ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION ERRORS PERFORMED BY LEARNERS WITH THE SUNDANESE BACKGROUND AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION : A Case Study of Third Semester Students at a University in Bandung.

(1)

Nafesa Islah, 2015

ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION ERRORS PERFORMED BY LEARNERS WITH THE SUNDANESE BACKGROUND AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu ABSTRACT

The primary focuses of this study are to find out the pronunciation errors and the type of errors performed by English learners with the Sundanese background. The data were the transcriptions from ten recordings of reading aloud taken from Sundanese learners at the department of English education. They were analyzed by using the procedure of error analysis proposed by Elis (2003) and classified into several types of errors as proposed by Haycraft (1973). The findings showed that the total errors encountered by Sundanese learners are as follows: sound /f/ 18%, sound /v/ 92%, sound /θ/ 42%, sound /ð/ 50%, sound /ʃ/ 38%, and sound /ʒ/ 61%. Further, it was found that there are three types of errors that took place: the pronunciation error type 3-the sound is alien 91.8%; type 1 the differences in pronunciation of the letter sound 5.7%; and pronunciation error type 7, students do not expect sound to change 2.8%. It is suggested that teachers should pay more attention to those particular sounds and provide extra exercises to the learners.

(2)

ABSTRAK

Fokus utama pada penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui kesalahan pelafalan dan tipe kesalahan oleh pembelajar bahasa Inggris yang merupakan penutur asli bahasa Sunda. Pengumpulan data diperoleh dari sepuluh transkripsi rekaman, yakni dari teknik membaca nyaring yang dilakukan oleh mahasiswa pendidikan bahasa Inggris. Analisis data menggunakan prosedur analisis yang dikemukakan oleh Elis (2008) dan diklasifikasikan berdasarkan tipe kesalahan pelafalan bahasa Inggris yang dikemukakan oleh Haycraft (1973). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa total kesalahan pelafalan yang dilakukan adalah pelafalan adalah sebagai berikut: bunyi /f/ sebesar 18%, bunyi /v/ sebesar 92%, bunyi /θ/ sebesar 42%, bunyi /ð/ sebesar 50%, bunyi /ʃ/ sebesar 38%, dan bunyi /ʒ/ sebesar 61%. Tipe kesalahan yang ditemukan adalah tipe 3 yakni bunyi yang asing sebanyak 91.8%; tipe 1 yakni perbedaan pelafalan huruf sebanyak 5.7%, dan tipe 7 yakni siswa tidak mengira bahwa adanya perubahan suara sebanyak 2.8%. Dari temuan ini diharapkan guru lebih memperhatikan lagi bunyi-bunyi tersebut dan juga memberikan latihan tambahan kepada siswa.

(3)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE APPROVAL ...i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION ... ii

PREFACE... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... iv

ABSTRACT ... v

ABSTRAK ... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...vii

LIST OF TABLES ... x

LIST OF FIGURES ... xi

LIST OF APPENDICES ...xii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 Statement of Problems ... 3

` 1.3 Aims of the Study... 3

1.4 Significance of the Study ... 3

1.5 Scope of the Study ... 4

1.6 Clarification of Terms ... 4

1.7 Organization of Paper ... 5

1.8 Concluding Remarks ... 6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ... 7

2.1 The Overview of Second Language Acquisition ... 8

(4)

` 2.3 Nature of Pronunciation ... 10

2.3.1 Definition of Pronunciation ... 10

2.3.2 Consonant Sounds in English ... 11

2.3.3 Classification of Consonants in English ... 12

2.3.3.1 The fricative of English ... 13

2.3.3.2 Consonants letter and sound correspondences variations ... 14

2.3.2 Consonant Sounds in Sundanese ... 16

2.4 Factors Influencing Pronunciation ... 16

2.5 Difficulty in Learning Pronunciation ... 17

2.6 Error Analysis ... 19

2.6.1 Definition of Error Analysis ... 19

2.6.2 Procedures of Analysis ... 20

2.6.3 Types of Errors ... 21

2.6.4 Distinguishing Errors and Mistakes... 22

2.7 Previous Study ... 23

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 25

3.1 Formulation of Problems ... 25

3.2 Research Design ... 25

` 3.3 Site and Participants of the Study ... 26

3.3.1 Site of the Study ... 26

3.3.2 Participants of the Study ... 26

3.4 Data Collection ... 28

3.4.1 Reading Aloud ... 28

(5)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 33

4.1 Pronunciation Errors Performed by Sundanese Learners at the Department of English Education ... 33

4.1.1 The Productions and Deviations of Sounds ... 35

4.1.1.1 The production of sound /f/... 35

4.1.1.2 The production of sound /v/ ... 36

4.1.1.3 The production of sound /θ/ ... 38

4.1.1.4 The production of sound /ð/ ... 39

4.1.1.5 The production of sound /ʃ/... 40

4.1.1.6 The production of sound /ʒ/ ... 42

4.2 Type of Pronunciation Errors Performed by Sundanese Learners at the Department of English Education ... 43

4.2.1 Problematic Sounds Faced by Sundanese Learners at the Department of English Education ... 45

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 48

5.1 Conclusions ... 48

5.2 Recommendations ... 49

APPENDICES BIOGRAPHY

(6)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In the previous section, introduction of research and related theory regarding to pronunciation has been briefly discussed. In this section, the research methodology of will be presented.

This section will discuss some aspects in research methodology such as formulation of problems, research design, site and participants, data collection, and data analysis of the research.

3.1 Formulation of Problems

As stated in the first chapter, this study aims to examine some problems which are formulated in the following questions:

1. What are the pronunciation errors performed by the Sundanese learners at the Department of English Education?

2. What are the types of pronunciation errors performed by Sundanese learners at the Department of English Education?

3.2 Research Design

Research design is the overall plan for collecting data in order to answer research questions. Also, it can be defined as the specific data analysis techniques or methods that the researcher intends to use (Fraenkel, et. all, 2011).

Meanwhile, this research is qualitative in nature because the data gathered is audio materials. It is in line with Cresswell (2012) that qualitative research involves collecting data and working with text, images, or sounds. It is appropriate to this kind of research since the data is in a form of audio taped data. In addition, since this study is qualitative there will be no hypotheses presented. Larsen and Long (1991) states that the prototypical qualitative methodology is researchers do not set out to test hypotheses, but rather to observe what is present with their focus, and consequently the data, free to vary during the course of the observation

(7)

26

Hamied, 2014). Case study is defined as a part of qualitative research approaches in which researchers focus on a unit of study known as a bounded system and can be used when the researcher is interested in studying the process (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009).

In this research, in order to get the data, the researcher used reading aloud and recording of each participant‟s performance. Thus, subjects were asked to read aloud word lists, sentences or passages which have been an abundance of particular sounds in representative environments. The subjects‟ performances were recorded for later analysis. Further, the recordings of participants‟ pronunciation were analyzed by using error analysis procedure.

3.3 Site and Participant of the Study 3.3.1 Site of the Study

This study was conducted in one of the Universities in Bandung focusing on the department of English education. Cresswell (2012) asserts that in qualitative studies, purposeful sampling can be used in order to select both individual and sites. It aims to get the central phenomenon from the focus of the research. Thus, this site was chosen as regards to several reasons.

Firstly, University in Bandung was chosen since the focus of the study is Sundanese students. It is assumed that many Sundanese students can easily be encountered at this university.

Secondly, it deals with the accessibility of the researcher. In this case, the accessibility refers to the ease for both researcher and participants in collecting data. Since this department is the place where the researcher and participants are studying, it makes them both easy to manage the time to arrange the schedule to collect the data.

Lastly, it is related to the background of the department. Since this department focuses on English learning and education, this department also offers pronunciation subject as one preparation for its students.

3.3.2 Participants of the Study

(8)

27

research consisted of all students of the department of English education for the academic year 2013-2014 at Indonesia University of Education Bandung. To gain the data needed, a class of this academic year was chosen. The class contains fifteen students. The participants were selected by the first language used in their daily communication. It was meant because of the fact that some Sundanese learners, who are native speakers of Sundanese, might not use Sundanese in their daily conversation. Some of them use Bahasa Indonesia instead of Sundanese. Thus, in order to get intended participant, it used purposive sample. As stated by Cresswell (2012), purposive sample is defined as selection of individuals and sites to learn or understand the central phenomenon. Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2009) also state purposive sampling is the most common form of sampling that match the case study.

Accordingly, this research selected ten students whose first language is Sundanese as participants. Third semester students were selected based on the consideration that these students had already taken pronunciation subject in the previous semester. It was assumed that they had already understood the concept of pronunciation. Besides, it was predicted that their knowledge of pronunciation might in line with pronunciation knowledge and awareness.

The participants were given code name as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, and so on considering the order of the reading aloud.

Table 3.1 Data of Participants

Code Age Gender Pronunciation

(9)

28

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 3.4 Data Collection

In order to find out the answers of the research questions, some types of instrument were used. The data were collected by the reading aloud and questionnaire to support the data gained. The first procedure was aimed to gather the data in the form of audio taped data.

In the very beginning, the participants‟ permission was asked regarding the proposed research that will be conducted. The purpose of this research was also explained. They were told that their identity will not be published. Participants were told things they should do and the reason they do it. Afterward, the data were collected by recording the result of each participant‟s performance. Data later on were in a form of transcription. Then, each participant‟s performance was analyzed into phonetic transcription to figure out students‟ errors in pronouncing some fricative sounds.

3.4.1 Reading Aloud

Erlam (as cited in Ellis, 2009) states that free language production may provide a large sample of natural speech. Meanwhile, there is no way of predicting which particular language structures will be elicited. He also points out that “where there is often the need to test for acquisition of the specific language features that have been targeted as the research focus” (p.65). For that reason, this test is only in a form of one type test namely reading aloud. Beebe and Flege (as cited in Larsen and Long, 1991) state reading aloud has been used in studies researching pronunciation in a second language. Ullah (2011) adds that reading aloud was used because it could be used in eliciting pronunciation quality.

(10)

29

performance of production skills of English individual sounds. The form of pronunciation was adopted from Ullah (2011) and several online websites. The example of reading aloud was divided into three sections, as follow:

Reading 1

1. The fluffy puppy is very cute.

2. The vision of the vigilant inspector is enough

3. To prevent the water flowing around, she shouted to call neighbors

Reading 2

No [f] – v] [ʃ] – [ʒ ] [θ] – [ð]:

1 fine voice official decision both mothers

2 first variant special measures three brothers

Reading 3

Table 3.2 Total of the Occurrences of Sounds in Tested Words

Sound No. of Occurrences Total

(11)

30

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu 3.5 Data Analysis

The data were obtained from productive skill in reading aloud of sentences and sound comparison pairs, some words containing intended sounds in different positions namely initial, medial, and final position. Then, the voice of each participant was recorded. The recordings of participants‟ voice, then were transcribed in phonemic transcription. It was compared to the standard that was used in this research, namely International Phonetic Alphabets (IPA) and used online transcriber namely a PhoTransEdit Online application that transcribes small English texts into broad phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). Phonetic transcription is aimed to provide a shared system of symbols that only ever refers to one sound to write down pronunciation clearly and consistently (Knight, 2012).

The procedure of analysis of this study used a procedure proposed by Ellis (2003). He states that there are five steps in analyzing learners‟ errors. They are described as follows,

- Collection of a sample of learner language. In this study, the sample of language learner in form of a transcription of pronunciation errors performed by the participants.

- Identification of errors. This first step requires determination of elements in the sample of learner language which deviate from the target language (L2) in some way. Corder (1967) tries to distinguish this into two types. They are systematic errors which result from learners‟ lack of knowledge of L2 and mistake which results from some kind of processing failure such as a lapse in memory. Then the deviation that belongs to mistake will not be analyzed.

- Description of errors. For purposes of analysis, errors are usually classified according to language level (whether an error is phonological, morphological, syntax, etc.) In this case, the classifications of errors were based on the position and the sound itself

(12)

31

- Evaluation of errors. This step involves the analysis of what effect the error has on whomever is being addressed. For instance, how serious it is, or to what extent it affects intelligibility, or social acceptability.

To classify the errors that learners make, it was used the theory proposed by Haycraft (1973). He classifies pronunciation errors, particularly in individual sounds as follows.

1. Type 1: The difference in pronunciation of the letter sound

Basically, this type of pronunciation is defined as the differences between the letter from Sundanese as native language and English as the target language. Haycraft (1973) gives the example of this pronunciation error as happened in letter „a‟= sound /æ/, student‟s sound /Ʌ/: „funtustic‟. Sanusi (2010) also presented the case for Indonesian, this letter might be read as /Ʌ/. Thus, the students might pronounce the word as /fɅntɅstik/.

2. Type 2: Sound appears the same as in the mother tongue but is not Haycraft (1973) states that native language and target language might be share the same phonemes, but have differences in terms of its distribution. Sanusi (2010) exemplifies the result of his research, such as students have difficulty in pronouncing aspirated /p/ and /t/.

3. Type 3: The sound is alien

Haycraft (1973) describes this pronunciation errors as some sounds that do not exist in native language, but do exist in English as the target language. As in this case, the sounds tested are fricative sounds that do not exist in Sundanese

such as /f/, /v/, /θ/, /ð/, /ʃ/, and /ʒ/. This absence of these sounds in native

language might lead to different production and recognition. It can be caused by student‟s lack of knowledge and incorrect input from their environment (Sanusi, 2010).

4. Type 4: Sound embedded in cluster of consonants or vowels;

(13)

32

fricative sound in English, this kind of errors that is happened in this study might not be the focus of investigation.

5. Type 5: Students’ mother tongue does not use the same sound combination, in certain positions

For this type, Haycraft (1973) illustrates that this error might be avoided when the text is not used. The example is as the speaker of the Spanish pronounce the letter „d‟ as /ð/ like in the ‘riding house’.

6. Type 6: Students’ mother tongue does not accept certain combination of sounds

Haycraft (1973) exemplifies this type of error as happened with Italian speaker. The letter „smalto’ s + voiced consonant is pronounced as /z/ such as in English „small‟ and „snail‟ will be pronounced as /zmɑːl/

and /zneɪl

/.

Meanwhile, if the letter „s‟ is followed by voiceless consonant, it will be produced correctly, such as in Italia‟stagione‟ as in English „stand.

7. Type 7: student does not expect the sound to change.

The last type of pronunciation error is the changes in sound /s/ become z/ between vowels as in rosy, noisy. Students might pronounce it as /ˈrəʊ.si/ and /ˈnɔɪ.si/ instead of /ˈrəʊ.zi/ and /ˈnɔɪ.zi/. In this case, students might still pronounce it as /s/.

3. 6 Concluding Remarks

(14)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the conclusions and recommendations of this study. The conclusions are drawn from the findings and discussions that have been discussed from the previous chapter of this study. It also offers some recommendations for teachers, students, and researchers who have willingness to conduct further study related to this topic.

5.1 Conclusions

This study aims to discover the pronunciation errors performed by Sundanese learners at the department of English education. The study merely focuses on segmental errors of fricative sounds of English that do not exist in Sundanese phonetic system. Further, it also aims to analyze the types of errors that were performed by the participants.

Overall, from the 138 words being tested, 70 words were mispronounced. It is about 51% words were pronounced differently compared with phonetic transcription from dictionary. This means, the participants mispronounced more than a half of the tested words incorrectly. In general, the total errors were found in pronouncing sound /f/ is 18%, sound /v/ is 92%, sound /θ/ is 42%, sound /ð/ is 50%, sound /ʃ/ is 38%, and

sound /ʒ/ is 61%.

(15)

49

ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION ERRORS PERFORMED BY LEARNERS WITH THE SUNDANESE BACKGROUND AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

As stated earlier, the second type of errors occurred during reading aloud is pronunciation error type 1, namely the difference in pronunciation of the letter sound. Celce, Brinton, & Goodwin (2008) exemplify some letters that might be pronounced as sound /ʃ/. It has been mentioned that some words like ‘sugar’ and ‘ocean’ were pronounced as /ˈsʊɡə/ and /ˈəʊzn̩/ instead of /ˈʃʊɡə/ and /ˈəʊʃn̩/. This might be caused by participants who do not know that letter ‘c’, ‘t’, ‘s’, ‘sh’, and ‘ch’ can also be pronounced as /ʃ/ (Celce, Brinton, & Goodwin, 2008)..

This kind of errors also happened in ‘genre’ and ‘beige’. Mostly the participants pronounced them by using /dʒ/. Letter ‘g’ also represents sound /dʒ/ in words of French origin, such as in ‘beige’, ‘rouge’, ‘loge’, and ‘luge’. Another letter that represents sound / dʒ/ is letter ‘s’. This occurs in word-medial ‘s’ after a vowel letter and before an unstressed ‘u’ vowel or an iV sequence such as in ‘measure’, ‘leisure’, and ’vision’.

The last type of errors performed by the participants is the pronunciation type 7, namely the students do not expect sound to change. There was 2.8% of this errors occurred. As mentioned before, this kind of errors might be caused by the difference in pronunciation of letter sounds between native language and target language. Participants tend to pronounce the English words based on the letter constituting the words (Sanusi, 2010). The example of this error as mentioned earlier as in ‘disclosure’. The participants mostly pronounced the words by using /ʃ/ as in ‘sure’. Meanwhile this word should be pronounced as/ dɪsˈkləʊʒə /. Therefore, this kind of errors can be categorizes as pronunciation type 7.

5.2 Recommendations

(16)

50

Firstly, for the teachers, after knowing learners errors in pronunciation, it is suggested that teachers or instructors pay more attention to those particular sounds without taking aside other sounds. Teachers play significant roles in helping learners with errors that might be produced. It is in line with Allwright (1993) who suggests that teachers have a duty to adjust their treatment of any error to the need of moment. It is also important for teachers to give a good example of pronunciation since learners might get the most exposure to particular language from the teachers’ example. Touchie (1986) also offers several error treatments which is related with this study. They are correcting error which is affecting intelligibility that interferes with the general meaning and understandability of utterance; the highest frequent errors should be corrected more often that less frequent errors; and errors relevant to a pedagogical focus should receive more attention from the teacher that other errors.

Secondly, for the learners themselves, as regards to the findings, the learners might have a picture of what difficulty that they might face in acquiring pronunciation especially in individual sounds. By knowing this, it is hoped that the learners might do some individual exercises in order to improve their pronunciation.

(17)

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu REFERENCES

Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre. (2002). Fact sheet: What is pronunciation? Retrieved fromrescentr@nceltr.mq.edu.au

Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre. (2002b). Fact sheet: Setting goals for teaching pronunciation. Retrieved from 2002www.ameprc.mq.edu.au/docs/fact_sheets/02Pronunciation.pdf

Allwright, Dick. (1993). Observation in the language classroom: Applied linguistics and language study.New York: Longman

Anna and Galina.(n.d.). Practice material for consonant contrast. Retrieved from http://usefulenglish.ru/phonetics/practice-consonant-contrast

Bonaventura, P., Herron, D., Menzel,W. (1999). Phonetic rules for diagnosis of

pronunciation errors.Retrieved from

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.42.9705...pdf

Brown, H, Douglas. (2001). Teaching by principle: An interactive approach to language pedagogy 2nd edition. New York: Pearson Education.

Celce-Muria, M., M.Brinton, D., M.Goodwin, Janet. (2008). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for the teachers of English to speakers of other

language. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Corder, S.P. (1982).Error analysis and interlanguage. New York: Oxford University Press

Cresswell, John W. (2012) Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research 4th edition. United States of America: Pearson

(18)

52

Edward, G. Hansen and Zampini, Marry. (2008). Phonology and second language acquisition. John Benyamin Publishing.

Ellis, Rod. (2003). Second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press

Erlam, Rosemary. (2009). Theelicited oral imitation test as a measure of implicit knowledge. In Ellis, Rod.Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing, and teaching.Canada: Multilingual Matter

Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E., Hyun, H.H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research ineducation 8th edition. New York: The McGraw Hill Company

Fromkin, Victoria & Rodman, Robert. (1988). An introduction to language 4th edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston Inc.

Gass, S., &Selinker, L. (2008).Second language acquisition. New York: Routledge

Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., &Airasian, P. (2009).Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. New Jersey: Pearson Education

Gilakjani, A.B.&Ahmadi, M.R. (2011). Why is pronunciation so difficult to learn? English Language Teaching Journal Vol. 4, No. 3

Gilakjani, A.B. (2012). A study of factors affecting EFL learners’ English pronunciation learning and the strategies for instruction.International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 2, No. 3

Guntari, A.K.(2013). Sundanese students’ production of English dental fricative consonant sounds.Lexicon Journal Vol. 2 No. 1: April 2013

Haycraft, Brita. (1973). The teaching of pronunciation: A classroom guide 2ndedition. London: Longman Group Limited

(19)

53

language in Asia: Implication for language education: Multilingual

education(p.63-78). London: Springer Science and Business Media.

Indarjani, N. Tiono. (2013). A study of phonological errors produced by English department students. English Department of Petra Christian University

Retrieved

fromhttp://www.petra.ac.id/-puslit/journals.dir.php?DepartmentID=ING

Knight, R.A. (2012).Phonetics: A course book. New York: Cambridge University Press

Kirkpatrick, A. (2012). English as an international language in Asia: Implication for language education. In Kirkpatrick, A. &Sussex,R. (eds.). English as an international language in Asia: Implication for language education:

Multilingual education(p.29-44). London: Springer Science and Business Media.

Jones, Daniel. (1969). An outline of English phonetics9thedition. Cambridge: W. Heffer& Sons Ltd.

Larsen, D, Freeman & Long, H. Michael. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. United Kingdom: Longman Group

Liu, Q. (2011). Factors influencing pronunciation accuracy: L1 negative transfer, task variables, and individual aptitude. English Language Teaching Journal Vol. 4 No. 4: December 2011

Malik, R.S &Hamied, F.A. (2014).Research methods: A guide for first time researchers. Bandung: UPI Press.

Quintanilla, L.I., Yanez, M., Munoz, T., & Zuniga, G. (2012).An analysis of the pronunciation of English consonantal sounds in proper names and other

(20)

54

Rahman, Nur R. (2014). Error analysis of Indonesian learners of English: A case study of the British Institute conversation class students. (Research Paper).Faculty of Language and Arts Education, Indonesia University of Education, Bandung.

Rouch, Peter. (2009). English phonetics and phonology: A practical course 4th edition. United Kingdom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Sanusi. (2010). The analysis of errors in English pronunciation. (Research Paper).Faculty of Language and Arts Education, Indonesia University of Education, Bandung.

Schaetzel, Kirsten. (2009). Teaching pronunciation to adult English language

learners. Retrieved from

http://www.cal.org/caelanetwork/pdfs/TeachingPronunciationWeb.pdf

Shekhzadeh, E. &Gheici, M. (2011).An account of sources of errors in language learners’ interlanguage.International Conference on Language, Literature, and Linguistics, vol. 26 IACSIT Press.

Sudaryat, Y. (2008). ModulkebahasaanSunda. Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished

Troike-Saville, Muriel. (2012). Introduction to second language acquisition 2ndedition. New York: Cambridge University Press

Ullah, Irfan. (2011). The Impact of ‘phonological characteristics of Pashto’ and native environment’ on the pronunciation of English consonants.Asian EFL

Journals. Retrieved from

(21)

55

Yuliati.(2013). Final consonant clusters simplification by Indonesian learners of English and its intelligibility in international context.International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. No. 6, November 2014