PHONOLOGICAL INTEFERENCE IN THE
SPOKEN ENGLISH PERFORMED BY JAVANESE
SPEAKER AT UIN SUNAN AMPEL SURABAYA
THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd.) in Teaching English
By :
SISKA HIDAYATIN NIKMAH
NIM D95212085
ENGLISH TEACHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND TEACHER TRAINING
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SUNAN AMPEL
SURABAYA
vi
ABSTRACT
Siska Hidayatin Nikmah. (2016). Phonological Interference in the Spoken English
Performed by Javanese Speaker of Fourth Semester Students of English Teacher Education Department at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. A thesis English Education Department, Faculty of Education and Teacher Training, State Islamic University (UIN) Sunan Ampel. Advisor: Hilda Izzati Madjid, M.A
Keywords: Interference, Phonology, Speaking skill
The aims of this research are to describe (1) kind of phonological interference in the spoken English performed by Javanese speaker of students in fourth semester of English education department UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya (2) phonological factors which result on phonological interference in the spoken English performed by Javanese speaker of students in fourth semester of English education department UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
This study was descriptive qualitative. The subjects of this study were all fourth semester students of English education department at UIN Sunan Ampel. However, the valid subject done on 35 Javanese speakers who use Surabaya dialect of fourth semester students. Data and the data source was audio-recorded file containing speech in length 4 to 6 minutes collected by 35 Javanese speakers of fourth semester students. The data collected through observation and record. The research instrument was questionnaire, audio-recorder, mp3 converter, audacity, mp3 cutter, and Collins Cobuild digital dictionary.
The results of this study show that there is occurrence of phonological interference include the kinds of: (1) under-differentiation of phonemes occurs when there are different phonemic system and absence of corresponding distinction in primary language results errors production consisting of several sounds including /æ/,
/ʤ/, /ɵ/, /ʒ/, /ð/, /ʧ/ and /ɒ/, (2) over-differentiation of phonemes occurs when there
are different phonemic system and presence of distinction (only) on primary system results errors production consisting of several sounds /k/, /d/, and /t/ replaced by the primary sounds /Ɂ/, /ɖ/, and /ʈ/, (3) reinterpretation of distinction occurs when there are different phonemic system and different interpretation done by primary speaker on stressing some secondary words which then results on errors production, and the last (4) actual phone substitution occurs when there are different phonemic system and different pronunciation of equivalent phonemes result on errors production
consisting sounds /ŋ/ and /z/.
x
LIST OF CONTENTS
TITLE SHEET ... i
ADVISOR APPROVAL SHEET ... ii
EXAMINER APPROVAL SHEET ... iii
MOTTO ... iv
DEDICATION SHEET ... v
ABSTRACT ... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... vii
PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN TULISAN ... ix
LIST OF CONTENTS ... x
LIST OF TABLES ... xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Problem of the Study ... 7
C. Objective of the Study ... 7
D. Significance of the Study ... 7
E. Scope and Limitation of the Study ... 8
xi
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoritical Background ... 10
1. Bilingualism and Multilingualism ... 10
2. Language Interference ... 12
3. Phonological Interference ... 15
4. Factor Causing Phonological Interference ... 17
5. Phonological System in English and Javanese... 20
6. Javanese Speaker ... 27
B. Previous Study ... 30
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODS A. Research Design ... 35
B. Research Location ... 36
C. Subject of the Study ... 36
D. Data Collection Techniques ... 37
E. Research Instrument ... 39
F. Data and Source Data ... 42
G. Data Analysis Technique ... 42
CHAPTER IV: RESERACH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Research Findings ... 45
xii
1. Phonological Interference on Students’ Speaking
Performance ... 54
2. Phonological Factors Resulting on Phonological
Interference on Students’ Speaking Performance ... 67
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion ... 72
B. Suggestion ... 73
REFERENCES
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This study focuses on describing phonological interference on students’
speaking ability by Javanese speaker in the spoken of English. This chapter presents
several important points include background of the study, problems of the study,
objectives, significance of the study, scope and limitation, also definition of key
terms used in this study.
A. Background of the Study
Bilingual even multilingual condition allows people to use more than one
language in their communication activity. This condition happens to many students
in Indonesia who have a local language as their first language and official even
foreign language as their second language. For example the students of English
Teacher Education Department at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya, they are multilingual
students by using Javanese, Madurish, or even Indonesian as their first language and
English as second language.
English as the second language seems to become important to be learned
since this language is used by the people around the world to communicate; it means
that the students will require this language to increase their opportunity getting
proper education even getting proper job later. Regarding this case, students have
already tried and studied hard to master English well. As students of English Teacher
2
are prepared to be future teachers by having sufficient knowledge on English which
will be delivered for their students later. However, learning English is not easy as it
seems. In fact, English Teacher Education Department students are occasionally
encountered with those who learn this language for years; nonetheless, their skills are
not well-increased especially in spoken skill. They may produce the same error
production which has become habitual and established. For instance, the word
because is often pronounce as /bɪkǝs/ or /bɪkos/ while according to dictionary, the
correct pronunciation is /bɪkɒz/.
Language interference on acquiring second language becomes one of
indicated issues result on error production which it can decrease students’ English
skill. This questions whether any influence of mother tongue on the process of
acquiring English as second language then resulting difficulties by bilingual even
multilingual learners or not. Considering to the language contact on both languages
used by bilingual learners, this may play role in resulting the language interference.
Weinrich’s statement on contact between two languages used by bilingual person
“two or more languages will be said to be In Contact if they are used alternatively by
the same persons”.1
The condition of language contact often arises to the
phenomenon of language interference. Language interference itself is defined as
situation when the person (bilingual) uses norm or rule from their first languages
1
3
involved to their second language as a result on the language contact on both
languages.2
There are three kinds of language interference, they include phonological,
grammatical, and lexical.3 Phonological interference concerns with the matter in
which bilingual learners use the phonetic system of first language to reproduce
sounds in second language. While, grammatical interference concerns on the L1
system influence L2 in the level of word order, use of pronouns and
determinants, tense and mood.4 Last, lexical interference concerns with the
phenomenon of language interference in the level of vocabulary.5 Those are the kind
of language interference which may play role in resulting errors for acquiring target
language.
However, this study will focus on the terms of phonological interference
which then resulting on producing misappropriate pronunciation in spoken of target
language by bilingual learners. Consider to the challenging activity to observe this
area, sometimes phonological interference becomes forgettable area to be studied.
This is in line with the statement of Weinrich that “the observation of interference in
the act of speech is much more precarious…this will have possibility that the
observer will be faced by difficulty because dealing with the direct conversation
2
Uriel Weinrich, Languages in Contact……….1
3Uriel Weinrich, Languages in Contact……….….
2
4
Deepa Nayak, M.S. et.al. Phonological, Grammatical and Lexical Interference in Adult Multilingual Speakers. Language in India. Vol 9. No. 6, 2009, 11-22
5
4
result than written text result”.6
There are few studies focused on this area yet. But,
this study is important to be done to find if there is L1 phonological interference on
acquiring L2 which resulting on the difficulty of bilingual even multilingual learners.
Mainly, phonological interference becomes important to be studied due to
this kind of interference dealing with the speaking skill. Among four basic skills in
English, speaking becomes the most noticeable skill than other skills. Nowadays, not
only communicate to others who have the same language but also people like to
communicate to other people who have different languages. For example, Indonesian
people who do communication with native of English because of their job or their
study. Sometimes, people like to judge the other people from their speaking skill;
they may judge another person having less competent in English if she or he has less
ability to speak in English especially producing some English word. In this case, one
of the ways to improve speaking skill is having good pronunciation of English
sounds. By having good pronunciation, the other people especially native of English
could understand well about we are speaking to.
However, speaking to having good pronunciation in English sounds is not
easy matter. The main reason is not all the English sounds are existed in other
languages; this condition may result on error production. The students may
reproduce English word alike their native languages, for example Javanese students
may pronounce the word job as /jɔb/ not /ʤɒb/. To this case, phonological
6
5
interference could be occurred when there is different phonological rule on both
languages. Javanese language system does not recognize the sounds of /ʤ/ and /ɒ/;
therefore they tend to use similar sounds in their language system which often they
use to replace those sounds.
It has been a common habit if English Teacher Education Department
students especially English Teacher Education Department students at UIN Sunan
Ampel, they still use their local language in daily communication even in college
where they have to speak English more to improve their English skill well. This
condition may influence the rule of their mother tongue in acquiring English as
second language. There are several local languages which are used by English
Teacher Education Department students at UIN Sunan Ampel, they are Javanese,
Madurish, even Indonesian. Due to language interference phenomenon could be
happened on anyone and any languages, all of those local languages are possibly
experienced on phonological interference.
However, this research will be limited to Javanese language specifically
Surabaya dialect. This is as effort to conduct further research by Mr Bejo who has
been studied The Micro linguistics Contrastive Analysis between Javanese Language
of Banyumasan and English, moreover, to answer the researcher’s question whether
any phonological interference on students’ speaking ability by Javanese Surabaya
dialect speakers which decrease students’ speaking skill. In the previous research, Mr
phonological system on Javanese and English, this then raise an issue if there is an
existence of phonological interference on students’ speaking ability in English with
Javanese as their first language.7
Furthermore, the researcher has chosen to conduct the study on students of
English Teacher Education department at UIN Sunan Ampel especially fourth
semester students. Besides, of the researcher will find Javanese speaker in Surabaya
dialect on students, it is considered as two years for learning English in college, they
already have exposure to four basic skills in English (speaking, writing, listening and
reading). Also, in the previous semester, they have already learned about English
phonology. It is hoped that they have already mastered English well, but in fact, there
is still students producing misappropriate English words. As attempt to develop
pre-service English teacher proficiency in English before they go to school to do PPL for
having experience teaching in the real school, this study is the best steps to invite
them.
For the reasons mentioned before, here the writer is eager to investigate
whether there is phonological interference on students’ speaking ability by
7
7
conducting the study entitled “Phonological Interference in the Spoken English
Performed by Javanese Speaker at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya”.
B. Problem of the Study
Based on the background above, the research problem is formulated as follow.
1. What kind of phonological interference in the spoken English performed
by Javanese speaker at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya?
2. What are the phonological factors which result on phonological
interference in the spoken English performed by Javanese speaker at UIN
Sunan Ampel Surabaya?
C. Objectives of the Study
Based on the problems above, this study is intended:
1. To describe kind of phonological interference in the spoken English
performed by Javanese speaker at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
2. To describe phonological factors which result on phonological
interference in the spoken English performed by Javanese speaker at UIN
Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
D. Significance of the Study
The result of this study is able to give contribution for students and teachers.
The result regarding on phonological interference on students’ speaking ability is
able to be useful for students to know the importance of understanding their kind of
8
ability by omitting their habitual attitude in producing English word during the time
and easier to understand native speaker’s speaking because they can interpret their
speaking appropriate to correct pronunciation.
Moreover, the result of this study is able to be useful for teacher to as
information know the common error production because of the presence
phonological interference; therefore, they may add this knowledge to speaking class
or phonology class.
E. Scope and Limitation of the Study
The scope of the study entitled “Phonological Interference in the Spoken
English Performed by Javanese Speaker at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya” is
describing kind of phonological interference on Javanese first language on acquiring
English as second language and factors causing phonological interference on second
language.
The study will use Weinrich theory on type of phonological interference.
Therefore, the writer will categorize the kind of phonological interference by
referring to the theory. Additionally, this study will limit to analyze the factors
causing phonological interference only on structural perspective, another factor such
interlanguage will be not mentioned. The area of phonological system will be studied
is only the feature of both segmental system. Furthermore, this study conducts the
9
acquires English as second language, the other languages except Javanese and
English will be not examine to this study.
F. Definition of Key Terms
To avoid misinterpretation, the terms of this study are defined as follows:
1. Phonological interference
Deepa, et all defined as involvement of L1 (Javanese) phonological
systems in acquiring L2 (English). 8 In this study, phonological
interference is Javanese learner’s mispronunciation of English word
because they use L1 phonological system on acquiring L2 which is
different.
2. Phonological Factor
When the sounds are viewed as a part of phonological system, certain
additional factors emerge which favor or inhibit faulty sound
reproduction.9 In this study, phonological factor means that different
structural phonological system of Javanese language which may result
mispronunciation of several English sounds.
8
Deepa Nayak, M.S. et.al. Phonological……….11-22 9
10
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter will discuss some description of conceptual framework relate to
phonological interference in the spoken English performed by Javanese speaker. This
conceptual framework will be the preliminaries concept for conducting this research
covering the concept of bilingualism and multilingualism phenomenon in language
learning, language transfer and language interference. Also, related previous study
will be presented to describe the difference with this current study.
A. Theoretical Background
On this subtitle, the writer wants to discuss some theoretical background
which is related to phonological interference in the spoken English performed by
Javanese speaker include bilingualism and multilingualism phenomenon in language
learning, language transfer and language interference.
1. Bilingualism and Multilingualism
Language is acquired by people since they are children. Chomsky
theory has stated that “we are born with an innate ability to learn language,
and with little guidance, children will naturally learn language”. Moreover, he
stated that human born with a language acquisition device, an area in
human’s brain, which allows the human to learn and to acquire the language
system naturally. It means that, every human in this world has ability to learn
11
human to help them acquiring the language. These language systems include
variables of language which are phonology, morphology, syntax, pragmatics
and discourse. Language becomes very crucial thing in human’s life, as its
function for doing communication to others in their daily life.
In reality, it is commonly found that an individual acquires and uses
more than one language in their life; this phenomenon called bilingualism.
Another definition about bilingualism is mentioned by Weinrich “the practice
of alternately using two languages will be called Bilingualism and the persons
involved, Bilingual”.1
Sometimes, an individual is able to acquire and to use
more than two languages, for instance Indonesian is able to use Javanese as
their first language then they acquire Bahasa, English, Arabic even other
languages as their additional languages; this is called Multilingualism.
Multilingualism is mentioned in book of Wardaugh as the use of two or more
languages.2 A phenomenon of bilingualism or multilingualism becomes the
main issue which allows the occurrence of language contact then resulting on
language interference.
In bilingualism and multilingualism context, people use alternatively
the languages in their life replacing one another depend on the situation. For
instance, Indonesian people who speak Javanese as their first language use
this language in their daily life with people around their region, and then use
1
Uriel Weinrich, Languages in Contact………...1
2
12
English in college as in the situation of language learning which demands
students to use English. Weinreich has mentioned that “two or more
languages will be said to be In Contact if they are used alternatively by the
same persons.”3
In other words, if bilingual or multilingual person uses their
ability in using more than one language regularly and alternatively on their
daily life, this will greatly allow the occurrence of language contact. The
occurrence of language contact on bilingual or multilingual person sometimes
results on language interference.
2. Language Interference
The writer will begin the description of language interference by
delivering the concept of language transfer in language acquisition. Language
transfer is crucial concept to be described, before knowing further description
about language interference, since this is the initial term which then describes
the phenomenon of language interference. What kind of situation language
transfer is; after reading some literature, this is able to be defined as the use
of mother tongue (L1) knowledge in a language system transferring to
acquiring even practicing of target language (L2) or vice versa. Jarvis et all
describes language transfer as transferring linguistic features of first language
to second language or second to first in the speech skill which occurred to
3
13
bilingual or multilingual person.4 In line, “applying knowledge from one
language to another language” describes language transfer. 5
Further,
Sharwood & Kellerman brings the term cross linguistic influence to describe
language transfer, it means that the source of influencing target language not
only mother tongue but also L3.6
Language transfer becomes central issue to be discussed in applied
linguistics, second language acquisition, also language teaching and learning
for many years.7 It is possible to occur on anyone and in any situation.
Commonly, it happens to language learning situation when learners naturally
transfer their linguistic element from mother tongue to target language.
Moreover, it is also occurred to someone or even to community who
communicate using different language; it results on language contact then
influences both native. Last, this situation of language transfer commonly
happened when someone has less native-level comprehension. Furthermore,
language transfer is able to include the linguistic element of meaning,
structure even pronunciation. This may commonly occur in the area of
spoken and written of a language.
4
Jarvis, et.al., Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. (Abingdon: Routledge, 2008)
5
Uriel Weinreich. Languages in Contact……….…. 1
6
SiLangWiki, “Language Transfer: Interlanguage”. (http://si-lang.inf.uth.gr/, accessed on April 10th, 2016)
7
14
Language transfer may be positive and negative (then called language
interference). According to literatures, positive transfer gives more correct
production because both languages have the similar system. This is in line
with the statement; positive transfer may result on correct comprehension and
language production in both spoken and written because of the similar
structure on both mother tongue and the second language. 8 Therefore,
positive transfer commonly gives correct language production in acquiring
target language because of the existence of similarities of both mother tongue
and target language. Often, the phenomenon of positive transfer becomes less
realized by learners and less discussed in the area of linguistic even language
learning acquisition; correct production resulting on the similarities or
relevant unit and structure of both languages are acceptable by native of the
target language.
On the contrary, negative transfer or language interference seems to
result on errors in acquiring target language (L2). The existence of different
linguistic element between mother tongue and target language impacts on
difficulty even errors made by learners. This is in line with the statement that
it describes as the use of different elements or structure form of mother
tongue to target language practice. 9 Negative transfer discusses more in the
area of linguistic even language learning; linguist even learners are more
8
SiLangWiki, “Language Transfer: Interlanguage”…………
9
15
aware on the error production which may be resulted by the different of both
languages. In this case, language interference is more often discussed as a
source of errors. Errors and mistakes are easier matter to be investigated by
linguist even by learners, linguist or learner considered to anticipate or
develop learning method to improve learners’ skill in English. Last, there are
three kinds of interference in language include phonological, grammatical,
and lexical. Then, this study will be focused on the analysis of phonological
interference made by Javanese speaker to English in the spoken repertoire.
3. Phonological Interference
Weinrich has mentioned that there are three kinds of interference in
languages include phonological, grammatical, and lexical. Phonological
interference is kind of situation when the phonological system rule of first
language involved in the second language use. For instance, the word button
in English pronounced /bɅtǝn/, but often pronounced as /bʊton/ considering
that there is no rule of phoneme /u/ will be pronounced /Ʌ/ in Javanese. This
phonological interference phenomenon sometimes results on negative impact
on the occurrence of phonological error then producing misappropriate
pronunciation of English word.
Furthermore, Weinrich mentioned four types of phonological
interference on his book of Languages in Contact include
16
reinterpretation of distinctions and actual phone substitution. 10 The
description of those each types will be explained as follow.
a. Under-differentiation of phonemes occurs when two sounds of the
secondary system whose counterparts are not distinguished in the primary
system are confused. It means that this type of phonological interference
could be happened when there is distinction of identical sounds in target
language whereas in the first language is not. Weinrich gives example
between the Romans language and Schwyzertutsch language of his
research finding. Schwyzertutsch speaker’s confusion of roman’s
distinction between /i/ and /ɪ/. For instance, /kunˈtɪ/ ‘knife’ is likely to be
mispronounced /kunˈti/.
b. Over-differentiation of phonemes involves the imposition of phonemic
distinctions from the primary system on the sounds of the secondary
system, where they are not required. It means that this type of
phonological interference could be happened when there is distinction of
several sounds of the first language which are transferred to produce the
target language. In the contact of Romansh and Schwyzertutsch, the
interpretation of /ˈlada/ ‘wide’ pronounced as /ˈla da/ by Schwyzertutsch.
To this case, there is an extraneous phonemic length of Schwyzertutsch’s
pronunciation represents over-differentiation of phonemes. Moreover, he
10
17
mentioned another example, German /k/ and /kˊ/ is interpreted as separate
phonemes as in Lettish.
c. Reinterpretation of distinctions occurs when bilingual distinguishes
phonemes of the secondary system by features which in that system are
merely concomitant or redundant, but which are relevant in his primary
system. It simply means that, sometimes, the L1’s speaker mispronounce
several words consisting of geminate sounds of L2 because they have
different interpretation to pronounce those sounds due to their language
system. For instance, the Romans word /ˈmɛssa/ ‘mass’, can be
interpreted almost as Schwyzertutsch /ˈmes /, where –ss- does not occur.
d. Actual phone substitution applies to phonemes that are identically
defined in two languages but whose normal pronunciation differs. It
means that, this type of phonological interference could be happened
when two sounds of two languages is considered alike by bilingual but
the fact that the pronunciation is different. For instance, Romans /ɛ/ and
Schwyzertutsch /æ/ are both as front vowels of maximum openness;
however Schwyzertutsch phoneme is pronounced more open.
4. Factor Causing Phonological Interference
Weinrich mentioned four phonological factors results on phonological
interference which has been described in previous subheading include
18
distinction (only) in primary language, different phonemic system, and
different pronunciation of equivalent phonemes.11 The description of each
factor will be explained as follow.
a. Absence of corresponding distinctions in primary language
Absence of corresponding distinctions in primary language means
condition where there is no distinction of identical sounds in primary
language while the target language does. Therefore, those distinctions
may result on phonological interference because the primary speaker does
not recognize those several distinction sounds; moreover they may
replace those sounds with similar sounds which are found in their
language system. Weinrich has given example between the Romans
language and Schwyzertutsch language of his research finding.
Schwyzertutsch speakers are confused of roman’s distinction between /i/
and /ɪ/. They may produce /kunˈtɪ/ ‘knife’ is likely to be mispronounced
/kunˈti/. To this case, Schwyzertutsch does not distinguish sounds
between /i/ and /ɪ/, those sounds are realized as allophones /i/, and
therefore they may replace /ɪ/ with /i/.
b. Presence of distinction (only) in primary language
This factor is opposites of the first point where there is distinction
of identical sounds in primary language; however, the target language
11
19
system does not recognize the distinction sounds. This condition may
result on phonological factor because they may transfer that language
system in their primary to produce several sounds of target language. In
the contact of Romansh and Schwyzertutsch, the interpretation of /ˈlada/
‘wide’ pronounced as /ˈla da/ by Schwyzertutsch. To this case, there is an
extraneous phonemic length of Schwyzertutsch’s system; moreover, they
transfer that knowledge to pronounce the target language’s word which
then results on error production.
c. Different phonemic system
Different phonemic system means that sometimes there is
different phonological system of primary language and target language on
producing sounds. Those different phonemic system are include different
manner of articulation (how to produce sounds), different place of
articulation (where the place for producing sounds), different phonation
type where the sounds are voiced or voiceless, or even different number
of consonant and vowel sounds which existed on both languages; these
different system may result on phonological interference condition. For
instance, the phoneme /b/ of Romans is always voiced, whereas the
phoneme /B/ of Schwyzertutsch is common voiceless. The pronunciation
of /læ B / ‘to live’ as /lɛb / by a native Romans speaker represents
20
d. Different pronunciation of equivalent phonemes
Different pronunciation of equivalent phonemes means that the
condition where there are identical sounds of both primary language and
target language having different pronunciation which then result on
phonological interference on those languages. Those different
pronunciations may substitute several sounds from the primary language
to produce target language or vice versa. Weinrich gives example Romans
/ɛ/ and Schwyzertutsch /æ/ is both as front vowels of maximum openness;
however Schwyzertutsch phoneme is pronounced more open.
5. Phonological System in English and Javanese
Doing this study related to phenomenon of language interference in
the spoken repertoire will be not completed without exposing the
phonological system of both languages. This information will be central thing
to be investigated as a source of errors production in speech. The following
concept will be described the phonological system in English and Javanese
include consonant and vowel system. The phonological system in English and
Javanese need to be described to support this study. The description will be
useful to analyze the common mistake made by Javanese learner seen by the
21
a. Consonant sounds
The following table will be described the difference of consonant
system between English and Javanese. To help investigation to this study, the
chart representation of both consonant systems on both languages will be
showed as in the table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Sounds Comparison between English and Javanese
sounds. The data were made by the researcher after collecting and analyzing
data regard to manner of articulation, place of articulation and phonation type
of both languages.1213 From the table 2.1, the sign check ( ) means the
language having the consonant sounds provided, and then (+) means voiced
consonant while (-) means voiceless consonant. From the table 2.1, only /h/
sound is different on both languages; English produces this sound as voiced
sound while Javanese produce this sound as voiceless sound.
There are 30 consonant sounds represented to be compared to both
languages between English and Javanese. The 30 sounds are taken by each
language, and then the writer wants to investigate whether there is the
presence of consonant sound differences which belong to both languages
compared. To find phonological interference on spoken English by Javanese
speaker, investigating the presence of difference on both languages become
crucial thing in this study; the presence of difference may result to the
phenomenon of language interference. Initially, the numbers of consonant of
12
George Yule. The Study of Language: Fourth edition. (Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2006). 26. combining to the study of Kirchner on Phonology
13
Furthermore, we can see in table 2.1 there are missing sounds on both
languages. English has no /c y ɲɖʈ Ɂ/ sounds which existing in Javanese. /c/
often pronounced as /k/ in English for example ‘cat’ pronounced as /kæt/,
‘kick’ pronounced as /kɪk/. /y/ often called semi-vowel, this sound must be
followed by vowel sounds for instance ‘yellow’ /jeloʊ/ and ‘yawn’ /jɔ:n/, also
it is often pronounced like /j/. The other sounds /ɲ ɖ ʈ Ɂ/ are only existed in
Javanese, for instance /ɲ/; /ɲǝlɔɁ/ ‘call’, /ɖ/; /ɖahar/ ‘eat’, /ʈ/; /pʊ ʈʊ/
‘grandchild’, and /Ɂ/; /ɛlɛɁ/ ‘ugly’.16 In contrary, Javanese has no /ʃ ʧ ɵ ð ʤ
ʒ/ which are only existed in English, this may affect Javanese learner having
difficulty in producing those sounds in English word.
Table 2.2
Consonant system both English and Javanese
Sounds English Javanese
David deterding. How many consonant sounds are there in English?. STETS language & Communication Review. Vol. 4. No 1, 2005.
15
Abdul Chaer. Linguistic………
16
Table 2.2 represents the phonological system of English and Javanese;
where the sounds produced and how the sounds produced. Both English and
Javanese have no difference on place of articulation; both English and
25
velar, glottal to produce the consonant sounds. On the contrary, manner of
articulation both languages are different; English has stops, fricative,
affricative, nasal and approximant while Javanese has additional two sounds
include lateral and trill. The data were made by the researcher after collecting
and analyzing data regard to manner of articulation, place of articulation and
phonation type of both languages.1718
From the table 2.2, the bold columns represent the difference of
producing sounds between English and Javanese. There are five different
producing sounds between English and Javanese; they are /d/, /j/, /l/, /r/, and
/t/. Regarding to the place of articulation, /d/ of English is produced in the
alveolar but /d/ of Javanese is produced in dental. /t/ of English is produced in
alveolar but /t/ of Javanese is produced in dental. Regarding to the manner of
articulation, /j/ of English is produced as approximant sounds but /j/ of
Javanese is produced as affricative. /l/ of English is produced as approximant
sound but /l/ of Javanese is produced as lateral sound. /r/ of English is
produced as approximant sound but /r/ of Javanese is produced as trill sound.
Even though the producing sounds are the same, but the place and the manner
of producing the sounds are different. The presence of those differences may
26
b. Vowel sounds
Table 2.3 will describe the difference of vowel system between
English and Javanese. The data were made by the researcher after collecting
and analyzing data regard to manner of articulation, place of articulation and
phonation type of both languages.1920 To help investigation to this study, the
chart representation of both vowel systems on both languages will be showed
as follow.
Table 2.3
Vowel system both English and Javanese
27
Vowel systems between English and Javanese have been mentioned in
the table 2.8. From the table, both languages seem to show less difference on
vowel system. The sign check ( ) means the language having the vowel
sounds provided. Javanese does not recognize the vowel sounds of /æ/ /Ʌ/
and /, because they do not have those vowel system as English. This will
question whether learner having capability to produce those sounds properly
or not. While, the other vowel sounds seem to be produced in the same place
and manner of both languages.
6. Javanese Speaker
Javanese is one of local languages in Indonesia. This language is used
mostly in Java Island in Indonesia country. According to the literature,
around 82 million people are native of Javanese.21 In Indonesia itself,
Javanese language divides into several dialects; the distributions of those
dialects are categorized by native’s location. According to Uhlenbeck, the
classification of Javanese dialect based on their native demography is
categorized into three clusters; west cluster include Banten dialect, Cirebon
dialect, Tegal dialect, Banyumasan dialect, and Bumiayu dialect; mid cluster
include Pekalongan dialect, Kedu dialect, Bagelan dialect, Semarang dialect,
Pantai Utara timur dialect, Blora dialect, Mataram dialect covers Surakarta
and Yogyakarta dialect (refer to standar Javanese), and Madiun dialect; East
21
28
cluster include Surabaya dialect, Malang dialect, Jombang dialect, Tengger
dialect, and Banyuwangi dialect.22
Sometimes, among dialects mentioned have different system on the
language include lexicon, grammar, phonology, syntax, even meaning; this is
as representation of the variation of the language consider to the native of the
language itself is different one to another, their location domicile, the purpose
on using the language is different, also each native of the language have each
characteristic.23
Speaking to Suroboyoan dialect, this language is used by people in
Surabaya city as majority and surround. Native of the language include
Surabaya city, Gresik, Sidoarjo, Mojokerto, Jombang, Lamongan cover mid
and east area, Malang, Pasuruan include mid and west.24 This language is
commonly known as rude language rather to as is in Yogyakarta and
Surakarta. Consider to the level of Javanese speech, it is classified into three
i.e. ngoko, madya and krama. Mostly, native of Suroboyoan Javanese uses
ngoko rather than madya or krama, however less people are still using madya
or krama according to the purpose even the condition.
22
Lyndonbaines. Baha Jawa………..
23
Chaer Abdullah. Linguistik Umum. (Jakarta: Rineka cipta. 1994) cited by Chriesna Yuli Anggarwati
in her thesis “Penggunaan dialek Surabaya dalam novel Emprit Abuntut Bedhug karya Supartaa Brata”. 2014. 11
24
Chriesna Yuli, thesis: Penggunaan dialek Surabaya dalam novel Emprit Abuntut Bedhug karya
29
Consider to the description of phonological system in Javanese is
needed in this study; further information of phonological system in
Suroboyoan Javanese will be described. According to Wedhawati, there are
several points of phonological system in Suroboyoan Javanese differs to
standard Javanese.25 There are four characteristics of Javenese Surabaya
dialect phonological system that differ to standard Javanese will be described
as follow.
a. Some area include Gresik, Pasuruan, Surabaya, Sidoarjo have eight vowel
sounds are /a/ /i/ /u/ /ʊ/ /e/ /ǝ/ /o/ /ɔ/, while standard Javanese has seven
vowel sounds /i/ /e/ /a/ /ǝ/ /u/ /o/ /ɔ/. This supported by the existence of
minimal pairs on the word /ɔmbhɔ/ ‘wide’ and /ambha/ ‘explore’ also
/kabhe/ ‘keluarga berencana’ and /kabhɔ/ ‘all’.
b. There is phonological displacement on sound /I/ to /e/, for instance
/mulIh/ to /muleh/ ‘go home’ and sound /u/ to /ɔ/, for instance /abuh/ to
/abɔh/ ‘swollen’; it is commonly used by Tuban and Bojonegoro area.
c. There is omitting phoneme /w/ in the beginning of the word used by some
area, for instance /wetan/ to /etan/ ‘east’, /wʊtʊh/ to /ʊtʊh/ ‘whole’.
d. There is additional vowel /u/ to give the meaning ‘very’, for instance
/gǝde/ to /guǝdhe/ ‘very big’, panas to puanas ‘very hot’, /adoh/ to /uadoh/
‘so far’.
25
30
B. Previous Studies
On this subtitle, the writer will describe some related previous study as
references for conducting this study. First of all, the study by Bejo entitled “The
Micro linguistics Contrastive Analysis between Javanese Language of Banyumasan
and English” conducted contrastive analysis focusing on the microlinguistic feature
of vowel and consonant phonemes commonly used by the people in the area of
Banyumas. The result is that there is difference between phonemes in Javanese
language of Banyumasan and English; the Banyumasan language there is no long
vowel sounds like English. This study has revealed that there is kind of different
phonological system on Javanese and English, this then raise an issue if there is an
existence of phonological interference on students’ speaking ability in English with
Javanese as their first language.26
Furthermore, another study conducted by Sinha et al entitled “Interference
of First Language in The Acquisition of Second Language” focusing on reviewing
the issue of language acquisition and interference of first language on acquiring
second language. After that, this study also attempts to find the factors causing the
interference and find the appropriate standardized measure to decrease the negative
impact from interference. This study conclude that the first language interferes in
acquiring second language applied to almost skill include speaking, reading and
26
31
writing. This study has performed by Asian learners specifically Chinese, Korean,
and Indian. 27
Related previous study conducted research specifically on phonological
interference done by Erdogan Bada entitled “Native Language Influence on The
Production of English Sounds by ɛapanese Learners” focusing on finding the
influence of first language on acquiring second language in the area of phonology.
The influence is able to be either positive or negative. The result found that there is
some difficulty producing sounds influenced by first language, while others less
because of the existence of the same phonological system on first language and
second language.28
Apeli & Ugwu conducted their research entitled “Phonological Interference
in the Spoken English Performance of the Izon Speaker in Nigeria: A Product of
Systemic and Interlanguage Factors” have studied on Izon Speaker in Nigeria having
investigation on the level of interference the Ịzọn speaker exhibits in his spoken
English is not just as a result of the differences that exist between both language
systems but also as a result of interlanguage factors such as the level of the
27
Avanika Sinha et.al. Interference of First Language in the Acquisition of Second Language. Journal of psychology and Counseling. Vol. 1. No. 7, September 2009, 117-122
28
32
individuals interaction in and with the L1, his level of education and access to oral
English lessons while in school.29
Ragmat Hidayat conducted his research entitled “Interferensi Bahasa ɛawa ke
dalam Bahasa Indonesia pada Keterampilan Berbicara Siswa Kelas XI SMA Negeri
1 Pleret, Bantul” focusing on the finding kind of phonological, morphological,
lexical, and syntactical interference from Javanese to Bahasa as second language in
students speaking ability. This study used qualitative analysis and found that there is
some kind of interference from first language to second language in the speaking
performance. First of all, kind of phonological interference was occurred by the
different producing sounds of /b/, /d/, /j/, and /g/. Secondly, kind of morphological
interference was resulted by the involvement of Javanese morphological system on
producing English word for instance (a) prefix n-, (b) prefix ke-, (c) prefix ny-, (d)
prefix ng-, (e) prefix m-, (f) suffix -e, and (g) multiple affixation ke – en. Thirdly,
lexical interference occurred by the use of lexical ‘pada’ and ‘tak’ which contributed
to the lexical error. Last, syntactical interference occurred by the use of adverbial
phrasal form “pada + verba” and “adjective + sendiri” and the use of pronominal
possessive form (tak) + Verb.30
29
Apeli & Ugwu. Phonological Interference in the Spoken English Performance of the Izon Speaker in Nigeria: A product of Systematic and Interlanguage Factor. AFRREV LALIGENS. Vol.2. No.2, May 2013, 173-189
30
Rahmat Hidayat, thesis: “The Interference of Javanese language to Indonesian in the Speaking Skill
33
Arum Perwitasari et al was conducted their research entitled “Vowel
Duration in English as a Second Language among ɛavanese Learners”. This study
attempted to find whether there is first language interference on producing vowel in
second language. Study involved 10 native speakers of American English who were
21-30 years old and did not have any knowledge on Javanese and 20 Javanese by
their second language was English. The result of this study found that there was
different speech duration on producing vowels between Javanese and native.
Javanese subject seemed to fail in producing either long or short vowels. This was
because there were different phonological system on vowels both two languages.31
Those are the related previous study used in this study. In summary, those
previous study has been conducted to (1) find out the contrastive analysis on
Javanese and English phonological system which is mentioning the difference and
the similar of those systems (2) find out the first language interference on acquiring
second language in the area of speaking, reading and writing production (3) find out
phonological interference by first language (Japanese) on second language
acquisition both negative and positive (4) find out the level of phonological
interference by the first language on second language acquisition resulted on
systematic and interlanguage factor (5) find out the kind of phonological,
morphological, lexical, and syntactical interference from Javanese to Indonesian as
second language in students speaking ability (6) find out whether there is first
31
34
language interference on producing vowel in second language. While the differences
between this current study and previous studies are; first, this current study entitled
“Phonological Interference in the Spoken English Performed by Javanese Speaker at
UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya” wants to find the kind of phonological interference by
first language Javanese to acquiring of second language English, this phonological
interference will be focused on finding negative interference in the spoken skill.
Second, the classification of phonological interference uses the theory of Weinrich
include under-differentiation of phonemes, over-differentiation of phonemes,
reinterpretation of distinctions, and actual phone substitution. Third, this study will
investigate phonological interference by mother tongue of Suroboyoan Javanese as
35
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter presents description of how the researcher conducted the study
to find out the phonological interference on students’ speaking ability of fourth
semester students at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. The research method includes
research design, research setting, subject of the study, data collection technique,
research instrument, data and source data, and data analysis technique.
A. Research Design
This study used descriptive approach. This method is applicable for this
study due to the objective of this study is to describe kind of phonological
interference in spoken English performed by Javanese speakers of students in fourth
semester of English Teacher Education Department UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
This is in line with Marthyn conducted research with descriptive approach through
observing and describing the phenomenon without doing any intervention. 1
Moreover, this study used qualitative research which is more concerned with
meaning.2 Qualitative research uses data in a word description to answer the research
question. Therefore, this study used descriptive qualitative research.
1
S, Marthyn, Descriptive Research Design. (http://explorable.com/descriptive-research-design , accessed on December 16th, 2015)
2H. O’Connor, N. Gibson ‘A Step by Step Guide to Qualitative Data Analysis’.
36
B. Research Location
This study is conducted at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya especially at
Speaking for Formal Setting Class which is taken by fourth semester students of
English Teacher education Department.
The researcher location is chosen because in English Teacher Education
Department, the students are not native of English Language and as expected found
that some of them are Javanese speakers using Surabaya Dialect therefore this study
could be done on this location. Moreover, as future teacher they are expected to be a
good teacher by giving appropriate lesson by using English language, however errors
production on speaking ability are still found.
C. Subject of the Study
Subject of this study is fourth semester students of 2014-2015 academic years
who take speaking class. There are four speaking class are taken by fourth semester
students, they are Formal Setting A, B, C, and, D class. Every class consists of 30
less or more students. The subject chosen is considered as Javanese speaker who
acquires English as second language and who takes English for formal setting class.
Furthermore, the number of Javanese speakers of each class is approximately 15 to
20 students. However, the researcher has chosen 35 Javanese speakers who use
Surabaya dialect as valid subject; the other Javanese dialect speakers are not
37
questionnaire in the first week of June 2016. The recapitulation of choosing subject
described in the appendices.
Furthermore, the reason why the researcher conducts this study on fourth
semester students is because they have taken phonological course which discusses
about phonological system in English. Furthermore, four basic English skills have
been acquired by the students in the previous semester. It means that they have had
well knowledge on English, this study wants to find whether phonological
interference on students’ speaking ability which then results on errors and mistakes
production.
D. Data Collection Technique
This study aims to find the kind of phonological interference in the spoken
English by Javanese speakers. As effort to find depth information about the
phenomenon of phonological interference on Javanese speaker in spoken skill, this
study used several techniques to collect the data from the subject of the study. Those
data collection techniques are observation, questionnaire and audio-recording.
Data of the research was collected through the following steps.
1. Observation
Observation becomes appropriate technique for collecting data from the
subject of the study in the first action. To understand the condition in the field which
experienced by the subject, observation becomes appropriate initial action to
38
exactly things occurred in the field. The researcher joined the studied class to see any
activity and interaction of the students, while keeping notes during the observation.
During the last week of May and the first week of June 2016, the researcher
conducted observation. The researcher conducted the observation on only three
classes of Speaking for Formal Setting because the limited time, and only once on
those classes to observe students’ attitude in speaking performing. This condition
may seem enough for gathering initial facts or situation of the class as preparation to
collect the main data using record technique while another class is observed while
conducting record technique. The researcher joined the class sitting on the back
while keeping notes to gather the initial information from the students. The note
contains the information regarding on specific facts of what happened during
students’ performance in class and personal response to the facts happened during
students’ performance.
2. Questionnaire
Questionnaire becomes supported technique to help the researcher choosing
the subject. To this study, the chosen subject is fourth semester students who take
speaking for formal setting class, moreover, she or he who is Javanese speaker using
Surabaya dialect. Paper-based questionnaire consisting of twenty questions has been
delivered to students during the first week of June, 2016 to know the students’
39
3. Audio-recording
Audio-recording becomes main technique to collect the data. As effort to find
the phenomenon of phonological interference on the subject, audio-recording
supports the researcher to provide the finding data in the field. The audio-recording
contains any utterance even speech made by the students. During the second and
third week of June 2016, the researcher joined four speaking classes again to collect
the data through recording. Fortunately, during that time, the researcher could record
students’ performing speech one by one for final examination. The length of the
audio-recording is 4 to 6 minutes contains students’ speech which analyzed then.
E. Research Instrument
Research instrument is kind of tools to collect data. The instrument should be
valid and reliable to obtain expected result. Therefore, the chosen research
instruments become one of crucial activities in doing research. To make this relevant
to the data collection before, appropriate instruments have chosen as a tool to collect
the data.
1. Note
For observation activity, the researcher used filling note as instrument.
During observation done on speaking classes, the researcher as participant sitting in
the back joined the speaking class, and then taken note of students’ performance in
the class. Furthermore, the note consisted of any information of students’
40
and their performance in speaking; how far the students made error productions in
the spoken English language.
2. Questionnaire
The researcher delivered questionnaire for students in fourth semester who
take speaking for formal setting class. The questionnaire consists of twenty questions
which expected to be answered by the students. The questionnaire contains the
questions which to know students’ language background. The examples of the
questions are described as follow.
a. At what age did you first begin to learn English?
b. At what age did you first begin to learn Indonesian?
c. At what age did you first begin to learn Javanese?
d. At what age did you first begin to learn ________?
e. What language did you hear in your home between the ages of birth- 5 years?
Those are the examples which are consisted at the questionnaire and the
complete questions are described in appendix. Delivering this questionnaire is hoped
to give information who are Javanese speakers.
3. Audio-recorder
To collect data needed, the researcher recorded students’ performance in class.
Fortunately, the final examination was conducted when the researcher joined the four
speaking classes during second to fourth week of June 2016; the students performed
speech on the theme chosen in 4 to 6 minutes. Therefore, the researcher could record
students’ performing speech one by one in class. The researcher used recorder
41
recorder seems applicable to collect the data because the researcher has already used
it before and the output is clear enough. If there is some audio file consisting noise or
they are not clear enough, the researcher used other audio software to get the clearer
output for instance the audacity which is also used in this study.
4. Mp3 Converter (Format Factory)
The researcher used Format Factory application to convert the
audio-recording file which taken from personal mobile phone to mp3 format. For the
reason, the researcher needs to analyze the audio-recording file in mp3 format to be
easy as in analyzed by the researcher even another software. The audio-recording
files taken from personal mobile phone are still in 3ga format; therefore, the files
need to be converted to mp3 format.
5. Audacity
Audacity helps the researcher to transcribe the audio files. To find indicated
errors production made by the students, the researcher transcribed the students’
speech into phonetic transcription compared to the dictionary. This application
supports slow and speed the audio to help transcription activity.
6. Mp3 cutter
The researcher used mp3 cutter to select and cut the students’ utterance in a
word. For the reason that the data which to be analyzed is word, the researcher need
42
phonological interfered then it could be classified into four phonological interference
classification made by Weinrich.
7. Collins Cobuild dictionary
The researcher used Collins cobuild dictionary is kind of digital dictionary
consisting native pronunciation to compare students’ utterance and the right
pronunciation while transcribing the audio. The dictionary contains the native
utterance and phonetic transcription to show the right pronunciation in producing
English word.
F. Data and Source Data
Data has crucial role to answer research question to this study. The data
gathered through collecting data techniques using appropriate instruments. As
mentioned before, the researcher conducted observation, questionnaire and
audio-recording as effort to collect the data. The data of the study include the result of
observation in a form of researcher’s note from students’ speaking performance in
the class. The data of audio-recording technique in the form of audio files gathered
by recorded students’ performing speech in the class. Those data analyzed by
researcher to find phonological interference which then influences the speaking
production made by students.
43
Concerning data analysis technique, the writer will use Hurberman’s concept.
Huberman’s data analysis techniques concept includes; data reduction, data display,
and conclusion drawing.3
Developing Huberman’s concept, the steps of data analysis technique are as
follow.
1. After collecting data through observation and audio-recording, the data are
investigated and reduced as is needed. The researcher chosen the audio-recording
made by Javanese speaker which analyzed then while the other is omitted.
2. Converting the audio files from personal mobile phone which are still in 3ga
format to mp3 format. Therefore, this audio is easier to be analyzed by the other
software even the researcher.
3. Transcribing the students’ speech into text. The researcher used audacity to play
the audio while comparing to Collins cobuild dictionary to transcribe the
students’ speech into phonetic transcription form. The students’ transcriptions are
showed in appendices.
4. Indicating error production then consulted to Collins cobuild dictionary again and
some expert of English language to strength the validity of the data.
5. Selecting and cutting the indicated word contains phonological interference to be
focused analization. The selecting data are showed in a table to be compared with
the right pronunciation according Collins cobuild dictionary.
3
44
6. Identifying and classifying the data using phonological interference classification
made by Weinreirch. The data categorized as four types; they are
under-differentiation of phonemes, over-under-differentiation of phonemes, reinterpretation of
distinctions, and actual phonic substitution.
7. Identifying the factors resulting on phonological interference made by the
students. The researcher interprets the factors result the phonological interference
on students’ speaking ability by consulting on Weinrich theory and the students’
answered questionnaire. In the chapter two, the researcher has compared
Javanese phonological system and English phonological system to investigate the
different system of both phonological rule, therefore, the factor resulted
phonological interference on students’ speaking ability could be determined and
the second question is able to be answered.
