dental [v] in the terminal position:

·  «halve»: [hɑ:f] instead of [hɑ:v];

·  «prove»: [pru:f] instead of [pru:v];

·  «save»: [seɪf] instead of [seɪv];

·  «live»: [lɪf] instead of [lɪv];

·  «have»: [hæf] instead of [hæv].

Alveolar sounds [z] caused some serious problem. Complete deafening of the sound [z] in the final position of word instead of partial deafening:

·  [ʤæs] instead of [ʤæz] (jazz);

·  [ʤi:s] instead of [ʤ:z] (jeez);

·  [kwɪs] instead of [kwɪz] (quiz);

·  [nju:s] instead of [nju:z] (news);

·  [ju:st] instead of  [ju:zd] (used).

Take into consideration the backlingual sounds such as [k], [g] and nasal [ŋ] we found out some problematic cases:

1.  The sound [g] in the end of the words was fully devoiced:

·  [flæk] instead of [flæg] (flag);

·  [dɔk] instead of [dɔg] (dog);

·  [lek] instead of [leg] (leg);

·  [mʌk] instead of [mʌg] (mug);

·  [hʌk] instead of [hʌg] (hug);

2.  No nasalization is made when pronouncing [ŋ] in such words as

·  ['klaɪmɪn] instead of ['klaɪmɪŋ] (climbing);

·  [wɔʧɪn] instead of [wɔʧɪŋ] (watching);

·  ['stiːlɪn] instead of ['stiːlɪŋ] (stealing);

·  ['θɪŋkɪn] instead of ['θɪŋkɪŋ] (thinking);

·  [brɪn] instead of [brɪŋ] (bring).

Speaking of assimilation of voicing and deafening category we found the following type of mistakes. Assimilation of the voiced consonant before the initial voiced sound of the followed word:

·  [u: ni:d tu hæf it] instead of correct [u: ni:d tu hæv it] (you need to have it);

·  [li:fʌsə'ləun] instead of [li:vʌsə'ləun] (leave us alone);

·  [gɪfbɜ:θ] instead of [gɪvbɜ:θ] (give birth). 

Interdental combination of letters “th” transcribed as [θ] and [ð] were definitely difficult to pronounce for students. Actually, we revealed two problem types:

1)  No interdental transmission of the sound [θ]. “Th” combination transcribed as [θ] was frequently transmitted as the Russian sounds [ф], [с] & [т] in such words as:

·  [fɔn] instead of [θɔŋ] (thong);

·  [sɪn] instead of [θɪn] (thin);

·  [fɪk] istead of [θɪk] (thick);

·  [tauz(ə)nd] instead of ['θauz(ə)nd] (thousand);

·  [fret] instead of [θret] (threat);

·  [senk] instead of [θæŋk] (thank); 

2)  No interdental transmission of the sound [ð]. This sound was transmitted as [в], [з] & [д] in the following words:

·  [ze] instead of [ðe] (the);

·  [vən] instead of [ðən] (than);

·  [zæt/dæt] instead of [ðæt] (that);

Speaking of the English glottal sound [h], the students used to produce it in the Russian manner:

·  [хайд] (hide);

·  [хаг] (hug);

·  [хейр] (hair);

·  [хаф] (half).

Having analyzed the mistakes occurred in the phonetic level, we can infer that plenty of linguistic lapses were referred to the following consonant sounds: bilabial, labiodental, interdental, alveolar, glottal and velar sounds. The main cause for that was the failure in thinking that consonant system of sounds in the Russian and English languages has no discrepancy. Nevertheless, there are a load of divergences concerning the tension in the voice, that is why, the pronunciation is different. In this analysis we ascertained that an infinite number of mistakes were appeared because of having no aspiration in the pronunciation of sounds, complete deafening of consonants in the terminal position of words instead of partial deafening or having no deafening at all, absence of nasality, transferring the interdental sounds by using Russian sounds, etc. The problem can be fixed by training in pronouncing the English words all the time. 

References:

1.Екибаева Н.А. Исследование сочетаний гласных в казахском, русском и английском языках.

2. Bhela, B. (1999). Native language interference in learning a second language: Exploratory case studies of native language interference with target language usage. International Education Journal.

3. Sereebenjapol, P. (2003) An Analysis of the errors in English which graduate science students make in the discussion section of their thesis. Unpublished, Master’s Thesis, Mahidol University, Thailand.

4.Thep-Ackrapong, T. (2006). Overall patterns of errors Found in Thai EFL students’ written products. Thai TESOL BULLETIN, 19(2), 93-109.