UKWUEZEH, P. C. (MRS.) PG/M.ED/02/33332 PG/M. Sc/09/51723 PHONOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF EDEM SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARTS EDUCATION, FACULTY OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA ARTS EDUCATION JULY, 2008 Webmaster Digitally Signed by Webmaster‟s Name DN : CN = Webmaster‟s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka OU = Innovation Centre 2 PHONOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF EDEM SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE BY UKWUEZEH, P. C. (MRS.) PG/M.ED/02/33332 DEPARTMENT OF ARTS EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA JULY, 2008. i TITLE PAGE PHONOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF EDEM SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ii Approval page _________________________ _________________________ SUPERVISOR INTERNAL EXAMINER ________________________ ________________________ EXTERNAL EXAMINER HEAD OF DEPARTMENT _____________________ DEAN OF FACULTY iii CERTIFICATION Mrs Ukwuezeh Priscilla chika, a postgraduate student in the Department of Arts Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka has satisfactorily completed the requirement for the award of the degree of Master of Education. The work embodied in this project is original and has not been submitted in part or full for any degree of this or any other University. __________________ PROF.E.J OTAGBURUAGU SUPERVISOR _______________________ DR.MRS.UJU UMOH HEAD OF DEPARTMENT iv DEDICATION TO Almighty God The giver of Grace v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The researcher wishes to express her sincere and profound gratitude to the following people who have contributed immensely to the successful completion of the work. I am grateful to my project supervisor Prof. E.J.Otagburuagu whose readiness to help at all times, careful and thoughtful supervison of the work, constructive criticism and useful suggestion aided the completion of this work. I must not fail to appreciate my beloved husband pastor Jonas Ukwuezeh whose financial and moral support led to the successful completion of this study. I am also grateful to my loving children Nnaemeka, Toochukwu, Chukwuebuka, Ugochukwu, Oziomachukwu and Nmesomachukwu whose moral encouragement piloted me throughout the period of writing this project. To the statistical brains behind this work Dr. Usman and Prof. Ezeudu. I am thankful to the principals, teachers and students of the sampled schools for this study for their co-operation during the data collection stage. Ukwuezeh, P.C. (Mrs.) vi ABSTRACT This study attempts to find out the phonological problems of Edem Secondary School students in the English language. In achieving this goal, 61 students out of a total of 242 students were sampled using descriptive survey design, because it is aimed at collecting data on features and facts about a given population and describing it in a systematic manner. A self-made competence test (Phonological reading passage) was used as instrument for data collection. The findings reveal that Edem students have phonological problem of using /t/ sound for / / sound, /d / sound in place of / ð/ sound and /n/ sound for /l / sound. Hence London is pronounced Nondon. In Edem dialect of Igbo it has been discovered that both /l/ and /n/ are found in their dialect but they cannot make the distinction between the two. Again, they insert vowel sounds in between consonants, and each word with consonant ending they put a final vowel. Finally, the irregularity in English pronunciation affect Edem students greatly. vii TABLE OF CONTENTST Page Title Page … … Approval Page … … Certification … … Dedication … … … Acknowledgement … Abstract … … … Table of Contents … … … … … … … … … CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Study Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Significance of the Study Scope of the Study Research Questions … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …i …ii …iii …iv …v …vi …vii … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 1 1 13 14 15 16 16 … … … … … … … … … … 18 19 27 36 42 … … … … … … … … … … 42 42 42 43 44 44 45 45 46 46 … --- 47 53 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW Conceptual Framework … Theoretical Framework … Empirical Study … Summary of Literature Review CHAPTER THREE RESEACH METHOD … … Design of the Study … … Area of the Study … … Population of the Study … … Sample of the Study … … Instrument for Data Collection … Validation of the Instrument … Reliability of the Instrument … Administration of the Instrument … Method of Data Analysis … … CHAPTER FOUR DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION Summary of Findings --CHAPTER FIVE viii Interpretation And Discussion Implication of the finding Recommendations … Suggestion for further studies Limitation of the studies … Summary … … REFERENCES… … APPENDIX I … APPENDIX II … APPENDIX III … … --… … … … … … … … ----… … … … … … … … 54 56 58 59 59 60 61 65 66 67 APPENDIX IV … … … … … … … … 69 APPENDIX V … … … … … … … … 70 APPENDIX VI … … … … … … … … 71 APPENDIX VII … … ... … … … … … 72 … … … … … … … 73 APPENDIX VIII 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Study Language is the major tool of communication in human society and speech occupies a major position in most discussions of language as a communicative medium. One of the major characteristics of man, according to Mgbodile (1999), is his ability to use language to send messages about objects, events and situations around him. Speech is what distinguishes man from other animals. Speech is paramount to any language and knowledge of the English Language cannot be appreciably good without effective manipulation of the speech sounds, for linguistics competence, according to Chukwuma,H and Otagburuagu,E(1997), is based mainly on oracy. So, the mastery of English is highly connected to the mastery of the spoken form of it. From the early age, a normal child responds to the sounds which his elders use to communicate with him. In his bid to communicate and get his needs identified and satisfied, the child begins to imitate the sounds which he has heard from his elders. His dire need to communicate with the adult community and his constant hearing and imitation of the language make it possible for him to acquire his mother tongue or his first language. Ogbuehi 2 (2003) asserts that every normal child acquires the sound system and the speech patterns of his mother tongue in a normal way through imitation of sounds from adult group. On the other hand, learning to speak a second language or foreign language usually involves some rigours and challenges because the learner has to learn the sound systems and the prosodic features of the second language against the already firmly consolidated first language in the mind of the learner. The problem is partly that some languages are tonal and syllable-timed and others are stress-timed and various speech sounds have distinctive acoustic properties. The adjustment to these differences may lead to a mismatch and therefore the learner may produce sounds that cannot be understood by other users of the same language. Onuigbo (1990) asserts that learning to speak a second language is psychologically demanding because the learner already feels comfortable towards the phonological systems of his native language. Mackey (1965) agrees that a person who has been using only one language since early childhood has habits and thoughts which are closely tied to his habits of language, and that language is a part of his experience. He concludes that in learning a second language, the learner has to adjust his speech habits to accommodate those of the target language. This according to Otagburuagu and Okorji (2002) is because languages have their individual peculiar phonological 3 and phonemic features which must be mastered and used by the learner for mutual intelligibility with the native speakers and other users of the language. Many learners of a second language cannot make this adjustment successfully. They approximate the phonological features of the second or target language with those of their mother tongue. Put in another way, they allow the speech habits of their mother tongue or their first language to interfere with the speech habits of the target language. This phenomenon, according to Akindele and Adegbite (1999), is known in the language register as phonological interference. Phonological interference is a term which refers to a linguistic occurrence in which two different languages over lap and the linguistic system of one of the languages is transferred into the other in a process of producing the latter which is the second or target language. Interference, according to Baldeh (1990) is the major obstacle in the teaching of the English language and it constitutes a great problem to the learning of a second language for it can hinder mutual understanding and intelligibility and consequently affects performance in target language. This has resulted in the variety of English language in Nigeria called “Nigerian English”. Mgbodile (1999) is of the view that mother tongue interference is a great problem to second language learners of English. The Nigerian child should be taught to perceive and produce 4 correct pronunciation, stress and intonation in the target language, which in Nigeria is English. Teaching correct pronunciation, stress, and intonation to Nigerian children may be difficult as Nigeria is a multilingual country. William (1990) observes that teaching English to students that have different mother tongues other than English is complicated and difficult, and worse still when the learning environment is multilingual. This problem is compounded when one considers the fact that for many students, English is not really their second language but third or even the fourth language. Teaching correct pronunciation, stress and intonation becomes more complex when in a class, Student „A‟ may have a problem of distinguishing the /l/ from /r/ sounds, but this may not be the problem of Student „B‟ whose speech difficulty is with the pronunciation of words like „live‟ and „leave‟ so that they sound differently. Student „C‟s own difficulty may be that he cannot help inserting a vowel sound in a consonant cluster. From the spoken English of many Nigerians, one can identify from which area they come from. This is because different speech communities have different phonological and interference problems. Ogbuehi (2003) points out: “Today, there are many “Shibboleths (speech signs) for identifying people from different areas of Nigeria”. In a contrastive study of English and Nigerian languages, Chukwuma and Otagburuagu (2002), discovered that the Yorubas realize /v/ as /f/, e.g. ‟very‟ 5 becomes „fery‟, / z / does not exist in Yoruba so it is substituted with /s/ e.g. „zeal‟ is pronounced, „seal‟, issue is pronounced „izzue‟. Akindele and Adegbite (1999), also found out that the absence of English sounds such as the voiceless bilabial plosive /p/, voiceless and voiced labio-dental fricative / ѳ/ and /ð/ and the long vowels /I:/, /U:/ and /a:/ in Yoruba, for instance, make it difficult for Yoruba English bilingual to acquire such sounds. Hence, Yoruba English bilingual will produce „pat‟ as /kpæt/, „fever‟ as /fifa/, and „think‟ as „tink‟. The obligatory /h/ are also dropped hence, „house‟ is wrongly pronounced as „ouse‟ „his‟ is wrongly pronounced as „is‟ „hair‟ is wrongly pronounced as „air‟ „honey‟ is wrongly pronounced as „oney‟ In addition, the Hausa learners of English substitute /v/ for /b/, „very good‟ is pronounced „bery good‟, /kw/ is substituted for /k/. So, „go‟ is pronounced „kwo‟, „come‟ is pronounced „kwom‟, whereas „problem‟ is pronounced as „froblem‟. Some times /v/ is dropped in words like‟government‟ which they pronounce as „gworment‟ Onuigbo (1990), observed that a second language learner of English that has Igbo as his first language can produce „pit‟ with relative ease, but the same learner may experience some difficulties in producing „split‟ or „spit‟ because 6 these words have consonant clusters, but the Igbo language has no consonant cluster. Because of this, the Igbo learners of English insert vowel in the midst of the consonants. Onuigbo generalizes that Nigerian languages have no consonant clusters . In the English language, there is a regular occurrence of consonant clusters unlike the Igbo language that has no cluster but has virtually regular and unchanging pattern of (consonant vowel, consonant vowel (CVCV). Folorine (1975) has the same view with Onuigbo that problematic consonant clusters are the major problem which Igbo students encounter in the pronunciation of words. In his article, “The Problems of Students‟ English‟, he states that learners‟ problems may be that the learner either leaves out one element of the problematic cluster or inserts a vowel within the consonant cluster as in „penalty‟ which they put an additional syllable in the word as shown below A B C penalty /pen∂lti /pena:liti/ grateful /gretful/ /gretiful/ Group „B‟ is the correct English pronunciation of the word in column „A‟wheas group „C‟ is the wrongly pronounced Igbo form of group „A‟. Ogbuehi, C.U (2001) points out that the vowel harmony in Igbo words are transferred to the pronunciation of English words, thereby realizing a final vowel pronounced in words with consonant ending as in these groups: 7 A B C Ball /bכ:l/ /Bכ:lu/ Table /teibl/ /tebulu/ Head /hed/ /hedi/ Leg /leg/ /legi/ Group „B‟ is the correct English pronunciation of the words in column A whereas group „C‟ is the Igbo version of group „A‟. Another outstanding phonological problem according to Ugorji (2007) is that some English consonant sounds are not present in the Igbo language e.g. /θ/, /ð/ and /3/. Because of this, the Igbo learners of English substitute /t/ for / θ/, /d/ for /∫/ and /s/. Consequently, Igbos wrongly pronounce these words thus: A b c thief /θif/ /tif/ theory /θiori/ /tiori/ them /ðem/ /dem/ think /θink/ /tink/ casual /Kǽ3ju∂l/ /kǽsu∂l/ Group „B‟ is the correct English pronunciation of group „A‟ but group „C‟ is the wrong Igbo pronunciation of group „A‟. Some Igbo speaking areas of Nigeria interchange the liquid /r/ with the lateral /l/ thus producing such funny pronunciation like 8 „rook‟ instead of „look‟ instead of „bled‟ „flom‟ instead of „from‟ „maly, instead of „many‟ „bred‟ Also the long and the short vowel contrast is rarely made in Igbo as in „bed,‟ /bed/ and „bird‟ /bЗ:d/. These two words are pronounced alike by Igbo learners of English. The /ǽ/ in „cat‟ and /a: / „cart‟ is also pronounced alike. According to Onuigbo (1990), diphthongs are also reduced to single vowels by the Igbo learners of English since the Igbo phonemes are always single. They consequently pronounce, snake / Sneik/ as /Snek/. Phonological problems are not peculiar to Nigerians. It is a common problem to second language users of English from other parts of the world. The Indians for instance, according to Ogbuehi, pronounce words beginning with „v‟ as „w‟. They pronounce vice- chancellor as „wice- chancellor‟. A Cantonese learning English also encounters some problems in phonology. Hensman (1969) asserts that the absence of initial /b/, /d/, /g/, and /z/ from the range of Cantonese consonantal phonemes and the fact that their voiceless equivalents are highly aspirated as in French, constitute difficulties for the Cantonese student in hearing and producing. 9 a distinction between such pairs as „pin‟ and „bin‟ „tried‟ and „died‟, „card‟ and „guard‟, „fine‟ and „vine‟, „sink‟ and „link‟. The absence of /θ/ from the range of Cantones speech sounds constitutes problem for them. Also, because one Cantonse sibilant is a spirant which bridges the contiguous marginal allophones of English consonantal phoneme- /s/, /ð/, /s/, the average Cantonese student has considerable difficulty in differentiating between these consonantal phonemes of English both in speech and in aural comprehension. As a result, there is a confusion between „said‟ and „shed‟, „same‟ and „shame‟, „suit‟ and „shoot‟, „theme‟ and „seem‟, „thinking‟ and „sinking‟. Apart from the above, they substitute /f/ for /θ/ before /r/. So „three gifts‟ is said as „free gifts‟. Phonological problem does not only exist due to mother tongue interference (inter-lingual problem). Phonological problem can also be intralingual. This is the problem that is inherent in the English language itself. Intra-lingual problems result from faulty or partial learning of the target language rather than from language transfer. It is caused by inconsistencies of the target language itself. The English language in itself has different varieties. There are the American English varieties (AmE), the British English variety the Australian English variety which Ugorji (2007) identifies as English dialects. These different dialects have different ways of pronunciation, and this 10 pose a great problem to the learners. The word „schedule‟ for instance, is pronounced „∫edju:l/ by the British but it is pronounced /skedju:l/ by Americans. The internal inconsistencies in English language hinder learning and usage by second language learners and users. This can also be seen in a situation where different spellings may occur in words but in production they are pronounced alike. The long /i:/ vowel sound, for instance, can be realized from different spellings e.g. „e‟ as in be „ee‟ as in tree „ea‟ as in heat „ey; as in key „i‟ as in police „eo‟ as in people One may ask, why are all these realized as a single sound /i:/ when they have different spelling symbol Also the long vowel sound /כ:/ can be realized in these spellings: al as in talk aw as in saw ar as in war oar or as in board as in sport „ore‟ as in core 11 „oor‟ as „ou „ as in in door bought . The problem worsens as some words have the same spelling at a particular position but different pronunciation, words like „food‟, „look‟, flood‟, „blood‟ „good‟, „poor‟. Although these words have double „o‟ the double o‟s ‟ are pronounced differently e.g. „poor‟ is realized as /כ:/ in /pכ:/ „food‟ is realized as /u:/ in /fu:d/ „cook‟ is realized as /u/ in /cuk/ „flood‟ is realized as /Λ/ in /flΛd/ „blood‟ is realized as /Λ/ in /bLΛd/ „good‟ is realized as /u/, in /gud/. A second language learner may just know how to pronounce „good‟, and may over generalize that every word with the spelling „oo‟ is pronounced as /u/ which is wrong. There are still other words that have no double „o‟ but the sound is realized as /u:/ as in „pull‟, full‟ to mention but two. There are still words that are exactly the same in pronunciation but their spellings are different. Oluikpe, Anasiudu, Otagburuagu, Ogbonna and Onuigbo (1984) advise that words like these need to be consciously learnt by second language teachers and distinctly taught to second language learners of 12 English. These pairs of word are pronounced alike but they are spelt differently: „coase „ /kכ:s/, „courses‟ „alter‟ /כ:lt∂/, „alter‟ /כ:lt∂/ „fare‟ /fe∂/ , „fair‟ /fe∂/ „here‟ /hi∂/, „hear‟ peace‟ /pi:s/, „piece „ /Kכ:s/ /hi∂/ /pi:s/ These pairs of words pose problems to the second language learners. These internal inconsistencies in the English language pose a great problem to both the second language learners and the native speakers of the language alike. The phonological inconsistencies in English have become so pervasive to both native and second users of the language that Ogbuehi (2003:30) citing Spencer points out, The phonology of a second language will almost always receive some imprint from the phonology of the mother tongue …. It is a common problem with second language users of English from other areas and even with those that speak English as a first language. This problem is compounded as some languages in themselves have different varieties called dialect. In Igbo language for instance, the extent to which Edem dialect post phonological problems to the learners of the English 13 language that come from the area has remain a matter of wide speculation. There are about two hundred dialects, of Igbo, of which Edem dialect is one of them. Statement of the Problem There has been a public out cry about the standard of performance of the graduates of our educational institutions. The consensus appears to be that the level of performance in spoken and written English has fallen remarkably. It has been observed by West African Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (WASSSCE) Chief Examiners‟ report 2001, 2002, and 2003) that most students score little or nothing in the oral part of the English language examination. It has also been observed that the oral communicative strength of Igbo learners of English is very low. Some students find it difficult to communicate effectively, while others shy away from discussions in English. In a school excursion carried out by Comprehensive Junior Secondary School, Edem to Saint Teresa‟s College, Nsukka in May 2006, it was discovered that the students from Edem were not only shy but were unable to communicate well in English. Most of them got intimidated when they were called up to speak or answer questions in English. 14 One wonders what the problem could be. In pursuit of the possible cause of this poor performance in oral aspect of the English language, the phonological problems of Edem Secondary School Students are examined. Purpose of the Study Basically, the purpose of this study is to find out the phonological problems of secondary school students of Edem origin when they speak the English language. Specifically, this study attempts to: a. Carry out a contrastive study of English and Edem dialect of Igbo. b. Find out Edem-Igbo dialect sounds that do not exist in English and English sound that do not have a corresponding Igbo sound segment. c. Find out how the Edem Igbo speakers of English annex or approximate their dialect sound that do not have corresponding equivalent in English sound to English sounds. d. Find out possible solutions to these problems. Significance of the Study The result of this study will provide the students with the information on the differences that exist between the Edem – Igbo dialect and the English language and bearing this in mind, they will be able to check their progress in English. 15 Curricula Planners and designers may profit from this study because it could guide them on areas to place emphasis on in planning curricula in order to improve the overall performance of those who use the language. Publishers of books on the English language may find this work helpful because it could help them to identify the problem areas for the Igbo users of English so that they can focus attention on such areas in their publications. If these problems are systematically and judiciously addressed, learners and users of English as a L2 will make tremendous improvement in the language. To the teachers of English, the result of this study will provide an invaluable insight into the nature of the problems and the different ways they manifest themselves, so that they will know how to manage them. This modest endeavour will be a positive move in the direction of increasing the corpus of knowledge and of scholarship in the area. Above all, this study may stimulate the minds of scholars to explore more comprehensively the issues and findings that have been brought to the fore with a view to tackling decisively the problems of phonology in English of Nigerian users of the language. 16 Scope of the Study This study will be carried out in Edem in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu State, and it will use students of the senior secondary II. The study will focus only on the segmental phonemes leaving off the suprasegmental for proper management. Research Questions The following research questions will guide the study: 1. To what extent does the annexing or approximating of English segmental absence in Igbo affect the Edem students‟ performance in spoken English? 2. To what extent does the differences in the speech symbols of Edem students studying English affect their performance in oral English? 3. To what extent does the absence of consonantal clusters in the Igbo language affect the Edem learners of English proficiency in the oral aspect of English? 4. To what extent does the intra-lingual problem in English affect the performance of Edem students of English in their oral production of the English language? 17 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter presents a review of related literature to the topic under study. To place this chapter in its proper perspective, it will be divided into four parts, namely: Conceptual Framework: discussed under Interference Language in language teaching and learning Error Theoretical Framework Approach to Error Error Analysis Value of Error Analysis Weakness of Error Analysis Attitude to Error Analysis Contrastive Analysis Empirical Study The empirical study which will concentrate on the actual research work done on phonological problem in spoken English will be divided into Non Nigerian based study, and Nigerian based study. Summary of Literature Review 18 Conceptual Framework This deals with definition of items used in this study. It is discussed under Interference and language in language teaching and learning Error. Interference Interference according to Akindele and Adegbite (1999) is that instance of deviation from the norm of either language which occurs in the speech of a bilingual as a result of his familiarity with more than one language. Interference phenomenon are of two types, namely inter lingual interference and intra lingual interference. Interlingua Interference is the tendency of a language learner to transfer the form and meaning of his native language and culture to the foreign language and culture both productively when attempting to speak the language and receptively when attempting to grasp and understand the language as practiced by natives. There is always phonological difference between languages. The difference in the phonological system results in phonic interference which arises when a bilingual identifies phonemes of the secondary system with one in the primary system and in producing it, subjects it to the phonic rules of the primary language. It is the first language (L1) that actually causes interlignual interferences. Inter-lingual interference is a negative transfer that results when two languages that have different rules and forms are used by a bilingual person. 19 A. Inter-lingual interference according to Wang (2007) occurs because there exist some similarities between the mother tongue and the target language. Where similar, the learner may transfer concepts from mother tongue into the target language. So when the learner feels he could express all in equivalent way, he falls into a pitfall. For instance, despite that there are areas of similarities between the English language and Nigerian language according to Onuigbo (1996), there are also significant differences in some areas of phonology, morphology and syntax. The differences in the phonological systems of different languages result in phonic interference. The Igbo learners of English for instance, tend to substitute the dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/ in the English language with alveolar plosive /t/ and /d/ respectively, thus, resulting in error in pronunciation as follows Word English Pronunciation Igbo Pronunciation (wrong) They /ðei/ /de/ Thin /θin/ /tin/ There /ði∂/ /di∂/ Through /θru/ /tru/ Thing /θin/ /tio/ Study in the syllable structure of Nigeria languages reveals that most of Nigerian languages do not accept consonant clusters but the English language 20 accepts them. Consonant clusters are difficult for Nigerians learning English as L2. They insert vowels between each pair of consonants. Word English Penalty /pen∂lti/ Screw /skru/ Igbo /pen∂liti/ Hausa /pen∂liti/ /sukuru/ /sukaru/ Driver /driv∂/ /draiva/ /draiba/ School /skul/ /sukulu/ /sukulu/ Intra lingual interference is another type of interference which does not have connection with the first or native language. Wang (2007) asserts that intra-lingual interference comes from the target language itself. It is error that is caused by the inconsistencies that exist in the target language itself. B. Intra lingual Interference: Error may occur not only because of differences between the native and the foreign languages, but because constructions are difficult from the point of view of the target language. Errors like that have no connection with the first or native language. This type of error is called intra-lingual error. It is not peculiar to the non-native speakers of English only, native speakers battle with the error. Wang (2007) asserts that intra lingual interference comes from target language (TL) itself. He said that error caused by the inconsistencies exists in the target language itself. Wang discussed three types of intra-lingual errors namely: 21 1. Over Generalization: Here, the learner searches for patterns and regularities in the target language in order to reduce the learning load by a particular rule which appears to work. The learner may not look for exception; he tends to over-S generalize the rules. 2. Incomplete Application of the Rules: This arises when the language users or the learners fail to apply completely the rules in the language. 3. Cross Association: This happens when two or more items are similar in form and /or in meaning. The elements remain closely associated in memory. If there is an attempt to recall them, the wrong one may be selected or the element of both may be mixed. Learners and users of English tend to cross associate words like Alter Weather altar whether Cause Faithful C. course fateful Non-Linguistic Interference: Psychological factor and the objective environment could lead to this type of errors in language. D. Cultural Interference: This is interference caused by cultural background of one‟s mother tongue when it exerts a certain effect on his second language acquisition. 22 Whatever type of interference that is experienced has to do with the incorrect usage. Language in Language Teaching and Learning Language is any particular system of human communication, example the French language, the Hindi language, the Igbo language, and the English language to mention but four. Languages are usually not spoken with the same degree of fluency every where in the world. Differences in the way a language is spoken by different people are described in terms of regional and social variations. In a language one can get its different forms. These different forms of the same language are called dialects. Richards,J ,Platt J,,webe, H (1985) define dialect as a variety of a language spoken in one part of a country or by people that belong to a particular social class. The variety is different in some words, grammar and or pronunciation from one form of the same language. A dialect is always associated with a particular accent. In language teaching and learning first language (L1), mother tongue (MT), second language (L2), foreign language (FL), target language (TL) are relevant. First language and mother tongue are mostly used synonymously. The first language, mother tongue or better still, native language according to Akindele and Adegbite (1999) is the only language of a monolingual person 23 which is acquired naturally in his native environment and which meets all his linguistic needs. Mother tongue is usually the sequentially, first language of a bi/multilingual person. Occasionally, a sequentially first language could become a mother tongue. For instance, a Yoruba English bilingual who was born in and grew up in England uses English for most of his needs without having or recourse to use Yoruba. Here, English can be called his mother tongue. Again in multi-lingual community where a child may gradually shift from the primary use of one language to the primary use of another may be because of influence of a school language. First language, according Richards,J. et al (1985) may refer to the language the child feels most comfortable using. Mother tongue is usually the sequentially first language of a bi/multilingual person. This is also referred to as the language in which a bi/multilingual person conducts his everyday activities in which he has the greatest linguistics facility or intuitive knowledge. The person is a native speaker and is exposed to the language twenty-four hours daily. He uses the language both at formal or informal interaction. He understands the rules of pronunciation, syntax, lexis and discourse without having course to refer to texts for correct usage of these aspects of his/her mother tongue. Mother tongue is a language which the users employ in expressing their nationalistic spirit. 24 A second language (L2) can be defined as a language which is usually the sequentially second language of a bilingual person. It may or may not be the sequentially second language of a bilingual person. It may be the fourth language of a bilingual individual, which however functions as second language in societal bilingualism. A second language according to Akindele and Adegbite (1999) is a variety in which a bi/ multilingual person conducts his every day activities but shares this role with another language in which the speaker has greater linguistic facilities or intuitive knowledge. This is the case of the English language in Nigeria. The English language is a second language for the Nigeria English bilingual. Second language is not a native language in a country, but it is widely used as a medium of communication education and in government. It is used along side with another language or languages. A foreign language is not a native language in a country. It is usually studied either for communication with foreigners who speak the language or for reading printed material in the language. In North American applied Linguistic usage, according to Richard J. et al (1985), foreign language and second language are often used to mean the same in this sense, but in British usage, a distinction is made as shown above. Target language (TL) can also mean second or foreign language. It is a language that a learner is striving and making effort to learn. 25 Error Any language consists of a set of rules for generating phonologically, syntactically and semantically well-formed sentence. The use of wrong rules results in ill-formed sentences and sounds. Errors are, therefore, flawed side of a learner‟s speech or writing. Error is traceable to interference. Error in the speech and writing of a second or foreign language learner is the use of linguistic items (word, grammatical item, speech act) in a way which a fluent or native speaker of the language regards as showing faulty or incomplete learning. Errors according to Jack, John and Herdi (1985) can sometimes be classified according to vocabulary (Lexical error), grammar (syntactic error), misunderstanding of speaker‟s intention or meaning (interaction error), production of the wrong communicative effect e.g. through faulty use of a speech act or one of the rules of speaking (pragmatic error), and wrong pronunciation (phonological error). Oluikpe (1997) quoting Corder (1973 and 1774) posits two contrasting errors. She noted these two types of error as expressive and receptive errors. The expressive errors according to Oluikpe are errors that manifest when a learner expresses himself. They are wrong forms of the code because they occur when the wrong rules are used, causing strings of sentences which may be phonologically, syntactically or semantically deviant to occur. The receptive errors are those errors which prevent the hearer or 26 reader from understanding the discourse which he is decoding. It may be oral or written. Receptive errors result because the decoder is decoding information from a false premise. Such errors normally occur when the learner is not familiar with the context of the discourse and difficult to measure except through comprehension passage in the errors which remain with the reader through a long period. Theoretical Framework Approach to the Study of Error In discussing phonological problems, one is talking about errors in language learning. Error is a deviation from the norm. Anasiudu (2001) defines error as a systematic deviation from the target language by a non-native speaker. He observes that it is very unrealistic to reckon on language learning without error. He adds that errors are bound to occur in one form or another and to varying degree of frequency in the course of language learning. Anizoba (1996) asserts that errors provide feedback to the teachers regarding the effectiveness of his teaching materials and techniques. To him, knowledge of the problem areas of the learner will enable the teacher to focus his attention on these areas and so devote more time to them with a view to minimizing future occurrence. Anizoba is of the view that it is important that English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers investigate properly and establish the sources 27 and causes of learners‟ errors so as to apply appropriate corrective techniques and remedial strategies to deal with them. In discussing language errors in proper perspectives, there are two schools of applied linguist that have different things to say about error and second language learning. These two schools believe and see language as a code or a system, but share different views about language learning. These schools are applied linguists with structural orientation who use the principle of contrastive analysis as their tool for language teaching, and the applied linguists with transformational generative orientation who utilize error analysis (EA) as their tool for language teaching. Applied Linguists with structural orientation are empiricists who believe only in language observable data. They only believe and see language as a system with identifiable characteristics, and maintain that linguistic performance is superior to linguistic competence. This is why they emphasize speech more than writing. They believe that speech is primary while writing is only secondary. In line with the behaviourism, the applied linguists of structural order, according to (Wang 2007), see language learning as habit formation and as such, an utterance is believed to be a response to a stimulus which is internal or external, physical or verbal. 28 Furthermore, there is a belief that a response reinforced and repeated is learnt and this belief has greatly influenced methodology. In this school, meaning is not taught and explanations are considered unnecessary. The accepted meaning is inherent in an appropriate response. So there is no need for any conscious teaching of meaning. In summary the structuralized mode of language teaching is solely based on intensive practice as a means of developing the required habits. Anything ascribed to the mind is unacceptable because it is unobservable. By implication, according to Anasiudu (2001), language is not considered a creative process and so no serious thought is given to the role of the mind in language. They also believe that in learning a new language, transfer of habits is involved, and incorrect forms could be transferred. So, to avoid transferring and learning errors from the mother tongue to the target language, the applied linguists with structural orientation deploy contrastive analysis (CA) as an important tool for language teaching and learning. Error Analysis Error analysis has to do with identifying classifying, explaining, and utilizing of patterns and types of error to predict the error which inhibits process of language learning. Wang (2007) is of the view that approach to error in spoken English is composed of five stages, which include: isolation, 29 (also called discovery), identification, explanation, experimentation, and learning acquisition. The first stage in error analysis is discovery or recognition. Wang prefers to call it isolation. This is the key stage of this analysis, and teachers should note the whole errors respectively. The second stage is identification. Here the type of error is identified as either pragmatic errors or linguistic error. If it falls into linguistics kind of error, the teacher should sub-divide it into different categories viz: pronunciation, morphological, semantic, syntactic errors etc. For different types he should mark with different signs such as „G‟ (grammatical errors); „S‟ (syntactic error); „M‟ (morphological error) and so on. The third stage of error analysis is explanation. In this stage, the teacher describes not only the errors he has identified and is about to treat, but also where the problem occurred and what it involves. He explains why the learner has not been able to speak or write the language well. The final stage and the fifth stage of error analysis is learning acquisition which Wang (2007) calls providing correctness. Here the students may learn quickly, re-learn later or learn slowly and re-learn periodically. Days later, the teacher may check some points concerning their errors, give some topics for communication, and see if they can perform better in the real communication situation. 30 This five-stage approach avoids both the monotony and stress of intense audio-lingual classrooms. It is less artificial and yields result as good as, or better than traditional error correction. Value of Error Analysis The learner‟s error is symptomatic of the problem encountered by the language learner. Hence error analysis is said to be diagnostic. Anizoba (1996) is of the view that error provides feedback to the teacher regarding the effectiveness of his teaching material and technique. He continues that knowledge of problem area of the learner will enable the teacher to focus his attention on these areas and devote time to them with a view to minimizing future occurrence. These errors expose the weak aspect of the syllable or teaching methods for the teacher to see and make amendments. It provides data for positive reconstruction of the syllable. 31 Weaknesses of Error Analysis Error analysis takes a lot of time in its operation which includes detecting, classifying, explaining, and correcting errors. Besides, inexperienced teachers of the language may not recognize or detect error themselves as error in one sentence could be complicated. Error analysis requires linguistic terms such as mechanical accuracy, wordiness, ambiguity, vagueness, concord, etc, for the description of errors. It also requires psycho-linguistic terms such as over-generalization, memory limitation, aphasia, tiredness etc for the description of errors. The description between these two forms of classification of errors may not be clear to all language teachers hence confusion between the two forms of classification will lead to some errors in error analysis. Attitude to error In the course of language learning, errors are bound to occur. Behaviourists according to Anasiudu (2001) sees language as a process of transfer of habits from L1 to L2. According to Otagburuagu (1997) behaviourist theory has its foundation in the work of Edward Thorndike in his publication, “Animal Intelligence”, where he tried to tie learning to the establishment of links between sense impression and external stimulus. 32 The behaviourists insist that error is very inhibitory in language learning and so a speaker of a language should through stimulus and response practices learn language so perfectly that he commits no error in his language learning. Behaviourists maintain accuracy in language learning. Otagburuagu concludes that this theory has to do with stamping in the correct things and stamping out error totally from the language. The teacher of a language should not condone error at all. They encourage teacher frontedness in language teaching and learning so that the teacher will monitor and prevent the occurrence of errors. Behaviourists believe that the learning of the second language entails associating the habits of the first language to that of the second language. It is the association that leads to error in L2 learning most of the time. On the other hand, the mentalists do not believe in transference of errors from one language to another language. Nevertheless, they anticipate errors but contend that the errors occur in second language learning. This mentalist theory, according to Otagburuagu (1997) became necessary because of a shift in psychological thought and a general feeling of dissatisfaction and disgust which teachers and psychologist had about the stimulus response learning theory. A new learning theory was then formulated based on human insight and problem solving. This theory believes that a learner acts as intelligible as he can under the circumstances that confront him. Mentalists do not believe in 33 the “Stimulus-Response “(S-R)” process of learning. They believe that a learner calls attention to thinking, understanding and producing answer out of insight. They believe in problem-solving in which the learner when exposed to the data of the first language and the second language thinks and can learn out of that. He does this by postulating hypothesis and trying out the hypothesis to know whether it works out or not. If it does not work, he postulates another hypothesis. From this, one can see that mentalists see error as an integral part of language learning process, but behaviourist see error as a taboo. Contrastive Analysis As it has been earlier observed, applied linguists with structural orientation deploy contrastive analysis (CA) as a diagnostic tool which enables the language learners/experts to find out the similarities and the differences between languages at particular levels and in given contexts. Contrastive analysis is geared towards finding out those features in one‟s first language that impair one‟s learning of a second language. This is important to the second language learner of English because when the differences in the languages are known to the learner, he will become conscious of it at usage, and this helps him to minimize errors. 34 Ogbuehi (2003) asserts that the wrong usage by learners of a language is a direct result of the transfer of habits from the first language to the target language. The properties of the mother tongue exercise an influence in the course of second language learning. Akindele and Adegbite (1999) support the above and assert that the properties of the first language exercise an influence in the course of second language learning. The reason is that learners transfer sounds, structures and usages from one language to the other. They went further to differentiate between two types of transfer namely: negative and positive transfer. Positive transfer proves to be acceptable in using the first language (L1) habits in the second language (L2) setting because, they are similar. When they differ, it causes negative transfer generally known as interference. Here the first language habits cause error in the second language (L2) usage. Contrastive analysis is geared towards predicting and illuminating the problems that second language learners may face in the learning of the second language by comparing of the L1 and the L2. The problems could be curbed after contrastive analysis of the two languages. While the applied linguists with structural orientation use contrastive analysis (CA) as a tool for language analysis, the applied linguists with the transformational generative orientation to language learning and teaching make 35 use of error analysis (EA). They believe that error can occur in second language learning. Empirical Studies The empirical studies here will be presented in chronological order according to the year the work was done. It will also be divided into foreign based empirical studies and Nigerian- based empirical studies. Foreign Based Empirical Studies Scott and Tucher (1974) examined the oral and written proficiency of twenty-two Arabic–Speaking students enrolled in a low intermediate intensive English course. The aim was to examine errors generated by the subjects in terms of performance mistake, mother-tongue interference and false intralanguage analogy. After examination of data, they concluded that the majority of errors are attributed to intra-language difficulties rather than mother-tongue interference. They also indicated that more errors are made at the oral aspect of language other than the written aspect. The work above puts two languages under consideration where one was the mother-tongue and the other, the target language, hence a bilingual consideration. This work is centered on the use of English as a second language (L2). They used on the spot observation of spoken English of their subjects as well as written compositions as their instruments for data 36 collection. This study is also going to use tape recording as well as direct observation of the subjects for data collection. Kihl (1993) attempted to single out phonological inventory of a young Danish school boy from his spelling errors. The method used was the type called “explicit analytical procedure”. Using this method, after data collection and classification of the sound to letter patterns of misspellings, what followed was reverse of spelling rules. It was discovered that the letter-sound relations of the phonetic errors was a good approximation to the subject‟s phonemes. This research on error resembles this present work so far as the focus is on error as exhibited by young users of the English language and above all, it has to do with phonological errors which predominantly account for various patterns of error in written English of the subject under investigation. Lenhardtova (1993) carried out a research on phonological errors on the language performance of Slovak students learning English as foreign language (EFC). To do this, a contrastive analysis of Slovak and English phonemes was done. It was found out that the errors were of different qualities and distribution in the two language skills of perception and production, which have implications for second language teaching methods. Cox (1994) carried out a comparative error analysis. The purpose was: (1) To determine whether Francophone and Anglophone make similar or different mistakes 37 (2) To decide whether the two groups: The Francophone and the Anglophone could be taught together without prejudicing one or the other. To do this, the researcher had a lexico-phonological errors identified in spoken English prepared on diskette. The author presented the result of his analysis, which led him to conclude that the groups make similar errors and that combining the two groups has no major disadvantage. Nyamasyo, (1994) tried to find out the nature of phonological errors committed by Kenya‟s pre-university students (Secondary school students). To do this, he used tape-recorder in the collection of his data from few students of small randomly chosen samples of the students. So he used a corpus-based approach to describe the pattern of phonological errors of Kenyas‟ preuniversity students. He discovered that there was a variety of sources from the differences in the sound system of English and the first language of the students in the study. The research conclusion goes thus to advocate: 1. The teaching of phonetics, and 2. The inclusions of CA approach in pedagogy of the English as a second language (ESL) students, and Kenyan students in particular. This research resembles the present work as it is centred on phonological errors as manifested in spoken English by Edem. This project also considers the phonetically errors in spoken English. The method of data 38 collection is the same in each case since the two are corpus based recorded speeches of the subject on which the method of the errors were found out, but the language which may induces the error is different. Nigerian Based Empirical Studies Atunwo (1976) focused, on phonological problems of Igbo bilinguals using 60 students drawn from SSII in Nsukka zone. In collecting the data, the researcher used a competence-based test construction and a questionnaire for gathering information on the variables. In administering the test, the respondents were made to produce given words in isolation. The words were carefully selected to include phonemes absent in Igbo phonemic stock. Examples are diphthongs, dentals, central vowels and mid-front vowel. There are lots of similarities between Ngboji‟s work and the present work. Firstly, both samples are secondary school students. Secondly, both studies focus on phonological problems of second language learners. In a research carried out by Ikwuka (1996) which was based on the pattern of phonological deviation in the undergraduate English of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, he found out that phonic interference is the major source of error in the spoken English of the sampled population. In trying to find out similarities and the differences between the phoneme of the English language and Ndikelionwu dialect of the Igbo 39 language so as to highlight the problems the native speakers of Ndikelionwu may encounter in learning the English language Ike (1998) carried out a contrastive analysis of the two languages. He identified areas of similarities in phonemes as a factor that facilitates the learning of the English language and the area of differences in the phonemes of the two languages as a factor that inhibits the learning of the English language. This present work is also a contrastive analysis of two languages (Igbo and English) the purpose of which is to identify the similarities and differences in the phoneme as a factor that facilitates and inhibits the learning of the English language by Edem Igbo speakers. In 1990, Enem tried to expose the Igbo native speakers to the phonological errors they would encounter while learning the Hausa language. He tried a phonological comparison of Igbo and the Hausa language to find out the extent of influence, which one has on the progress of the other, predominantly using a contrastive analysis methodology. Okpara (2001) tried to trace the student‟s phonological errors so as to be able to solve them. The area of the study is Onitsha Local Government Area of Anambra State. To carry out his investigation, he asked the students to identify vowel sounds as well as pronounce some words which were recorded in the cassette. He concluded that interlignual and intralingual errors were the two 40 broad classes of phonological errors committed by the students. According to the work, interlingual errors emanate from influence of the mother tongue. Anozie (2002) carried out a study to find out pattern of error in spoken Igbo using the students in the Igbo Department of the Federal College of Education Eha-Amufu. He used cassette and tape recorder in the collection of his corpus. He discovered that social background negatively affects performance in spoken Igbo of the sampled population. This work centred on one and the same language just like the present work. In the present work, the same method of cassette recording and on-the- spot assessment of the sample population is to be used to elicit responses from which data shall be drawn for analysis. Summary of the Literature Review The work reviewed revealed that learners of language commit errors unavoidably as they make progress in mastering the target language. It is understood from the review that errors are transferable from L1 to L2 and that these errors could be prevented as much as possible. We also discovered that errors rather than emanating from one language into another can be intralingual. Here, the belief is that errors exist but these errors are inherent in the target language. 41 From the empirical studies, it was observed that phonological problems have captivated the interest of many scholars across the globe, and different scholars both foreign and Nigerian have examined different phonological problem in language teaching and learning using contrastive analysis. On the Nigeria-based empirical studies, it was discovered that the interest of researchers is predominantly on communication errors of secondary school students, university and pre-university students and none on primary school pupils. Most of the contrastive analyses apart from few ones are on the English language as the target language whatever the other language the learner has acquired as the mother tongue. Several works, according to the literature review, have been done on phonological problems of secondary school students as they move towards the mastering of a target language the English language. However, no work has been done on the phonological problems of Edem secondary school students in their learning of the English language. This is, therefore, the main focus of the work under study. 42 CHAPTER THREE RESEACH METHOD This chapter presents the methodology and the procedure used in this research. This research work is presented under the following headings: Design of the study, Area of the study, Population of the study, Sample and Sampling Technique, Instrument for Data Collection, Validation of Instrument, Method of Data Collection and Method of Data Analysis. Design of the Study The type of research design used in this study is the descriptive survey design because it was aimed at collecting data on features and facts about a given population and describing it in a systematic manner. This work was based on collecting facts about Edem Igbo dialect and describing it systematically. Area of the Study This study was carried out in Edem community in Nsukka Local Government Area of Enugu State. Edem has five secondary schools, four of the five are made up of both junior and senior secondary schools, while the fifth is only a junior secondary school. Edem community was focused on, in this study because it is a strategic town in Nsukka Local Government Area. It 43 is one of the communities whose citizens exhibit serious difficulties in spoken English. Population of the Study The population for this study constitutes the students from SSII in all the four secondary schools in Edem. The fifth school was not included in the population because it is just a junior secondary school. SSII was chosen for this study because it is the intermediate class whose students are actually going through the teaching of oral English, SSI is just the beginning of the senior secondary, and are going through the introductory teaching of oral English and so it was not used, while SSIII was not used, for they are already getting ready for their external examinations and so their teaching mostly takes the shape of summary and revision. Table I: Population Distribution School Class No. of Students School 1 SSII 100 School 2 SSII 40 School 3 SSII 40 School 4 SSII 22 School 5 SSII 202 44 Sample of the Study The researcher intends to employ the proportionate stratified random sampling to ensure that all the schools were incorporated. Twenty five percent of the total number of the students in each school will be used using systematic sampling procedure. Table II: Sample Distributions School Class Sample School 1 SSII 25 School 2 SSII 15 School 3 SSII 15 School 4 SSII 6 Total 61 Instrument for Data Collection The instrument consists of two components. The first is questionnaire designed to elicit information on the bio-data of the respondent. This section is to indicate the name of the school and the class of the respondent. The second is a self-made competence test (phonological reading passage) since the nature of the work did not allow the use of a ready made reading passage as it was designed to analyze the phonological problem of the students. It follows, therefore, that there has to be available what has been produced from the self- 45 made competence test. The self-made competence test is made in such a way that the likely phonological problems the researcher feels that the students would have were incorporated in it. This survey method comprises a questionnaire, direct observation and recorded speech by the use of a tape recorder. Validation of the Instrument The self-made competence test is given to a panel of three specialists in the English language education to face validate it. They demanded that the passage be made easier instead of a rather difficult passage prepared by the researcher. They also said that the passage should not be too long so that the researcher would be able to go round all the schools and students within two weeks using the official English language periods in each school. Their comments were incorporated in the final version of the instrument used in this research. Reliability of the Instrument In determining the reliability of the instrument, test retest method was used. Ten students were used for a sample, while 3 raters rated them. The correlation coefficient was calculated using Kendall‟s coefficient of concordance. The degree of stability of the test obtained was 0.95. So, this instrument has a high reliability rate. 46 Administration of the Instrument In each of the schools, the sample students were to be spoken to by the researcher for them to understand that the research would not form part of their school assessment. They would also be told not to write their names or their registration numbers on the bio-data forms provided, rather the name of their school and their classes should be written. These preliminary remarks would make them feel free and natural during the exercise. The self-made competence test (phonological reading passage) would be given to the students by the researcher with the help of the subject teachers during the English language lesson period and the rest students listened. The errors that researcher envisages would be staggered throughout the passage to prevent the testees from predicting what the researcher is looking for. The researcher by the use of a tape recorder, records the reading of these tests. The students were to hand in their bio-data forms to the researcher at the end of each test exercise. Method of Data Analysis Percentage will be used as the statistical tool for the analysis of the data. 47 CHAPTER IV This chapter presents the analysis of data based on the research questions earlier presented for the study. In carrying out this, the results of the reading test of the students from the four secondary schools are presented in tables and finally, the summary of the four schools were made. TABLE I :The errors committed by the students in school I S/N The errors of students 1 Total No. of errors in the passage The use of /t/sound for / θ/ sound 275 Total No. of Percentage errors of error committed by committed students 265 96.36% 2 The use of /d/ sound for / δ/ 550 519 94.36% sound 3 The use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound 600 597 99.50% 4 The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound 650 0 0% 5 The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound 250 49 19.60% 6 Vowel harmony 150 95 63.33% 7 Internal inconsistency 75 66 88.00% In school I the error that has the highest percentage is the use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound with 99.50%. Error of using /t/sound for / θ/ sound and /d/ sound for / δ/ sound have 96.36% and 94.36% respectively. Error of vowel harmony has 63.33% while error caused by internal inconsistency has 88.00%. The error of the use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound has 19.60% while the error of the use of /l/ sound to /n/ sound is 0%. 48 TABLE I I:The errors committed by the students in school II S/N Type of error 1 The use of /t/sound for / θ/ sound Total No. Total No. of Percentage of errors in errors of error the passage committed by committed students 165 152 92.12% 2 The use of /d/sound for / δ/ sound 330 300 83.33% 3 The use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound 360 354 98.33% 4 The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound 390 0 0% 5 The use of /l/ sound for /r/sound 150 30 20.00% 6 Vowel harmony 90 55 61.11% 7 Internal inconsistency 45 40 88.89% In school 2, the error that has the highest percentage is the use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound with 98.33%. The use of /t/ sound for / θ/ and /d/ sound for /ð/ sound is also high with 92.12% and 83.33% respectively. Error of internal inconsistency has 88.89% while error of vowel harmony has 61.11%. The error of the use of /l/ for /r/ has a very low percentage of 20.00% while the error of the use of /l/ for /n/ has 0%I 49 TABLE III :The errors committed by the students in school III S/N Type of error Total No. of errors in the passage Percentage of error committed 165 Total No. of errors committed by students 152 1 The use of /t/ sound for /θ/ sound 2 The use of /d/sound for / δ/sound 330 309 93.64% 3 The use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound 360 355 98.61% 4 The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound 390 0 0% 5 The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound 150 10 6.67% 6 Vowel harmony 90 60 66.67% 7 Internal inconsistency 45 41 91.11% 90.30% In school 3, the error that has the highest percentage is the use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound with 98.61%. The use of /t/ sound for / θ/ sound and /d/ sound for /ð/ sound have 90.30% and 93.64% respectively. Error caused by internal inconsistency has 91.11% while error of vowel harmony has 66.67%. The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound is very low with 06.67%. The error of the use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound is 0%. 50 TABLE IV :The errors committed by the students in school IV S/N Type of error 1 The use of /t/ sound for /θ/ sound Total No. of errors in the passage 66 Total No. of Percentage of errors error committed committed by students 55 83.33% 2 The use of /d/sound for / δ/sound 132 109 82.58% 3 The use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound 144 140 97.22% 4 The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound 156 0 0% 5 The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound 60 0 0% 6 Vowel harmony 36 24 66.67% 7 Internal inconsistency 9 7 77.78% In school 4, the error that has the highest percentage is the use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound and it has 97.22%. The use of /t/ sound for / θ/ sound and /d/ sound for /ð/ sound have 83.33% and 82.58%. Error caused by internal inconsistency is 77.78% while the error of vowel harmony has 66.67%. The percentage error of the use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound and /l/ sound for /n/ sound have 0%. 51 TABLE V:The Summary of errors committed by the students from the four Schools tS/N Type of error 1 School School School School Total Percentage I II II IV The use of /t/sound for / θ/ Total error in the 275 165 165 66 671 passage 92.45% Error committed 2 265 153 149 55 621 the 550 330 330 132 1342 The use of /d/ sound for /ð/ sound Total error in passage 92.18% Total error committed 3 519 300 309 109 1237 the 600 360 360 144 1464 The use /n/ sound for /l/ sound Total error in passage Total error committed 98.77% 597 354 355 140 1446 52 4 The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound Total No. of Error 650 Total No. of error 0 390 390 156 1586 0 0 0 0 00% committed 5 The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound 6 7 Total No. for error 250 150 150 60 610 Total error committed 49 30 10 0 89 Total No. of error 150 90 90 36 366 Total error committed 95 55 60 24 234 Total error 75 45 45 9 174 Total error committed 66 40 41 7 154 14.15% Vowel harmony 63.93% Internal inconsistency 85.50% Summary of findings The research findings make the following revelations. 1. The first research question which concerns itself with annexing and approximating of English segment absence in Igbo shows that the percentage error of approximation in the use of /l/ sound for /θ/ sound is 92.45%. The use of /d/ sound for /ð/ sound is 92.18% 53 2. Research question two which attempts to find out the extent the difference in speech symbols of Edem students studying English affect their performance in oral English shows that the percentage use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound is 98.77%. The percentage using /l/ sound for /n/ sound is 0%, and the percentage error of the use of /l/ for /r/ is 14.59% 3. Research question three which attempts to find out the extent vowel harmony in Igbo language affects Edem learners of English proficiency in oral English shows that the percentage error is 63.93%. 4. The fourth finding based on the research question which aims at finding out the extent intra-lingual (internal consistency) problem in English affects the performance of Edem student learner of English in their oral production of the English language shows that the percentage error is 88.51% The percentage error for the whole work is 65.27%(see appendix viii) 54 CHAPTER V INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS In this chapter, interpretation and discussion of result of the research are undertaken and the educational implication of the findings are also discussed. Approximating and annexing of English segments absent in Igbo affect the Edem students‟ performance in spoken English. From the research finding, it was discovered that 92.45% of the students from Edem use /t/ sound in place of / θ/ sound. This shows that the problem of using /t/ sound for /θ/ sound that has been discovered by other researchers is also predominant in Edem English learners. It was also discovered that 92.18 of Edem students learners of English use /d/ sound in place of /ð/ sound. This also shows that the phonological problem of using /d/ in place of /ð/ is predominant in Edem as it has been discovered earlier by other researchers as one of the phonological problems of the Igbo learners of English. Below are erroneous pronunciation that can be heard in the mouth of English learners from Edem. Thief is pronounced /tif/. 55 Thought is pronounced /tot/ The ,, ,, /di/ Those ,, ,, /dos/ Father ,, ,, Them ,, ,, /fada/ /dem/ In the misuse of symbol /l/ and /n/,. 98.77% of the sampled population use /n/ for /l/. From this it is shown that the use of /n/ for /l/ is a phonological problem to Edem Secondary School students learners of English. This error is not found among other Igbo L2 English learners.Hence London is pronounced /Nondon/ Zero percent use /l/ for /n/, this shows that Edem students do not have phonological problem of using /l/ for /n/,though this was discovered as a phonological error in some Igbo Learners of English .So the symbols /l/ and /n/ are not used interchangeably in Edem. Though both are in Edem dialect, it is the lateral /l/ that is wrongly pronounced as nasal /n/, and not vice versa. The percentage of the misuse of /l/ for /r/ is very low, and so we discard it as a phonological error of Edem Secondary School students. From errors that emanate from vowel harmony, the Edem Secondary School students learning English insert vowel in between every consonant From earlier researchers,this is a major phonological problem that Igbo Learner of English face hence delightful is pronounced /delitiful/, and every 56 word that ends in a consonant a final vowel is added, hence head is pronounced /hedi/ Finally, from the findings, irregularities that exist in English language itself affect to a great extent the Edem students pronunciation, as some words though the same in structure are different in production. The middle vowel n these words, took, loose and look. The difference in the long and short vowels not withstanding. Words for instance are pronounced alike by Edem Secondary School students. Took /tuk/ /tuk/ Loose /lu:z/ /luz/ Look /luk/ /luk/ The general percentage of error is 65.27%. It is above average showing that the rate errors are committed by Edem students learners is high. So there is still a great need for putting in more effort in oral English teaching and learning. Implications of The Findings The findings of this research have implication for the curriculum planners, teachers, textbook writers and the students. For the curriculum planners, there is the need, in selecting topics, to include contrastive analysis of English and native languages of the learners. 57 Again, the teachers need to devote time and attention in the teaching of the spoken English. Teaching, of course, implies that the teacher must be a master of his subject. Consequently, English teachers must be those who are specialties in both pedagogy and subject matter. They should also include more oral drills on sounds and minimal pairs in their topics. Since the English language teachers in this country rely very much on textbooks for pedagogy and subject matter, the findings stress the need for English textbook writers to employ teaching methods and techniques which are merely not only intelligible to the English teachers but which also makes oral English drilling a pleasurable exercise in the hand of a good language teacher. Finally, from the findings, there is a need to drill the students extensively in the use of received. Pronunciation of the English language. It is illusory to expect a teacher of English as a second language (ESI) to teach an accent he does not speak. But, a lot of theoretical knowledge of the phonology of the language can be taught so that a student can make phenomic distinction. The difficult areas as received pronunciation (RP), consonants and vowels, and the learner‟s mother tongue phonology should be given special attention. This could be done through drilling exercises and listening to tapes from good models. This will go a long way in reducing phonological interference. 58 Recommendations: In line with the findings, conclusion, and educational implication of this study, the following recommendations are made. 1. The teachers of oral English should be specialists in oral English. Non-specialists should not be allowed to teach the subject because they may not know the right pronunciations and so they may cause the students to internalize errors which are termed error of transfer of learning. 2. There is need to give the teachers chance to experience in-service training and seminars. This will make them conversant with current developments in pedagogy and the language itself. 3. Textbooks for oral English training to be recommended for use should be those, among other things, that throw light on some of these discovered oral English language problems and the solutions to these problems 4. Communicative language teaching should be employed in language teaching. This enable the students to speak more instead of writing more, thereby perfecting in oral aspect of language. 5. Language laboratories should be built in secondary schools. 59 Suggestion for further studies From the review of literature presented in this study, it is the case that no study has been carried out on phonological problems of Edem in English or any other language. Based on this observation and haven concluded this study, the researcher recommends for further studies in the following areas. 1. Replicating the present study using primary school pupils and junior secondary schools students respectively, instead of using of senior secondary II students as was done in the present study. 2. Factors that led to or contribute to these phonological problems of Edem students in oral English. 3. Replicating the present study using another language instead of the English language. 4. Replicating this study using another Igbo speaking town Limitation of the study The validity of this study has been hampered by the following limitations: 1. Because the members of the research population did not take the test seriously as they were aware that it was not a school test or were conscious to avoid error. The result of the test may have been contaminated by either the non challant attitude of those who did not take the work seriously or Hawthrone effect for those who took the test very seriously. 60 Summary The purpose of the present research was to find out the phonological problems of Edem secondary school students in English language. By the use of proportionate stratified random sampling sixty –one (61) students from SSII of four secondary schools in Edem were drawn A self–made competence test (phonological reaching passage) entitled “My father and I” was given to the students to read. Their readings were recorded using a tape recorder. Percentage was used to analyse the data. From the findings, it was discovered that Edem student use the nasal /n/ for the lateral /l/ in their speech, but they do not use /l/ for /n/ though both consonants are in their dialect. /θ/ and /ð/ sounds are replaced with /t/ and /d/ sounds respectively. They also carry the vowel hamony in Igbo into the English language hence head is pronounced /hedi/ Finally, the irregularities that exist internally in English language speech patterns constitute serious phonological problem for Edem students learning English. 61 REFERENCE Akindele, F and Adegbite, W (1999). The sociology and politics of English in Nigeria: An introduction. Nigeria: Obafemi Awolowo University Press. Anasiudu, B. N. (2001). “From Formalism to Functionalism: New Approach. Nsukka Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 2(1), 35-44. Anderson, R.C. (1977). http://www.org/linguahnks/literacy/implement. Anizoba, E. L (1996). Error Analysis of Students’ in written composition in English in Awka Education Zone. An Unpublished MED Project in UNN. Anozie (2002). Pattern of Error in Spoken Igbo of Students. Unpublished project submitted to the Department of Igbo. Federal college of Education Eha-Amufu. Atunwo, A. N. (1993). Phonological Problems Posed by Igbo Language in Secondary Schools in Nsukka Urban. An Unpublished B. ED Project, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.. Baldeh, F. (1990). Better English Language Learning and Teaching. Nsukka: Fulladu Publishing Company. Chief Examiners Report (2001, 2002, 2003). “West Africa Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination”. Chukuma, H., and Otagburuagu, E (2002) English for Academic Purposes. Uyo: African-Fep Publishers Limited. Enem,I.C(1990) Phonological Problems of an Igbo Learner of Hausa:A Preview.An Unpublished BA Thesis Submtited to the Faculty of Arts, UNN Folarin, B. (1979) Phono-Graphonological problem in student. Journal of Nigeria English Studies Association (1-2) Hensman, B (1968) The Phonological Problem of Chineses students of English as a second language. English teaching Forum unpublished manual. 62 Ike, V. (1996). A Contrastive Analysis of Segmental Phonemes of English and Ndikelionwu Dialect of Igbo. An Unpublished B. A Project. University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Ikwuka, S. (1996). Patterns of Phonological Deviations in the Undergraduates spoken English: A case study of University of Nigeria. An Unpublished B A project of University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Kihl, L. (1993). Phonological Errors in Spoken English: A Case Study of a Danish Speaker of English in Applied Linguistics. Retrieved February 25, 2008 from http:// www. Sil.org/Linguistics. Lenhardtova, G. (1993). Phonological errors: A study of Slovak student learner of English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Spoken Language 2230.Retrived April 5, 2007 from “http://en.wikipedia.org. Mackey, W.F. (1965) Language Teaching analysis. London: Longman Mgbodile, T.O. (1990) Fundamentals for Language Education. Nsukka: Mike Social Press. Nyamasyo G.O (1994). Error Analysis: A Study of Pre-University Students in Kenya. An Unpolished Mimeograph. Oderinde, (1976). “Second Language Teaching and Learning” In Ubahakwue (ed). The Teaching of English Studies for Schools and College, Ibadan: IUP Publishes. Ogbuehi, C. U. (2003). English as a second language in Nigeria: An Introductory Text. Enugu: Magnet Business Enterprise. Okpara, P. C. (2001). Error Analysis of Senior Secondary Students’ Spoken English in Onitsha South L. G. A. An Unpublished MA: Thesis. University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Oluikpe, B. A. (1989). English in Igbo land: A Contrastive Study of English and Igbo Syntax. Onitsha Africana-Feb Publisher Ltd. 63 Oluikpe, B.A ,Anasiudu,N. B .,Otagburuagu,E.J ,Ogbonna,E,Onuigbo, S. I .Intensive English for Senior Secondary Schools bk II.Onitsha:African FEP Publishers Limited. Oluikpe, E. (1997). Errors in English Tense Pattern among Secondary School Students in Nsukka Urban. An Unpublished MA. Ed Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Omojuwa, R. A. (1979). “Making and Use of Errors in Learning writing”. In Ebo Ubahakwue (ed). The teaching of English studies, Ibadan University Press. Onuigbo,S. I (1984) Phonological problems of Educated Igbo users of English: MA Thesis, University of Ile-Ife. Onuigbo, S.I. (1990) English Language Teaching: An integrated approach. Ibadan: Spectrum books limited. Otagburuagu, E. J. (1997). Teaching and Learning the Writing Skill in English Language: Theories, Issues and Practice. Nigeria: Cape Publishers International Ltd. Otagburuagu, E.J and Anyanwu (2002). Concepts and Issue in Language Studies. Nigeria: Spring, Field Publishers. Otagburuagu, E.J and Okorgi (2002) Linguistics and use of English Studies Manual: Enugu Benak Publisher. Richard,J., Platt, J. Weber, H. (1985). Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. England: Longman Group Ltd. Richard, J.C, Rodger, T.S (1986) Approaches and methods in Language Teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schallert, S. (1982). program/schema-theory. http:/www/lingualniks/mplementaliteracy Schon, A. (1987). Question on Pronunciation: English Teacher Forum. An Unpublished Manuscript. 64 Scott,M and Tucker,R (1974) Error analysis and English Language Stratagies of Arab Students Language Learningss Stevenson, K. (1979).”Teaching of Spoken Englihs”. Journal of Nigerian English Studies Association 6(1). Thompson,C.A(2004)Variable Production of Africa America English across Oracy and Literacy:Language Speech and Hearing.U K:Washinton Ubahakwe, E. (1979). The Teaching of English Studies, Ibadan: Ibadan University Press. Ugorji, C. U. (2007). Towards Queens English Pronunciation. Ibadan: Spectrum Ltd. Wang, D. (2007). Common Sense Approach to Error in Spoken English. Harbin Engineerer, University Filled www.goggle.com. Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold Ltd. 65 APPENDIX I Questionnaire Tick the appropriate box Name of School: _______________________________________________ Class:________________________________________________________ Sex:__________________________________________________________ 66 APPENDIX II PHONOLIGICAL READING TEXT MY FATHER AND I Occasionally we took winter walks together, my father and I, down some lane that led to a sight of the sea, or over the rolling downs. We tried to recapture the charm of those delightful strolls in London, when we used to lean over the bridges and watch the ducks. But we could not recover this pleasant pleasure. My father was deeply enwove in the chain of his own thoughts and would stalk on without a word, buried in angry reveries. If he spoke to me on these excursions, it was a pain to me to answer him. I could talk about it on easy terms with him around or indoor, seated in my high penalty chair with our heads on causally through level but it was intolerably laborious to look up into the firmament and converse with a dark face about and around the sky. The driver would always loose focus with many others, but my father will feel good without food for we were poor. On our winter walks, we saw attractive altars but we did not utter anything from our mouth. That is the truth. My father could go farther with thin things not worthy of praise. 67 APPENDIX III Computation of Reliability Coefficient Descriptive Statistics N Mean Std Deviation Minimum Maximum Interchanging of (1) Sound for (n) sound 3 .0000 .00000 .00 .00 Use of (t) sound for (Q) 3 101.3333 4.16333 98.00 16.00 Use of (d) for (s) sound 3 101.3333 3.05505 98.00 104.00 Interchanging of (r) sound for (l) sound 3 6.0000 2.00000 4.00 8.00 Vowel Harmony 3 49.3333 1.15470 48.00 50.00 Internal Inconsistence 3 5.3333 1.15470 4.00 6.00 Kendall’s W Test Ranks Interchanging of (1) Sound for (n) sound Use of (t) sound for (Q) Use of (d) for (s) sound Interchanging of (r) sound for (l) sound Vowel Harmony Internal Inconsistence Test Statistics Mean Rank 1.00 5.50 5.50 2.67 4.00 2.33 68 N Kendall‟s Wa Chi-Square Df Asymp. Sig 3 .955 14.327 5 .014 69 APPENDIX IV SCHOOL I, NO OF STUDENTS 25 (Error committed by each student) S/ N Type of Error 1 The use of /t/sound for /θ/ sound The use of /d/ sound/ð/ sound The use of /n/ sound for /l/ sound The use of /l/ sound for /n/ sound The use of /l/ sound for /r/ sound Vowel harmony error Problem of internal inconsisten cy Total 2 3 4 5 6 7 Max. 1 No. of Error in the Passa ge 11 1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 17 1 8 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 0 22 2 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 0 22 2 0 24 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 3 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 24 2 3 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 4 1 2 2 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 4 4 3 0 5 4 6 5 4 3 4 4 3 4 5 3 5 3 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 82 6 3 6 6 6 2 6 3 6 6 6 2 6 6 6 3 6 0 6 7 6 0 6 3 6 6 6 6 6 7 6 0 68 6 2 70 APPENDIX V SCHOOL IV, NO OF STUDENTS 15 (Error committed by each student) S/N Type of Max. 1 2 3 4 Error No. of Error in the passage 1 The use of /t/ 11 10 11 10 11 sound for /θ/ sound 2 The use of 22 20 19 20 19 /d/ sound for/ð/ sound 3 The use of 24 24 23 24 23 /n/ sound for /l/ sound 4 The use of /l/ 26 0 0 0 0 sound for /n/ sound 5 The use of /l/ 10 2 0 0 4 sound for /r/sound 6 Vowel 6 5 4 5 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 11 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 21 20 19 21 20 21 19 20 21 21 24 23 24 23 24 23 24 23 24 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 8 0 0 8 1 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 5 4 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 harmony error 7 Problem of 3 internal inconsistency Total 2 3 2 3 63 60 61 62 63 62 60 60 61 67 55 61 70 63 71 APPENDIX VI SCHOOL II, NO OF STUDENTS 15 (Error committed by each student) S/N Type of Max. 1 2 3 4 Error No. of Error in the Passage 1 The use of /t/ 11 10 11 10 10 sound for /0/ sound 2 The use of 22 21 20 21 20 /d/ sound for/ ð/ sound 3 The use of 24 24 24 23 24 /n/ sound for /l/ sound 4 The use of /l/ 26 0 0 0 0 sound for /n/ sound 5 The use of /l/ 10 0 5 0 0 sound for /r/sound 6 Vowel 6 6 4 2 2 harmony error 7 Problem of 3 3 3 2 3 internal inconsistency 64 67 58 59 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 11 10 10 11 10 11 10 10 10 8 21 20 21 20 21 21 20 21 21 2 23 24 24 23 24 24 23 24 24 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 6 4 2 6 4 2 6 4 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 62 62 62 59 63 63 58 63 67 5 72 APPENDIX VII SCHOOL II, NO OF STUDENTS 15 (Error committed by each student) S/N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Type of Error Max. No. of Error in the Passage The use of /t/ sound for 11 /0/ sound The use of /d/ sound 22 for/ ð/ sound The use of /n/ sound 24 for /l/ sound The use of /l/ sound for 26 /n/ sound The use of /l/ sound for 10 /r/sound Vowel harmony error 6 Problem of internal 3 inconsistency 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total 10 9 8 10 9 9 55 18 19 18 19 18 17 109 24 23 23 24 23 23 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 2 0 6 2 2 1 6 2 2 1 24 7 59 53 57 56 58 52 335 73 APPENDIX VIII General percentage of error in the work Error committed x 100 Committable error 1 = Committable error for the whole school = 6222 Errors committed by the students in the whole schools = 4061 Percentage error 100 = 4061 6221 = 406100 6222 = 65.27% x 1 74
© Copyright 2025 Paperzz