AN ERROR ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH APPROXIMANT
CONSONANTS MADE BY THE FIRST YEAR STUDENTS OF
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT AT MUHAMMADIYAH
UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR
A THESIS
Submitted as the Fulfillment to Accomplish Sarjana Degree At faculty of Teacher Training and Education
Makassar Muhammadiyah University
MUHAMMAD REZA
1053 55643 13
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION MAKASSAR MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY
iv
SURAT PERNYATAAN Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:
Nama : Muhammad Reza
Stambuk : 10535 5643 13
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Judul Skripsi : An Error Analysis of English Approximant Consonants Made by The First Year Students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar
Dengan ini menyatakan bahwa Skripsi yang dilakukan di depan Tim Penguji adalah asli hasil karya saya, bukan jiplakan dan tidak dibuat oleh siapa pun.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya dan saya bersedia menerima sanksi apabila pernyataan ini tidak benar.
Makassar, Maret 2021 Yang Membuat Pernyataan,
v
SURAT PERJANJIAN Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini:
Nama : Muhammad Reza
Stambuk : 10535 5643 13
Jurusan : Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris
Dengan ini menyatakan Perjanjian sebagai berikut:
1. Mulai dari penyusunan proposal sampai selesainya skripsi saya. Saya akan menyusun sendiri skripsi saya (tidak dibuat oleh siapapun).
2. Dalam penyusunan skripsi saya akan selalu melakukan konsultasi dengan pembimbing yang telah ditetapkan oleh pimpinan Fakultas.
3. Saya tidak akan melakukan penjiplakan (plagiat) dalam penyusunan skripsi saya.
4. Apabila saya melanggar perjanjian saya seperti yang tertera pada butir 1, 2, dan 3, maka saya bersedia menerima sanksi sesuai dengan aturan yang berlaku.
Demikian perjanjian saya buat dengan penuh kesadaran.
Makassar, Maret 2021 Yang Membuat Pernyataan,
vi
MOTTO
You Don’t Have to Be Great To Start, But You Have To Start To Be Great.
PERSEMBAHAN
Skripsi ini adalah bagian dari ibadahku kepada Allah Azza Wajalla, karena Kepadanyalah Kami menyembah dan kepadaNyalah kami memohon pertolongan.
Sekaligus sebagai ungkapan terima kasihku kepada:
Bapak, Ibu dan saudariku yang selalu memberikan motivasi dalam hidupku,. Teman-teman BG 013
vii
ABSTRAK
Muhammad Reza, 2020. An Error Analysis of English Approximant Consonants Made by the First Year Students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. Skripsi. Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan. Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar dibimbing oleh Ummi Khaerati Syam dan Uyunnasirah Hambali.
Tujuannya agar peneliti ingin mengetahui kesalahan dominan yang dilakukan siswa dalam mengucapkan kata-kata yang mengandung Fricative dan Approximant Consonant bahasa Inggris.
Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian kuantitatif. Kuantitatif pada dasarnya dibingkai dalam istilah penggunaan angka, pertanyaan tertutup. Penelitian kuantitatif dicirikan sebagai pemeriksaan karakteristik yang efisien dengan mengumpulkan informasi yang dapat diukur dan melakukan prosedur faktual, ilmiah, atau komputasi. Dalam pengumpulan data peneliti menggunakan tes pengucapan sebagai instrumen untuk mendapatkan data. Item tes pengucapan terdiri dari daftar 120 kata. Setiap suara terdiri dari 5 kata. Tes pengucapan diberikan kepada responden dengan meminta mereka untuk mengucapkan kata-kata dengan jelas dan benar saat peneliti merekam.
Hasil data penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa melakukan 1085 atau 93,53% kesalahan substitusi, 38 atau 3,28% kesalahan kelalaian, dan 37 atau 3,19% kesalahan penjumlahan dari total kesalahan yang ditemukan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar siswa melakukan kesalahan dalam substitusi dengan persentase yang lebih tinggi daripada kelalaian dan kesalahan substitusi memiliki persentase yang lebih tinggi daripada kelalaian dan penjumlahan. Hasil analisis data menunjukkan bahwa terdapat kesalahan substitusi 179 atau 97,28%, kesalahan penghilangan 5 atau 2,72%, dan tidak ditemukan kesalahan penjumlahan dalam pelafalan approximant consonant bahasa Inggris. Jadi, dari semua jenis kesalahan, sebagian besar siswa melakukan kesalahan pada fricative dan approximant consonant
Keywords: Analisis Kesalahan, English Approximant Consonants, Penelitian Kualitatif
viii
Made by the First Year Students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. A Thesis. Faculty of Teacher Training and Education. Muhammadiyah University of Makassar, supervised byUmmiKhaeratiSyam and UyunnasirahHambali.
The objective that the researchers wish to find out the dominant errors made by the students in pronouncing the words containing English Fricative and Approximant consonants.
This research applied quantitative research. Quantitative is basically framed in term of using numbers, closed-end question. Quantitative research is characterized as an efficient examination of wonders by gathering quantifiable information and performing factual, scientific, or computational procedures. In collecting data the researcher used pronunciation test as instrument in order to get the data. The items of pronunciation test consisted of a list of 120 words. Each sound consisted of 5 words. Pronunciation test was given to the respondents through asking them to pronounce the words clearly and correctly while the researcher was recorded.
The result of the research data showed that the students made 1085 or 93.53% errors of substitution, 38 or 3.28% errors of omission, and 37 or 3.19% errors of addition from the total errors found. It indicated that most of the students made errors in substitution with high percentage than omission and errors of substitution had higher percentage than omission and addition. The result of the data analysis showed that there were 179 or 97.28% errors of substitution, 5 or 2.72% errors of omission, and there were no errors of addition found in pronouncing English approximant consonants. So, from all kinds of errors, most of the students made errors in substitution both fricative and approximant consonants.
Keywords: Error Analysis, English Approximant Consonants, qualitative Research
ABSTRACT
ix
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In the name of Allah, the most gracious and most merciful
AlhamdulillahiRabbilAlamin, I would like to express my profound gratitude to the almighty God Allah SWT, the most compassionate and merciful, the cherisher and sustainer of the world. Peace be upon him, Rasulullah Muhammad SAW, Shalawat and Salam are addressed to the beloved and chosen messenger.
Many problems and difficulties had been encountered in finishing this thesis. I do realize that in conducting the research and writing this report, I got invluable contribution and assistance from a great number of people. Therefore, I would like to express my deep appreciation and sincere thanks to all of them as follows:
1. The Rector of Makassar Muhammadiyah University, Prof. Dr. H. Ambo Asse, M.Ag.
2. The Dean of Faculty of Teacher Training and Education,Erwin Akib, M.Pd., P.HD.
3. The Head of English Education Department, Ummi Khaerati Syam, S.Pd., M.Pd., and Ismail Sangkala, S.Pd., M.Pd., the secretary of English Education Departmentfor their guidance and aid.
4. Ummi Khaerati Syam, S.Pd., M.Pd.,as the first consultant who guided, gave corrections and advices in writing this thesis, and then to the second consultant, Uyun Nasirah Hambali, S.Pd., M.Pd., for his time in guiding,
x
giving correction and suggestion from the preliminary manuscript until the last page of this thesis.
5. My beloved parents, Hamandja and Djumiatty Lundangen, for their love, sacrifices, advices and pray; and also special thanks to my brother and sister for their love and supports.
6. The lecturers and the staff of University Muhammadiyah Makassar for their guidance during the years of my study.
7. All my friends are from EDSA-013 and all of people who always gave me inspiration that cannot be mentioned one by one.
Hopefully, this thesis would be useful for many people who need it.
Makassar, January 2021
xi
LIST OF CONTENTS
Page
COVER ... i
LEMBAR PENGESAHAN ... ii
APPROVAL SHEET ... iii
SURAT PERNYATAAN ... iv SURAT PERJANJIAN ... v MOTTO ... vi ABSTRAK ... vii ABSTRACT ... viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... ix LIST OF CONTENTS ... xi CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ... 1 A. Background ... 1 B. Problem Statement ... 4
C. Objectives of the Research ... 4
D. The Significance of the Research ... 4
E. Scope of The Research ... 4
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 6
A. Review of Related Studies ... 6
B. The Concept of Error Analysis ... 7
1. Error and Mistakes ... 8
2. Error Analysis ... 9
xii
b. Sources of Errors ... 13
C. Sound of English ... 15
1. Consonant ... 15
D. The Concept of English Fricatives Sound... 19
1. Definition of Fricatives ... 20
2. Categories of Fricatives ... 20
3. Dental of Fricatives ... 23
E. Approximant ... 27
F. Conceptual of Framework ... 29
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHOD ... 31
A. Research Design ... 31
B. Research Variable and Indicators ... 31
C. Sample and Population... 32
D. Instrument of the Reseacrh ... 33
E. Procedure of Data Collecting ... 33
F. Technique of Datba Analysis ... 34
CHAPTER IV : FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 35
A. Findings ... 35
B. Discussion ... 39
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ... 43
A. Findings ... 43
B. Discussion ... 44
BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 45
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background
Education is the important thing in our life. It takes important role in the development of a nation. A nation will be considered as a respectable one because of its education. Education in the basis of local and global quality is education that knows how to exploit local quality and the needs of global competitive ability in economic, culture, language, information and communication technology, ecology, etc. that are useful for developing students’ competence.
In the process of learning English as a foreign language, many learners face difficulties and produce some errors especially in pronouncing English consonants as well as English vowels. In this study, the writer was interested to analyze the phonological errors made by second semester students of Study Program of English UniversitasBrawijaya regarding English consonants. Hence, the main focus of this study was the 24 English consonants. By conducting this study, the writer was able to find: first, the English consonants pronunciation error produced by the second semester students; and second, possible factors that influence their error. In answering the first research problem, the writer used Kelly’s and also Ladefoged et al.’s theories. Meanwhile, in answering the second research problem, the writer used Kenworthy and also Piske et al.’s theories (Widyaningtyas: 2014).
2
English plays an important role for specific function. Because of the importance of English, we have to give special attention to the English teaching learning in our country. In Indonesia, English has been chosen as the first-foreign language in school curriculum. It is because of a simple reason that English plays an important role in the international world. Our government hopes that it can be a means function to acquire science and technology. Therefore, Indonesian people will become intellectual and skillful person who are ready to face both national and international development.
In English language teaching, there are four language elements. The four skills of language teaching are Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. (Ramadan, 2019).One of them should be noticed is pronunciation is considered difficult element method that can be applied in learning pronunciation.
In line with Pardede (2017) explains that pronunciation plays an important role in learning at the second or a foreign language. Although students have English subject at school, most of them often make mistake, for example: in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The writer explain previously that language has three major components including phonology, vocabulary, and grammar. Among these components, phonology takes an important role. Automatically, phonology related with pronunciation.
Pronunciation instruction tends to be linked to the instructional method being used. In the grammar-translation method of the past, pronunciation was
3
almost irrelevant and therefore seldom taught. In the audio-lingual method, learners spent hours in the language lab listening to and repeating sounds and sound combinations.
Error analysis is an invaluable source of information to teachers. It provides information on students' errors which in turn helps teachers to correct students' errors and also improves the effectiveness of their teaching. According to Richards et al., as cited in Irianto (2018) states that error analysis has been conducted to identify strategies which learners use in language learning, to track the causes of learner’s errors, obtain information on common difficulties in language learning or on how to prepare teaching materials.
Based on the observation which is done by the researcher, he found some students’ Problems in Pronunciation in terms of Englishsound, the students having many problems in pronouncing the words, it is because lack of practicing the words.it is proven by some interviews that had been asked to the some students. They, the students, are difficult to differentiate the consonant sound for example Plosive, Fricative, approximant and ect.
From the explanation above the researcher commits to conduct a descriptive research with title “An Error Analysis of English Consonantmade by the First Year Students of English Department at Makassar Muhammadiyah University”.
4
B. Problem statement
Based on the background above, problem statement of this research are : 1. What kinds of errors are made by the students in pronouncing theEnglish
Fricative Consonants?
2. What kinds of errors are made by the students in pronouncing theEnglish Approximant Consonants?
C. The Objective of the Research
As the problem statement above, the objective that the researchers wish to find out the dominant errors made by the students in pronouncing the words containing English Fricative and Approximant consonants.
D. Significance of the Research
The results of this research would be expected to be useful information for many people in learning process, such as:
1. For the teachers, this research is expected to add information and valuable source about pronunciation and to encourage their teaching, especially for teaching English.
2. For the students and the learners, this research is expected to increase the students and the learners’ achievement in learning English.
3. For the next research, this research is expected to give information or contribution to other research especially in descriptive research.
E. The Scope of the Research
The scope of this research was limited to the Errors of English Fricative Consonant Sounds (/f/,/v/, /θ/, /ð/, /s/,/z/, /ʃ/, /Ʒ/, /h/) and Approximant
5
Consonant Sounds (/w/, /y/, /r/) made by the First Year Students of English Department at Makassar Muhammadiyah University Academic year 2019/2020.
6
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter presents discussions of theories and references dealing with the focus of the study.
A. Preview of Related Studies
Several studies have been conducted to identify and help students in dealing with pronunciation. Those studies applied certain technique in investigating pronunciation. Fatemi, Sobhani&Abolhassani (2012), in their journal entitle “difficulties of Persian learners of English in pronouncing some english consonant cluster” state that learners when facing such structural unfamiliarities resort to their native language phonological rules. The aims are to investigate some difficulties that Persian EFL learners may have in producing some English consonant clusters orally. Since consonant clusters in a language comply with its underlying phonological rules, or more specifically underlying syllabic structure, it seems to be quite relevant to deal with the syllabic structural rules of first and second languages.
“English is the language of stress and syllables, unlike Mandarin that is tonal” as Gilakjani (2012:121) has described. Each of linking, intonation and stress may affect macro level of language; each is described below in a brief way. Linking is the way that the last syllable of word joins the first syllable of the neighboring word. Intonation is described as the melody of the language. Word stress is the focused part, which is the most meaningful part of the sentence.
7
Elsa Hjøllum and Inger M. Mees (2012), in their journal entitle “error analysis of the pronunciation of English consonants by Faroese-speaking learners” state that learners’ difficulties with the consonants of English, on the vowels and on supra-segmental features such as stress, rhythm and intonation. Results show that Faroese speakers have problems with certain phonemic contrasts which are very similar to those facing many other non-native speakers of English. However, they also exhibit errors which are less usual worldwide (e.g. pre-aspiration of fortis stops). There are at the moment no textbooks for Faroese learners of English, nor any descriptions of their pronunciation difficulties; this paper is a first attempt at filling that gap
Based on the finding above the researcher concludes that error in pronouncing is commonly occurs among the students or learners. Therefore, after the researcher read certain different design above, the researcher is motivated to conduct the similar investigation about error analysis in pronunciation but under different design. In this recent study, the researcher offers to be conducted; namely descriptive research and researcher focus on Error Analysis of English Fricatives Consonants made by the First Year Students of English Department at Makassar Muhammadiyah University.
B. The Concept of Error Analysis
Creswell (2012:3) stated that research is a process of steps used to collect and analyze information to increase ourunderstanding of a topic or issue. At a general level, research consists of three steps: pose a question, collect data to answer the question, present an answer to the question.
8
According to Kothari, as cited in Bist (2014), research is a pursuit of trust with the help of study, observation, comparison and experiment, the search of knowledge through objective and systematic method of finding solutions of a problem. This research will analyze the students errors in writing a paragraph. Error Analysis (EA) is kind of descriptive research.
1. Error and Mistake
Error and mistake have different meaning. They exist in learning process. When the students study foreign language they sometimes make something wrong. That is what so-called an error or a mistake. In order to analyze learner’s errors in a proper prospective, it is important to distinguish the differences between error and mistake. Errors are typically produced by people who do not yet fully command some institutionalized language system. Error is systematic deviation; when a learner has not learnt something and consistently gets it wrong. However, that the term refers to noticeable deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker, which reflects the interlanguage communication of the learners.
A mistake refers to a performance error that is either random or a slip of the tongue, in that it is a failure to utilize a known system correctly (Brown, 2000). According to James in Hadiroh (2012: 24) mistake can be self-corrected if the deviation is pointed out to the speaker. Huber stated those temporary lapses of memory, confusion, slip oftongue and so on cause mistakes. Accordingly, when committing
9
mistakes, the speaker is normally capable of recognizing and correcting them. All people make mistakes in both native and second language situations. A learner is considered to make mistakes when he or she has deviation. For example, a learner has known that the word “jury” can be used both in singular and in plural without changing its form. He will write, for instance, “The jury is divided in their opinions”, instead of “The jury are divided in their opinions.” The failure in identifying the correct form of a verb is because of the word “jury” which is not in the plural form. This occurs because he or she perhaps makes an assumption that the word “jury” has to be changed into “juries” which is not the way it should be.
2. Error Analysis
In learning any language, learners will always make hypotheses about the language rules and then they practice or use them in actual language performance. The rules that they use are correct if the forms they produce are acceptable in the target language, and on the other hand, they should correct the forms if they are unacceptable.
Learners, in learning a second language, often produce erroneous utterances whether in their speech or in their writing. They find difficulties in learning the target language since its rules are different from those of their mother tongue. Those errors happen because there are influences of the rules of their mother tongue on those of the target language.
10
Error analysis is a methodology for dealing with which can be observed, analyzed, and classified to uncover and reveal the incidence, nature, causes, and consequences of unsuccessful language learning for the learners. As stated by James in Hadiroh (2012: 24) that error analysis is a methodology for dealing with data rather than a theory of acquisition. The data can be obtained by conduction a test with the students as the respondents. Meanwhile Brown in Hadiroh (2012: 25) says that error analysis is a fact that learners do make errors and the these errors can be observed, analyzed, and classified something of the system operation within the learners. The purpose is to uncover some problem faced by the students.
In order to make it easier for the learners to study the target language, all problems or errors faced by them should be observed, analyzed, classified to find or to reveal the solution to the problems. The study of the errors is commonly called error analysis. This error analysis should be made since errors in a language learning and teaching process are unavoidable. Since the 1960’s-1970’s an error study or an error analysis has been chosen to be one of the methods to find the answer to the problems owing to the fact that errors themselves, as stated by Wetzorke (2005) Corder, for instance believes that:
“A learners errors ... are significant in [that] they provide to the researcher evidence of how language is learned or acquired, what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in the discovery of the language” (Corder in Brown 2000: 2017).
11
Because of the significance of the errors themselves, foreign language teachers, in this case English pedagogues, have to realize that errors made by their students need to be analyzed correctly in order to be able to arrange learning strategy effectively. In addition, it is important to discuss error analysis to under score the relevance of such an analysis for teaching English as a foreign language. English lecturers should know error analysis since it becomes the key to understand the process of foreign language acquisition. They should know how the target language is learned and acquired, what strategy or procedure the learners employ in order to master the target language.
a. Steps of error analysis
Ellis & Barkhuizen in Taher (2011: 8) stated that when conducting an Error Analysis there are some steps that are included in the process
1) Collection of a sample of learner language, when collecting data one has to consider what the purpose of the study is and then tryto collect relevant data for the studies aim and research questions that needs to be answered.
2) Identification of errors, before analysing a text it is important to define what an error is beforehand. For example when ident ifying grammatical errors in English learners texts one has to compare them to what is grammatically correct in English grammar books which we will do in the study. However, if the
12
aim is to analyze learners errors in oral production one has to take into count which English variety the learners are exposed to when identifying their errors.
3) Description of errors, Corder writes that in order to describe an error one has to specify how the English learners error differs from the native speaker.Therefore a categorization of the grammatical errors needs to be developed, as thesefive following principles below show. All examples are taken from Ellis & Barkhuizen in Sawalmeh (2013):
a) Errors of omission: when the learner has left out a word e.g. “My sister happy”.
b) Errors of addition: when the learner has added a word or an ending to another word which is grammatically incorrect e.g. “I have eated”.
c) Misinformation/Substitution: when the learner uses the wrong form of a morpheme or structure e.g. when they use the wrong preposition in a sentence such as “It was the hardest time in my life”.
d) Misordering: e.g. when the learner places a morpheme incorrectly in a grammatical construction such as “She fights all the time her brother”.
13
e) Blends: when the learner is uncertain of which word to use and blends two different phrases e.g. “The only one thing I want”.
b. Sources of Errors
By identifying the sources of error, the researcher begins to know how learner’s cognitive and affective self relates to the linguistic system and also to formulate the process of learning his first foreign language. In this section, the scope of discussion is limited to errors on pronunciation.
There are two kinds of errors namely interlingual errors and intralingual errors.
1) Interlingua Errors
According to Brown et al., as cited in Sari (2015:5) the beginning stages of learning a second language are characterized by a good deal of interlingua transfer from the native language. Moreover, Richards et al., as cited in Sari (2015:5)says states, intralingual interference refers to items produced by learner, which reflect not the structure of mother tongue, but generalization based on partial exposure of the target language.
2) Intralingua Errors
Intralingua errors are caused by interference of the target language. Richards et al., as cited in Sari (2015:5-6) says that
14
intralingua or developmental errors reflect the learner’s competence at particular stage and illustrate some of the general characteristics of language acquisition. This error can be divided into four terms, they are overgeneralization, ignorance of rule restriction, incomplete application of rules, and false concepts hypothesized.
According to Richards, intralingua errors are also subdivided to the following categories:
a) Overgeneralization errors: the learner creates a deviant structure on the basis of other structures in the target language.
(e.g. "He can sings" where English allows "He can sing" and "He sings").
b) Ignorance of rule restrictions: the learner applies rules to context where they are not applicable.
(e.g. "He made me to go rest" through extension of the pattern "He asked/wanted me to go").
c) Incomplete application of rules: the learner fails to use a fully developed structure.
(e.g. "You like to sing?" in place of "Do you like to sing?") d) False hypothesis: the learners do not fully understand a
15
(e.g. the use of "was" as a marker of past tense in "One day it was happened").
C. Sounds of English
Sound divided into two parts are consonant sounds and vowel sounds. Consonant and vowel sounds are two different qualities of sounds that are found almost in all languages of the world. Consonants are defined as the sounds articulated by temporary obstruction in the air stream which passes through the mouth. Vowels are the sounds that are produced with an approximation without any obstruction in the air passage.
a. Consonants
Consonant is speech sound that is articulated with complete or partial closure of vocal track. In consonants there is points of articulation and manner of articulation. In points of articulation, there are seven primary points, they are Bilibial, Labio-dental, dental, Alveolar, palatal, velar, and Glottal. And in manner of articulation, there are seven the action of the vocal apparatus as a sound is being produced, they are stops, affricatives, fricatives, liquids, nasal, Glides, and Sibilants.
Consonants are usually classified according to the place of articulation (the location of the stricture made in the vocal tract, such as dental, bilabial, or velar), the manner of articulation (the way in which
16
the obstruction of the airflow is accomplished, as in stops, fricatives, and laterals) and then they are further divided into ‘voiced’ and ‘voiceless’.
In English, there are 24 [θ], [ð], [h], [w], [y]. All of this consonant sounds have difference each other, but there are some consonants have similarity when we pronounced them. For example, [v] and [f], [ch] and [j], [sh] and [zh], [s] and [z], [l] and [r], [θ], and [ð]. Sometimes we are difficult to distinguish those similarity consonant sounds.
The following classification of consonant is based on place of articulation (Ampa. 2010:5):
Classification Examples
1) Bilabial
17
/b/ /m/ /w/
Beak, rubber, rib Men, lamp, room What, swim 2) Labio-Dental
/f/ /v/
Feel, suffer, leaf View, given, serve 3) Dental
/ θ/ / ð/
Thin, earthy, with Those, mother, clothe 4) Alveolar /t/ /d/ /n/ /s/ /z/ /l/
Two, earthy, with Do, ladder, hard Nine, sins, one Sink, looser, niece Zinc, fuzzy, bus Like, fellow, all
5) Palate-alveolar /ʃ/ /Ʒ/ /tʃ/ /ʤ/ /r/
Sheep, wishing, wash Vision, beige
Choice, kitchen, rich Joke, ridges, age Rice, arrive, raw
18 6) Palatal /j/ You, few 7) Velar /k/ /g/ /ŋ/
Cave, weaker, lick Girl, target, bag Ring, singer 8) Glottal
/h/ Horse, anyhow
Classification of consonants based on manner of articulation:
1) Stops/plosives : The voice plosive of English /b/,/d,/g/ and Voiceless are /p/,/t/,/k/
2) Nasals : Or Nasal stop where the occlusion in the vocal tract shifts the airflow to the nasal tract. Examples in English are / m /, / n /, and / ŋ /. All the other sounds in contrast with nasals are classified as oral Sounds (air passes through the mouth instead of Nose).
3) Fricatives : Produced by forcing air through a narrow channel made by placing two articulators close together. This turbulent airflow is called friction. As in / f / the lower lip is put
19
against the upper teeth to pose friction in the way of the air coming from our lungs.
4) Affricates : A consonant which begins as a stop (plosive), characterized by a complete Obstruction of the outgoing air stream by the articulators, a build up of air pressure in the mouth, and finally releases as a fricative.
5) Laterals : A consonant, in which air stream proceeds Along the sides of the tongue, but is blocked by the tongue from going through the middle of the mouth. English has one lateral phoneme. /l/
D. The Concept of English Fricatives Sounds
English consonants have been remarkably stable over time, and have undergone few changes in the last 1500 years. On the other hand, English vowels have been quite unstable. Not surprisingly, then, the main differences between modern dialects almost always involve vowels.
Plosive are difficult consonants, they take more effort to articulate than other classes of consonants because in the pronunciation of a plosive there is a complete obstruction. (Bowen, T. and Marks, J, 1992:21)
20
1. Definition of Fricative
A dental consonant is a consonant articulated with the tongue against the upper teeth, such as /t/, /d/, /n/, and /l/. Dentals are primarily distinguished from sounds in which contact is made with the tongue and the gum ridge. Point of articulation of dental is The upper teeth and the tip of the tongue. Dental sound are made by placing the tongue tip between the teeth.
Fricatives are consonants produced by forcing air through a narrow channel made by placing two articulators close together. Fricatives are consonant with the characteristic that when they are produced, air escapes through a small passage and makes a hissing sound. The manner of articulation fricatives, in producing fricatives sound, one of the articlution is brought close to one of the points of articulation, creating a narrow opening. When the air stream is forced through this opening, a turbulence or frinction is created. Fricatives are therefore noisy sounds. They occur at four points articulation : dental θ and ð, labio-dental f dan v, alveolar s dan z, and alveo-palatal ∫ and ʒ . Notice that in one sense fricatives pattern with the stops : they both occur in voiced and voiceless pairs.
2. Categories of Fricatives
Ampa (2010:5) states that fricatives consists of some parts, they are: a. Alveolar fricative (/s/ and /z/)
21
There is a pair of fricatives produced with the blade of the tongue close to the alveolar ridge. These alveolar fricatives are /s/ as voiceless and /z/ as voiced. This pair has one other characteristic distinguishing them; they are produced with the tongue slightly grooved. Notice that in pronouncing /θ/, the blade of the tongue is quite flat, but in pronouncing /s/, the sides of blade are curled up slightly, forming a groove in the center. Failure to form the groove is responsible for certain types of lips. In the front teeth are missing, the are will not have to pass by some route, and a lass sibilant fricative sound is produced: an attempt to articulate /s/ produces a /θ/- like sound, which identified as a lips.
b. labiodental fricative (/f/ and /v/)
Where the friction occurs between the two lips, have symbols taken from the Greek alphabet: for the voiceless bilabial fricative the symbol is ϕ or /f/. And the voiced bilabial fricative is β or /v/. These sounds do not regularly occur in English, except in certain context as variant sounds for labio-dental fricative. This means that the small passage through which the air must pass is formed with the teeth and the lip. The upper teeth and lower lip are used in English.
c. Dental fricative (/θ/ and /ð/)
In English, there are two fricative sounds produced with the tongue and the teeth. In some dialect regions, the tongue is placed
22
behind the front teeth. For some speakers the tongue tip actually protrudes between top and bottom teeth, and these sounds are sometimes called interdental fricatives. In either case, the sounds produced is the same. This is the sound we spell th /θ/. We do not distinguish in spelling between the voiced and voiceless cognates, but they are pronounced differently. The voiceless variant occurs in the words “thin”, “thought”, and “both”. The voiced variant occurs in the word “the”, “this”, and “there”. It is transcribed with a symbol ð.
d. Glottal fricative (/h/)
The sound /h/, as in “house”, is usually classified as a fricative. It is different from the other fricatives in that the vocal tract is wide open, so there is little fiction. Also /h/ is voiceless, and there is no voiced cognate for it. For these reasons, /h/ is classified as a glottal fricative.
e. Alveopalatal fricative (/Ʒ/ and /ʃ/)
The alveopalatal fricatives are articulated by bringing the blade of tongue close to part of the roof of the mouth where the alveolar ridge and the hard palate join. These are sometimes called palatoalveolar, or not very accurately, palatal fricative. Unlike alveolar fricatives, there is no grooving of the tongue; is more or less flat at the point of restriction. For this reason, they are called slit fricatives.
23
The voiceless alveopalatal fricative is usually spelled sh in English is it the sound in the word “shore, bush, sugar nad position” there are two symbols used to transcribe this sound: /š/,/ʃ/. Either symbol can be used, but it is important to be consistent in using one or the other. The wedge over the s is called hachek; it is borrowed from the Czech alphabet.
The voiced alveopalatal fricative is less common in English, it is the sound that occurs in the words “measure”, “version”, and “leisure”. It is transcribed either of two ways: /Ʒ/, and /ž/.
3. Dental Fricative
Dental fricative is the friction occurs between the tongue tip and the back of the front teeth. The dental fricatives have sometimes been described as if the tongue was actually placed between the teeth, and it is common for teachers to make their students do this when they are trying to teach them to make this sound. In fact, however, the tongue is placed inside the teeth, with the tip touching the inside of the lower front teeth and the blade touching the inside of the upper teeth. The air escapes through the gaps between the tongue and the teeth. As with f and v, the fricative noise is weak.
Dental fricatives consists of two categories, they are:
a. Voiceless dental fricative
The voiceless dental fricative is a type of consonantal sound, is used in some spoken languages. The symbol in the International
24
Phonetic Alphabet that represents this sound is /θ/. The dental fricatives are often called interdental because they are often produced with the tongue between the upper and lower teeth, and not just against the back of the teeth, as they are with other dental consonants.
The voiceless dental fricative is the sound denoted by the letters “/θ/” in words “think” and “bath”. It is different from the “/ð/” in words “this” and “the”, which is the voiced dental fricative. The articulation of voiced dental fricative is The vocal cords do not vibrate, and the velum is raised. The tip of the tongue is raised very close to the upper front teeth. The sides of the tongue touch the upper side teeth. Friction is produced as the air passes through the narrowing at the tongue-tip.
Voiceless dental fricative (/θ/) Features of this consonant:
1) Its manner of articulation is fricative, which means it is produced by constricting air flow through a narrow channel at the place of articulation, causing turbulence.
2) Its place of articulation is dental which means it is articulated with the tongue on either the lower or the upper teeth, or both. 3) Its phonation type is voiceless, which means it is produced
25
4) It is an oral consonant, which means air is allowed to escape through the mouth.
5) It is a central consonant, which means it is produced by allowing the airstream to flow over the middle of the tongue, rather than the sides.
The airstream mechanism is pulmonic egressive, which means it is articulated by pushing air out of the lungs and through the vocal tract, rather than from the glottis or the mouth.
b. Voiced dental fricative
The voiced dental fricative is a type of consonantal sound, used in some spoken languages. The symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet that represents this sound is ð, and the equivalent X-SAMPA symbol is D. The voiced dental fricative occurs in English, and it is the sound denoted by the letters "th" in this and the. It is different from the "th" sound in thing and bath, which is the voiceless dental fricative. The dental fricatives are often called "interdental" because they are often produced with the tongue between the upper and lower teeth, and not just against the back of the teeth, as they are with other dental consonants.
Features of this consonant:
1) It is manner of articulation is fricative, which means it is produced by constricting air flow through a narrow channel at
26
the place of articulation, causing turbulence.
2) It is place of articulation is dental which means it is articulated with the tongue on either the lower or the upper teeth, or both.
3) It is phonation type is voiced, which means the vocal cords are vibrating during the articulation.
4) It is an oral consonant, which means air is allowed to escape through the mouth.
5) It is a central consonant, which means it is produced by allowing the airstream to flow over the middle of the tongue, rather than the sides.
6) The airstream mechanism is pulmonic aggressive, which means it is articulated by pushing air out of the lungs and through the vocal tract, rather than from the glottis or the mouth.
The pronunciation of /θ/ is almost the same with /ð/. But the contact between the tongue tip and the teeth should be loose enough to permit the voiced breath stream to pass out of the mouth between the tongue and the teeth. /ð/ is similar to /θ/, except that. /ð/ is voiced and /ð/ is pronounced with much lass of friction like quality heard in /θ/. Thus, the main difference between these sounds is that /θ/ is voiceless in which the vocal cords are wide apart so that air passes freely between
27
them, there is no vibration. While, /ð/ is voiced in which the vocal cords are drawn together, the air from the lungs repeatedly pushes them apart as it passes through, creating a vibration effect.
Both /ð/ and /θ/ appear initially as in thick and this, medially as in nothing and brother, and finally as in month and bathe.
E. Approximant
Approximants are speech sounds that involve the articulators approaching each other but not narrowly enough (Ladefoged, 1975:277) nor with enough articulatory precision to create turbulent airflow. Therefore, approximants fall between fricatives, which do produce a turbulent airstream, and vowels, which produce no turbulence. This class of sounds includes lateral approximants like non-lateral approximants like /r/ (as in rest), and semivowels like /j/ and /w/ (as in yes and west, respectively) (Martinez-Celdran, 2004:201).
In addition to less turbulence, approximants also differ from fricatives in the precision required to produce them (Boersma, 1997:12). When emphasized, approximants may be slightly fricated (that is, the airstream may become slightly turbulent), which is reminiscent of fricatives. For example, the Spanish word ayuda ('help') features a palatal approximant that is pronounced as a fricative in emphatic speech (Martinez-Celdran, 2004:204). However, such frication is generally slight and intermittent, unlike the strong turbulence of fricative consonants. Because voicelessness has comparatively reduced resistance to air flow from the lungs, the increased air flow creates
28
more turbulence, making acoustic distinctions between voiceless approximants (which are extremely rare cross-linguistically) (Blevins, 2006:13) and voiceless fricatives difficult. Again, no language is known to contrast the two. For places of articulation further back in the mouth, languages do not contrast voiced fricatives and approximants. Therefore the IPA allows the symbols for the voiced fricatives to double for the approximants, with or without a lowering diacritic.
Occasionally, the glottal "fricatives" are called approximants, since /h/ typically has no more frication than voiceless approximants, but they are often phonations of the glottis without any accompanying manner or place of articulation.
The three English approximant sounds (the/w/ sound, /r/ sound and /j/ sound) are created by constricting the vocal tract slightly, but not so much that the air becomes turbulent as it passes through.
Approximant Key Words
w
sound /w/ We
lips are made into a small circle, the back of the tongue is lifted
j
sound /j/ Yes
the tongue blade is pressed very close to the back of the tooth ridge
r
sound /r/ Red
the back of the tongue is bunched high so the sides of the tongue touch the back side teeth
29
F. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework underlying this research can be designed as follows:
ERROR ANALYSIS
Collection the Data Identification of errors Description of errors English Pronunciation English Consonant sounds30
The conceptual framework above describes the research which conductedby the researcher. This research is a descriptive research which described about the error of English fricative sounds made by the students. In this research there are 3 steeps, they are (1) collecting the data this means researcher collect the data taken from the research participant by using pronunciation test, (2) identification of errors, in this case, means after doing the pronunciation test the researcher will interpret the kinds of error analysis countered by the students and (3) description of errors, giving description related to students’ error in pronouncing the words. And the indicator that will be used the researcher is fricative and approximant in consonant sounds.
31
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter consists of research design, population and sample, instrument of the research, procedure of data collection, and technique of data analysis.
A. Research Design
This research applied quantitative research. quantitative is basically framed in term of using numbers, closed-end question. Quantitative research is characterized as an efficient examination of wonders by gathering quantifiable information and performing factual, scientific, or computational procedures. Quantitative inquire about collects data from existing and potential clients utilizing inspecting strategies and sending out online studies, online surveys, surveys, etc., the comes about of which can be portrayed within the frame of numerical.This research also used numbers, percentage as the result, typically characteristic of quantitative method. This was needed to provide complete research and valid finding result.
B. Research variable and indicators
The research variables were the objects whichwere observed, assessed, or examined through their own indicators or parameters. The variable was one of the important elements of research. The variable of this research is English Consonant sounds. While fricative and approximant consonants was selected to be the indicators of this research.
32
C. Population and Sample 1. Population
The population of this research was the first year students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar in academic year 2019/2020. There were 6 classes and the total of the students were 138 students.
Table 3.1 Total Population
No. Class Total Students Percentage 1. BG 2 A 22 Students 27% (6 students) 2. BG 2 B 24 Students 25% (6 students) 3. BG 2 C 24 Students 25% (6 students) 4. BG 2 D 22 Students 27% (6 students) 5. BG 2 E 23 Students 26% (6 students) 6. BG 2 F 23 Students 26% (6 students)
Total 138 Students 36 Students
2. Sample
The sample represents the whole population in this research. The sample of this research was selected by random sampling. There were 138 students of first semester in academic year 2019/2020 and the sample that was taken 36 students (25-27% each class of 6 classes and there were 138 students). The researcher used lottery technique (choosing a sample randomly). The research took the sample by giving the students number, then researcher took the number until 36 students.
33
D. Instrument of the Research
In collecting data the researcher used pronunciation test as instrument in order to get the data. The items of pronunciation test consisted of a list of 120 words. Each sound consisted of 5words. Pronunciation test was given to the respondents through asking them to pronounce the words clearly and correctly while the researcher was recorded. Students’ scoring rubric of the pronunciation test could be seen in the table above:
Students Pronunciation test
No Criteria Score
1 Poor 0-1 Students Makes many mistakes or error pronunciation.
2 Fair 1-3 The students have errors in pronunciation,some effort in articulation
3 Good-excellent 3-5 The students Makes Minnor or no errors in pronunciation and great articulation
E. Procedure of Data Collection
The researcher used some stages in collecting the data, it could been seen as follows:
1. The researcher used pronunciation test to find out the errors that makes by the students in pronouncing English Errors of English Fricatives and approximant Consonant Soundsmake by the First Year Students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Makassar.
34
3. Then convert into written form or transcribe the audio, and 4. Analysis the data.
The researcher analyzed the students’ pronunciation in consonant especially fricative sounds and Approximant Consonant Sound.
F. Technique of Data Analysis
In analyzing data for descriptive research, this research was an error analysis so that the researcher used Non Statistical Approaches/Techniques. The steps of an error analysis in pronunciation were:
1. The researcher identified the error;
2. The researcher gave the description of the errors;
3. The researcher explained the error which made by the students;
Besides, the researcher also wanted to know the students in pronouncing English consonant in term of fricative and approximant consonants make the dominant errors. From the result of each of the analyses, the researcher was able to identify the significant things related to the errors they made in pronouncing the English fricative and approximant consonants. Calculating the percentage of the students’ score, by using the following formula:
Where = rate percentage
f = frequency of the correct answer n = total number of the students 100
x n F P =
35
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter consists of two sections, the finding of the research and discussion of the finding.
A. Findings
In this descriptive research, the researcher found many errors in the use of English consonants especially fricative and approximant consonants. The researcher identified the errors that the students made in the appendix 2
1. The kinds of error in pronouncing the English fricative consonants
The following table showed the kinds error which made by the students in pronouncing the english fricative consonants. Based on the table the researcher devided the errors into 3 kinds; substitution, omission, and addition. Each kind contains the error frequency from all students.
Table 4.1 The Kinds of Error in English Fricative Consonants No. Fricative Consonants Kinds of Error
Substitution Omission Addition
1. /f/ 65 8 16 2. /v/ 59 - - 3. / θ/ 132 30 3 4. /ð/ 238 - - 5. /s/ 25 - 3 6. /z/ 198 - - 7. /ʃ/ 109 - - 8. /Ӡ/ 113 - 15 9. /h/ 146 - -
36
Total 1085 38 37
1160
Percentage (%) 93.53 3.28 3.19
The table above show the kinds of error in pronouncing the fricative consonants. There were 1085 or 93.53% errors of substitution, 38 or 3.28% errors of omission, and 37 or 3.19% errors of addition from the total errors found.
Figure 1 The Kinds of Error in English Fricative Consonants
2. The Kinds of Error in Pronouncing the English Approximant Consonants
The following table showed the kinds error which made by the students in pronouncing the english fricative consonants. Based on the table the researcher devided the errors into 3 kinds; substitution,
93,53%
3,28% 3,19%
Substitution Omission Addition
Kinds of error in pronouncing the
fricative consonants
37
omission, and addition. Each kind contains the error frequency from all students.
Table 4.2 The Kinds Error in English Approximant Consonants
No. Approximant Consonants
Kinds of Error
Substitution Omission Addition
1. /w/ 14 - - 2. /r/ 61 4 - 3. /j/ 104 1 - Total 179 5 - 184 Percentage (%) 97.28 2.72 -
The table above show the kinds of error in pronouncing the approximant consonants. There were 179 or 97.28% errors of substitution, 5 or 2.72% errors of omission, and there were no errors of addition found in pronouncing english approximant consonants.
Figure 2 The Kinds of Error in English Approximant Consonants
97,28%
2,72% 0,00%
Substitution Omission Addition
The Kinds Error in English Approximant
Consonants
38
Table 4.3Total Error in Fricative Consonant Sounds
55 Sample
Fricative Consonant Sounds
/f/ /v/ /θ/ /ð/ /s/ /z/ /∫/ /ʒ/ /h/ Total Error 89 59 165 238 25 198 109 128 146 Percentage (%) 7.69 5.10 14.26 20.57 2.16 17.11 9.42 11.06 12.62
The tableabove show all error made by the students. There were 89 (7.69%) in /f/ sound, 59 (5.10%) in /v/ sound, 165 (14.26%) in /θ/ sound, 238 (20.57%) in /ð/ sound, 25 (2.16%) in /s/ sound, 198 (17.11) in /z/ sound, 109 (9.42%) in /∫/ sound, 128 (11.06%) in /ʒ/ sound, 146 (12.62%) in /h/ sound.
Table 4.4 Total Error in Approximant Consonant Sounds
55 Sample
Approximant Consonant Sounds
/w/ /r/ /j/ Total Error 14 65 105 Percentage (%) 7.61 35.33 57.06
The tableabove show all error made by the students. There were 14 (7.61%) in /w/ sound¸ 65 (35.33%) in /r/ sound, and 105 (57.06%) in /j/ sound.
Table 4.5 The proportion of error frequency made by the students
Number of words Number of errors Frequency Percentage (%)
60 11 1 20.00
60 12 2 21.82
39 60 16 1 29.09 60 18 2 32.73 60 19 2 34.55 60 20 2 36.36 60 21 5 38.18 60 22 2 40.00 60 23 2 41.82 60 24 1 43.64 60 25 9 45.45 60 26 8 47.27 60 27 1 49.09 60 28 4 50.90 60 29 4 52.72 60 30 1 54.54 60 32 1 58.18 60 34 1 61.81 60 36 3 65.45 60 39 1 70.90
From the table above show that there were some students made errors from the words given. Each student made error frequency which has been counted in the table. And each student had their own percentage of error.
B. Discussion
The result of this descriptive research dialed with the answer of the problem statements which aimed to know about the dominant errors in pronouncing English fricative and approximant consonant sounds. The data of errors in pronunciation consisted of fricative consonants and approximant consonant sounds.
40
There were 3 kinds of errors in pronouncing the english fricative consonants, substitution, omission, and addition.
a. Substitution
Substitution is one of the kinds of errors deals with substitution of one sound with another sound. There were some students subtitute the sound of some words with incorrect sound.
Based on the findings of this research there were 1085 or 93.53% errors of substitution, 38 or 3.28% errors of omission, and 37 or 3.19% errors of addition from the total errors found.
As the explanation in findings, every student made errors when pronouncing the fricative sounds. Most of them substitute the word with the near one. As can be seen in the phonetic transcription the students mostly did substitution in pronouncing the fricative consonants.
Example:
Word Error
Identification
Error Description Error
correction
Fast /fes/* Substitution of vowel
/ɑ:/with /e/
/fɑ:st/
Cloth /klɒt/* Substitution of consonant
/θ/ with /t/in final position
/klɒθ/
b. Omission
Omission is one of the kinds of errors which deals with removing the sound of one word. There were some students remove the sound from one word when they pronounce the words.
41
Example:
Word Error
Identification
Error Description Error
correction
Thnk /θɪŋ/* Omissionof consonant /k/ /θɪŋk/
Parent /ˈpeə.rən/* Omission of consonant /t/in final position
/ˈpeə.rənt/
c. Addition
Addition is the kinds of error which deals with adding some sounds to the correct sound of words. There were some students give addition to the sound of the word when they pronounce it.
Example: Word Error
Identification
Error Description Error
correction Peace /piːys/* Addition consonant /y/ in
middle position
/piːs/
Cloth /klɒwt/* Addition consonant /w/
in middle position
/klɒθ/
2. The kinds of error in pronouncing the English Approximant consonants Based on the result of data analysis the kinds of students’ error in pronouncing the English approximant consonant were substitution and omission. In approximant consonant there were no students did addition.
The result of data analysis show that there were 179 or 97.28% errors of substitution, 5 or 2.72% errors of omission, and there were no errors of addition found in pronouncing english approximant consonants. a. Substitution
Most student made error by substitute some word with another word, here the example :
42
Word Error
Identification
Error Description Error
correction
Swim /swɪn/* Substitution of consonant
/m/ with /n/ in final position
/swɪm/
Hour /oʊər/* Substitution of vowel /a/ with /o/ in initial position
/aʊə r /
b. Omission
In pronouncing approximant consonant sounds some student made error and did omission. Here the example :
Word Error
Identification
Error Description Error
correction Yourself /jɔːˈsef/ Omissionof consonant /l/ /jɔːˈself/ Parent /ˈpeə.rən/* Omission of consonant
/t/in final position
/ˈpeə.rənt/
From all kinds of error, the kind of error that students mostly did is substitution error. They subtitutethe sound of some words with incorrect sound. Substitution occurs when the students change the consonant with the other similar consonant.
This is happened because there are several consonants in English which almost has the same utterances. This is then mostly causing them made error in pronouncing the English sounds. They also made errors in omission and addition, but from the result of the data analysis substitution had high percentage than the others.
43
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consists of two sections. The first is the conclusions which based on the research findings and discussions. The second section is suggestions which based on the conclusions purposed.
A. Conclusions
Based on the findings and discussions in the previous chapter, the researcher drew the conclusions that:
1. The analysis of the test proven that the students made 1085 or 93.53% errors of substitution, 38 or 3.28% errors of omission, and 37 or 3.19% errors of addition from the total errors found. It indicated that most of the students made errors in substitution with high percentage than omission. 2. The findings of pronouncing approximant consonants also showed that
errors of substitution had higher percentage than omission and addition. The result of the data analysis showed that there were 179 or 97.28% errors of substitution, 5 or 2.72% errors of omission, and there were no errors of addition found in pronouncing English approximant consonants. So, from all kinds of errors, most of the students made errors in substitution both fricative and approximant consonants.
44
B. Suggestions
Based on the conclusions above, there are some suggestions given as follows: 1. For the teachers
a. The teachers have to be a good model in pronouncing English sounds. In this case, they should explain more detail to the students about voiced and voiceless consonants.
b. The teachers should pay more attention to their student’s pronunciation and teach them more about English sounds.
2. For the students
a. The students should be aware that later, in the future time, they would be a model in speaking English. Therefore, they have to pay careful attention to their pronunciation.
b. The students should learn and practice more about English sounds to make their pronunciation better and to improve their ability in pronouncing English sounds.
45
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abdullah, H. 2012. An Error Analysis in Simple Present Tense Made By the 8th Year Students of SMPN 1 Malunda. Thesis of Unismuh Makassar
Baker, W. &Trofimovich, P. (2005) Interaction of native- and second language vowel language vowel system(s) in early and late bilinguals. Language and Speech, 48, 1-27
Blevins, Juliette. 2006. "New perspectives on English sound patterns: "natural" and "unnatural" in evolutionary phonology", Journal of English Linguistics
Bist R. B. 2014. Research Procedure: an Introduction, Nepal.
Brown, H.D. 2000. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Longman
Creswell, John W. 2012. Educational Research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative Research. Fourth Edition. United States of Amrica: Pearson
Depdikbud. 2004. PedomanPerpustakaanPerguruanTinggi. Jakarta: DepartemenPendidikandanKebudayaan.
Elsa Í Hjøllum and inger M. Mees. 2012. Error Analysis of the Pronunciation of English Consonants by Faroese-Speaking Learners
Fatemi, Sobhani&Abolhassani. 2012. Difficulties of Persian Learners of English in Pronouncing some English Consonant Cluster
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., Hyams, N. (2007).An Introduction to Language (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth
Geoffrey Broughton. 1988. Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Routledge & Kegan Paul Publisher
Gilakjani, A.P. (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), 119-128.
Harmer. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman
Irianto,N,A.2018. An Analysis of pronunciation Errors of English Consonants : /Θ/ And /Ð/ By The Students of The English Education Study Program of
