A study of interlanguage word final consonant pronunciation by vietnamese learners and the degree of intelligibility as judged by native and non native english speakers

No.: 5729401 Key Words: PRONUNCIATION , WORD-FINAL CONSONANT, INTELLIGIBILITY, INTERLANGUAGE, NATIVE, NON-NATIVE Name: HANH DUC NGUYEN Dissertation Title: A STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD

A S TUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD-FINAL CONSONANT PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAMES E LEARNERS AND THE D EGREE OF

INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLIS H S PEAKERS

Hanh Duc Nguyen I.D No 5729401

A Dissertation Submitted in Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

in English Language Teaching Graduate S chool of Human S ciences ASS UMPTION UNIVERS ITY OF THAILAND

2019

Copyright by

ASS UMPTION UNIVERS ITY OF THAILAND

2019

VIETNAM ESE LEARNERS AND THE DEGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS

By: HANH DUC NGUYEN

Field of S tudy: DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

Dissertation Advisor: ASSOC PROF DR JOSEPH FOLEY

Accepted by the Graduate S chool of Human S ciences, Assumption University in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in English Language Teaching

………

(Assoc Prof Dr S uwattana Eamoraphan) Dean of the Graduate S chool of Human S ciences Dissertation Examination Committee

……… Chair/External Expert (Assoc Prof Dr Supong Tangkiengsirisin)

……… … Faculty Member

(Dr Andrew Anthony Jocuns)

I.D No.: 5729401

Key Words: PRONUNCIATION , WORD-FINAL CONSONANT, INTELLIGIBILITY,

INTERLANGUAGE, NATIVE, NON-NATIVE

Name: HANH DUC NGUYEN

Dissertation Title: A STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE WORD-FINAL CONSONANT

PRONUNCIATION BY VIETNAM ESE LEARNERS AND THE DEGREE OF INTELLIGIBILITY AS JUDGED BY NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS

Dissertation Advisor: ASSOC PROF DR JOSEPH FOLEY

This research investigates word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese learners and the degr ee of intelligibility as evaluated by native and non-native English speakers Both the quantitative approach and the qualitative approach were used There were two groups of students and thirty-five judges of the intelligibility This research had two smaller studies Research instruments of the production study were the English language experience

questionnaire, the wordlist reading, the text reading, and the picture description The current research adapted Nguyen and Brouha’s (1998) framework and Sato’s (1984) to analyze the data In the perception study, research tools were the non-native English speaker background questionnaire, the native English speaker background questionnaire, and the intelligibility test Moreover, Dang’s (2018) framework was adapted to become an analysis framework of this study

The findings showed that regarding the single word-final consonants, the final consonant /s/ was pronounced the best, followed by the word-final consonant /f/ The final

single word-final consonants, the students’ pronunciation was categorized into targets and variations Among these variations, the substitution was the most common, followed by devoicing and deletion As to the word-final clusters, the informants’ production was

classified into targets and modification strategies The informants omitted one or two

consonants (not all consonants) the most frequently and the reduction was the most common followed by omission plus devoicing and substitution of all consonants Furthermore, in respect of the single word-final consonants, there were the most targets in the wordlist

reading, followed by the picture description and by the text reading With reference t o the word-final clusters, the wordlist reading had the most targets, followed by the text reading, and by the picture description

There were similarities and differences in word-final consonant production between the L-group and the H-group The similarities were in production categories and in problematic final consonants which were /ʒ, ʤ, d, ð, v, l, p, ldz, vz, lp, nd/ M oreover, these two groups had the word-final consonant /s/, which was performed the best As regards production tasks, both groups had similarities in rank order of tasks based on targets as to the single final consonants and the final clusters However, there were some differences in the number of tokens of production categories between these two groups With reference to the production tasks, the L-group was different from the H-group in the number of targets in the same task

In respect of the intelligibility, the Vietnamese listeners gave the most targets in both groups compared to other listeners M ore importantly , the judges from native and the non-native English speaking countries recognized more word-final consonants in the H-group than those in the L-group In addition, the research had some implications for teaching and learning pronunciation, material design, and curriculum design Finally, it mentioned few

One of my former supervisors commented that doing research was like raising a child The implication is that I have my own ways to raise my children, who are directly connected with the community and their success greatly depends on the community My doctoral dissertation – my ‘mental’ child – was no exception It could not have been

completed had there not been assistance from the community, to which my heartfelt

acknowledgements go

I would first like to express my deepest gratitude to Assoc Prof Dr Joseph Foley, my current dissertation advisor, not only for his constructive, specific comments but also for his empathy, enthusiasm and belief in my ability He gave me invaluable advice even when he was not my dissertation supervisor

I also wish to thank all of my former advisors, Dr Arthur M cNeill, Asst Prof Dr

Soisithorn Isarankura, Asst Prof Dr Ratchaporn Rattanaphumma, and Dr Rajeevnath

Ramnath, for their support and strategic suggestions related to my research

I would like to express my special regards to my dissertation committee,

including Assoc Prof Dr Suwattana Eamoraphan, Asst Prof Dr Kulaporn Hiranburana, Assoc Prof Dr Joseph Foley, Assoc Prof Dr Supong Tangkiengsirisin, and Dr Andrew Anthony Jocuns, for their valuable time and helpful feedback on my work

I am grateful to the M inistry of Education and Training, Vietnam, managing the Scholarship 911, for sponsoring me through my Ph.D program in English Language

Teaching at the Graduate School of Human Sciences, Assumption University, Thailand

There were many people who helped me during the period of this research These include Asst Prof Dr Nussara Wadsorn, Dr M arilyn Fernandez Deocampo, Assoc Prof Dr

Ly, M r Hoa Ngoc Ngo, M s Nguyet Anh Pham, M iss Vi Thi Xuan Truong, staff members of

St Gabriel’s Library, Hua Mak Campus, Assumption University, Thailand I also owe a huge debt of gratitude to judges from the US, the UK, Australia, Canada (for the pilot study only), Myanmar, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam for the main study and the pilot study ; and to English major students in the following classes: 19AV, 19TA1, 19TA2, 18AV, 18TA, 17AV, 17TA, 16AV, 16TA, 43AV, 42AV, 41AV in the first semester, the academic year 2018 –

2019, An Giang University, Vietnam (for the main study ); the first-year students (English Teacher Education, K43), the second-year students (English Teacher Education, K42), the third-year students (English Teacher Education, K41), the fourth-year students (English Language, K40) in the second semester, the academic year 2017 – 2018, Can Tho University,

Vietnam (for the pilot study )

My special thanks go to all of my family members for supporting me emotionally and financially To my wife, I would like to say , “Thank you very much” Without her

unconditional love and encouragement, I definitely would not have been able to finish my Ph.D dissertation To my two children, Quynh Duc Hanh Nguyen and Quan Duc Anh

Nguyen, I wish to express my great appreciation of their efforts to overcome difficulties during the time when my wife and I were both in Bangkok to pursue our Ph.D studies

Last but not least, I wish to recognize the valuable assistance provided by my fellow Ph.D warriors, i.e Warlito Jr Sanchez Caturay, Haide Estudillo, M aria Shiela Sapul, Bun Hoeun Philip Chhourn, Emmanuel M ushi, Roche M agsayo, Loan Nguyen Phuong To, Dung Thi Nguyen, among others Talking to them and hanging out with them was really fun and informative, which helped to reduce any feelings of homesickness and stress, and

massively helped me improve my research

Page

COPYRIGHT ii

APPROVAL iii

ABSTRACT iv

ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS vi

CONTENTS viii

LIST OF TABLES xii

LIST OF FIGURES xv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background of the Study 1

Statement of the Problem 2

Research Questions 6

Research Objectives 6

Theoretical Framework 6

Conceptual Framework 7

Scope of the Study 8

Definitions of Terms 9

Significance of the Study 10

Page CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Dispersal of English 12

Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage 21

The Vietnamese Language 33

English Consonants and Vietnamese Consonants 35

Thai Consonants and English Consonants 39

Burmese Consonants and English Consonants 41

Cambodian Consonants and English Consonants 43

Research on Influence of English Language Experience on English Proficiency 45

Previous Studies of Vietnamese Learners’ Production of Word-final Consonants 49

Previous Studies of Intelligibility of ESL Speakers 57

Summary 64

CHAPTER III RES EARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design 65

Production Study 67

Population 67

Sample 68

Research Instruments 72

Collection of Data 79

Data Analysis 80

Research Participants 84

Research Instruments 85

Collection of Data 91

Data Analysis 92

Research Procedure 92

CHAPTER IV RES EACH FINDINGS

Research Question 1 94

Targets and Variations 94

Production of Word-final Consonants in Different Tasks 104

Research Question 2 108

Single Word-final Consonants 108

Word-final Clusters 116

Changes in the Number of Targets among Three Tasks 123

Research Question 3 127

CHAPTER V D IS CUSS ION, CONCLUS ION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussion 146

Conclusion 153

Implications 158

Limitations of the Study 162

Future Areas of Research 162

Page

APPENDIC ES 176

Appendix A: English Language Experience Questionnaire 177

Appendix B: Vietnamese Translation of the English Language Experience Questionnaire 185

Appendix C: Scoring Criteria for the English Language Experience Questionnaire 193

Appendix D: Wordlist 199

Appendix E: Text Reading 201

Appendix F: Guided Questions for Picture Description 203

Appendix G: Intelligibility Test 206

Appendix H: Native English Speaker Background Questionnaire 208

Appendix I: Non-native English Speaker Background Questionnaire 210 Appendix J: Item-objective Congruence (IOC) Index of Research Instruments 212

Appendix K: Inferential Statistics 221

Appendix L: Recruitment of Listeners 232

Appendix M : Consent Form from Can Tho University, Vietnam for the Pilot Study 234

Appendix N: Consent Form from An Giang University, Vietnam for the M ain Study 236

BIOGRAPHY 238

TABLE Page

1 English in Vietnam 13

2 Number of Overseas Vietnamese Students in 2016 17

3 Three Levels in the Vietnamese Education System 18

4 Theoretical Assumption and Characteristics of Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis, and Interlanguage (Pongprairat, 2011: 17) 33

5 Vietnamese Consonant Phonemes 35

6 English Consonant Phonemes 35

7 Similar Consonants in Vietnamese and in English (adapted from Tang, 2007) 36

8 Differences in Word-initial Consonants between Vietnamese and English (adapted from Tang, 2007) 37

9 Similarities in Word-final Consonants in Vietnamese and in English (adapted from Tang, 2007) 37

10 Word-final Consonants in English (adapted from Tang, 2007) 38

11 Thai Consonant Phonemes 39

12 Burmese Consonant Phonemes 41

13 Cambodian Consonant Phonemes 43

14 Phonetic Realization of Khmer /r/ in Casual Styles (Filippi and Vicheth, 2016: 32) 44

15 Faculties and Centers at An Giang University 67

16 Three Training M ajors of the Faculty of Foreign Languages 67

Page

18 Descriptive Statistics of Scores by the H-group and the L-group 69

19 L-group’s and H-group’s Attitudes towards Pronunciation 69

20 Demographic Details of the L-group and the H-group 70

21 Problematic Word-final Consonants 74

22 Production Categories of Single Word-final Consonants 81

23 Production Categories of Word-final Clusters 81

24 Single Word-final Consonant Pronunciation Types 82

25 Word-final Cluster Pronunciation Types 82

26 Types of Recognized Words 92

27 Target Sounds 94

28 Targets and Variations on Single Word-final Consonants 97

29 Targets and Variations on Word-final Clusters 100

30 Changes in Targets of Single Word-final Consonants among the Tasks 104

31 Tokens of Variations in Each Task regarding Single Word-final Consonants 106

32 Changes in Targets of Word-final Clusters among the Tasks 107

33 Targets, Variation Tokens, and Variations among Tasks 108

34 Single Word-final Consonants Produced by the L-group 110

35 Single Word-final Consonants Produced by the H-group 111

36 Seven Word-final Consonants Having the Least Targets in the L-group and in the H-group 112

37 The M ost Common Substitutes for Each Word-final Consonant

38 Differences in Targets between the L-group and the H-group 115

39 Production of Word-final Clusters in the L-group 117

40 Production of Word-final Clusters in the H-group 118

41 Word-final Clusters Having the Least Targets in the L-group and

in the H-group 119

42 Substitution for Final Clusters in the L-group and in the H-group 120

43 Differences in Cluster Targets in the L-group and in the H-group 122

44 Changes in the Number of Targets among Three Tasks 124

45 Word Intelligibility 127

46 Homophones Recognized by the Native and

Non-native English Speakers 130

47 STC Words Recognized by the Native and

Non-native English Speakers 130

48 Variations on the Word-final Consonants Recognized by

the Native and Non-native English Speakers 137

FIGURE Page

1 Theoretical Framework 7

2 Relationship between Interlanguage and Two Social Dialects 30

3 Pronunciation Continuum of Production Tasks 74

4 Research Procedure 93

5 Summary Chart Comparing the L-group’s and the H-group’s Results 126

Abbr.: Abbreviations

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

ES L: English as a Second Language

IL: Interlanguage

L1: First language

L2: Second language

L-grou p: low English language experience group

H-group: high English language experience group

NL: native language

Non-NS J: non-native English speaker judges

NS J: native English speaker judges

TL: target language

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background of the S tudy

It is undeniable that English is present in every continent around the world and English is used in international fields such as political life, business, communication,

entertainment, the media, education, etc The English language is global and it helps its learners to communicate with a larger number of people in the world than any other language (Crystal, 2003) Currently, in the development of international economy and integration in the ASEAN community and in the world, need for use of English is inevitable To guarantee

a successful international conversation, intelligible pronunciation plays a vital role in today’s world However, in reality, it seems that although Vietnamese speakers, for example, can use English in their international dialogues, their intelligible pronunciation is very limited

According to Ha (2005), there were a large number of foreigners commenting that many Vietnamese people were able to speak English; however, only some of them could have intelligible English pronunciation so that the foreigners could understand them easily in direct communication Ha (2005) added that she had witnessed Vietnamese learners’

communication breakdowns because of their serious pronunciation variations, which

influenced the foreigners’ understandings of the Vietnamese people’s English and she

asserted that the Vietnamese learners had made many phonetic variations resulting in

unintelligible English speech (Ha, 2005; Nguyen, 2013)

Cunningham (2013) corroborates this by saying that Vietnamese learners might not know that their English pronunciation was unintelligible In Vietnamese-accented

English, “phonotactic constraints in L1 appear to be persistent even in L2, and L1

phonological rules will, apparently, often apply in L2 unless they are blocked in some way.” (Cunningham, 2013: 3) Actually, Vietnamese-accented English speakers have variations in

pronunciation which render their English unintelligible (Duong, 2009; Ha, 2005; Luu, 2011; Nguyen, 2013) Among them, the variations in English word-final consonant pronunciation are the most common (Clements, 2015; Nguyen, 2007; Pham, 2009) because pronouncing English final consonants and final consonant clusters correctly is one of the most difficult things which Vietnamese learners of English encounter (Clements, 2015; Dang, 2000; Ha, 2005; Nguyen, 2007; Nguyen 2008; N guyen, 2012; Nguyen, 2013; Osburne, 1996; Pham, 2009)

S tatement of the Problem

Variations in English word-final consonants are the variations where English word-final consonants are not pronounced like native English speakers do This means that while every word-final consonant in English is pronounced by native English speakers, these word-final consonants can be deleted or changed in their fe atures by Vietnamese learners of English or sometimes, they can add an epenthesis to an English word-final consonant An example is given as follows

She is happy because you gave her a good /laI/

Actually, this speaker wants to pronounce the word ‘lime’, but he/she deletes the nasal

consonant /m/ and ‘lime’ [laIm] becomes [laI] Therefore, when [laI] is heard by a listener, the latter can realize [laI] as ‘light’, ‘line’, ‘lime’, ‘lie’, ‘like’, or ‘life’ Conspicuously, each of these six words (‘light’, ‘line’, ‘lime’, ‘lie’, ‘like’, ‘life’) is suitable for that ‘blank’ [laI] in terms of meaning and grammar Although the word ‘lie’ does not work very well

semantically, it might be one of listeners’ options because the actual pronunciation [laI] is heard As a result, it is really hard for the listener to understand what the speaker tries to say According to the researcher’s teaching experience and observation, t he variations on English word-final consonants happen in most of Vietnamese learners of English in general and in many English major students at An Giang University, Vietnam in particular

An Giang University, Vietnam was founded under the Decision No 241/1999/ QĐ-TTg, on December 30, 1999 by the Prime Minister of Vietnam and was officially opened

on September 9, 2000 On August 13, 2019, it became the seventh member university of Vietnam National University – Ho Chi M inh City under the Decision No 1007/QĐ-TTg by the Prime M inister of Vietnam Developed from the Former Education College of An Gian g,

An Giang University is responsible for teaching and doing research to meet the demands of educational socio-economic development of the M ekong Delta and the South of Vietnam However, when the English major students speak English, most of them have vari ations on word-final consonants This might cause their conversation to break down It is, therefore, important for this study to be conducted in order to examine features of English word-final consonants pronounced by English major students at An Giang University, especially at different developmental stages at a particular point in time, and to investigate the degree of intelligibility evaluated by native and non-native English speakers

Clearly, English word-final consonant variations can have a big influence on intelligibility of Vietnamese speakers’ English (Clements, 2015; Cunningham, 2009; Luu, 2011; Nguyen 2007; Nguyen, 2012) Nguyen (2012) argued that there were many foreigners, especially native English speakers, complaining about the fact that Vietnamese speakers of English did not pronounce English word-final consonants In line with Nguyen (2012),

Clements (2015), a native English teacher from England, shared his experience in teaching English to Vietnamese learners for the first time by saying that English word-final consonant variations were regarded as top issues These final consonant variations also affected

intelligibility of the Vietnamese learners’ words because their spoken words were not

recognized correctly (Clements, 2015)

It is clear that if English word-final consonants are not enunciated in the English

of Vietnamese learners, that English is barely intelligible to native speakers of English

because native English listeners usually resort to consonants to decide word boundaries and figure out what the actual word is (Zielinski, 2006) Also, Nguyen (2007: 23-24) explain ed that

final consonants can convey meanings since English has so many words that differ only in their coda and they also play important roles in grammar for singular or plural as well as tenses The inability to produce exact word-final consonants may prevent speakers from being understood by others when speaking English, and more importantly, may affect learners’ confidence to communicate

Nguyen (2012) added that English word-final consonant variations made listeners find it difficult to understand or even misunderstand speakers As a result , English final consonant variations of Vietnamese learners can lead to communication breakdowns (Nguyen, 2012; Pham, 2009) Today, because English is an international language and most of English users are non-native English speakers, intelligibility plays a significant part in communication, noticeably among non-native English users This results in the fact that the current research addresses the intelligibility in relation to the production of English word-final consonants judged by both native English speakers and non-native English speakers, especially those coming from A SEAN countries

M ore importantly, Pham (2009) argued that although Vietnamese learners had commonly made variations on English word-final consonants, it seemed that Vietnamese teachers of English did not pay attention to these variations This is in agreement with

Nguyen’s (2012) research where the students said that no one corrected their variations on English word-final consonants, even their teachers when these students spoke English

Especially, the students could imitate the teachers who did not pronounce English word-final consonants Furthermore, Nguyen (2012) stated that when Vietnamese learners spoke English with each other without English word-final consonants, they still understood each other This

resulted in the fact that variations on English word-final consonants had been ignored and so, fossilized like Jenkins (2002: 100) asserted that “when speakers come from the same L1 background, convergence will result in an increase of phonological transfer in order to

facilitate interlocutor intelligibility, as well as to signal shared group identity.” This issue is very prevalent and difficult to deal with in Vietnam in general and at An Giang University in particular based on the researcher’s own observation and teaching experience So, a study of English word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese speakers of English is one of the main undertakings of this study

Research on variations on English word-final consonants and clusters was

undertaken in the United States (Benson, 1988; Nguyen, 1999; Nguyen, 2008; Nguyen and Brouha, 1998; Osburne, 1996; Sato, 1984), in Sweden (N guyen, 2007) and in Vietnam

(Clements, 2015; Pham, 2009; N guyen, 2012; Nguyen, 2012) However, studies mentioned above only investigated descriptions of variations on English final consonants and very few

of them suggested strategies for these variations without any investigations into these

strategies M oreover, there has been little inquiry into pronouncing English word-final

consonants with native and non-native English speakers’ evaluation of intelligibility although Nguyen (2007) conducted the study of this issue in Sweden in terms of comprehensibility judged by native English speakers The current research carried out in Vietnam investigates

An Giang University students’ interlanguage in terms of English word-final consonants (including word-final consonants and final clusters) and examines native and non-native English speakers’ judgments of intelligibility Furthermore, to the best knowledge of the researcher, there is only one study of interlanguage pronunciation regarding intonation

conducted by Pongprairat (2011) Based on the amount of English experience, she had two groups of Thai learners, i.e low English experience group and high English experience

group Pongprairat (2011:2) stated that “learners with low experience and high experience

show a high tendency of conformity of performance to their group.” This present study also uses the degree of English experience to choose two groups of Vietnamese learners with low and high English language experience; however, it focuses on Vietnamese learners’

pronouncing English word-final consonants

Research Questions

The study seeks to answer the following three research questions

1 How are English word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese learners with low and high English language experience?

2 What are the similarities and differences between Vietnamese learners of English with low and high English language experience regarding pronouncing English word-final consonants?

3 How do native and non-native English speakers judge the degree of

intelligibility in each group of Vietnamese learners?

Research Objectives

The objectives of this study are:

1 To investigate the phonetic realizations of English word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese learners with low and high English language experience

2 To examine the similarities and differences between Vietnamese learners of English with low and high English language experience regarding pronouncing English word-final consonants

3 To identify the degree of intelligibility judged by native and non-native

English speakers in each group of Vietnamese learners

Theoretical Framework

The current study uses the following theories as its framework Lado (1957, cited

in Suksiripakonchai, 2014) proposed ‘Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis’ and confirmed that

when studying a foreign language, a learner has a tendency to apply what this learner knows

in his/her native language to the target language M oreover, ‘error analysis’ (Corder, 1967) is used and according to Gass and Selinker (2008), when conducting an ‘error analysis’, we should carry out some steps including collecting data, identifying ‘errors’, classifying

‘errors’, quantifying ‘errors’, analyzing sources, and remediating Finally, the ‘interlanguage’ theory plays a vital role in this research Corder (1971) calls a learner’s language an

idiosyncratic dialect and Selinker (1972) named an L2 learner’s idiosyncratic dialect

‘interlanguage’ Corder (1981) explained that ‘interlanguage’ is not stable and it is a dialect and its rules share features of a learner’s native language and a target language

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study is illustrated in the diagram below

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

English used by Vietnamese learners at An Giang University, Vietnam had its

Dang (2018)

Interlangu age

of Vietnam ese learners at

listeners from the

UK, the US, Australia, Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar, Vietnam

Word-fin al consonant pronunciations

Perception study:

Intelligibility test

Production study:

wordlist, text, picture description

Nguyen and Brouha (1998) Sato (1984)

Problematic word-final consonants:

these students is called the ‘interlanguage’ of Vietnamese learners at An Giang University (AGU) Although this ‘interlanguage’ had some correct forms compared to standard English,

it also had problems Therefore, theories of ‘contrastive analysis’, ‘error analysis’, and

‘interlanguage’ were used to explain this issue One of the problems the ‘interlanguage’ of Vietnamese learners has is that they have difficulty pronouncing word-final consonants (Clements, 2015; Dang, 2000; Ha, 2005; N guyen, 2007; Nguyen, 2008; N guyen, 2012;

Nguyen, 2013; Osburne, 1996; Pham, 2009) It is very common for Vietnamese learners of English to make variations on word-final consonant pronunciation (Clements, 2015; Nguyen, 2007; Pham, 2009) The following word-final sounds are problematic for Vietnamese

learners of English, i.e /f, v, θ, ð, s, z, ʃ, ʒ, ʧ, ʤ, p, t, k, d, l, ŋk, nd, vz, lp, ldz, nts, sk, nst/ The research instruments, i.e the wordlist reading, the text reading and the picture

description included aforementioned sounds and they were used to elicit forms of

pronouncing word-final consonants These forms were categorized and analyzed based on the analytical frameworks of Nguyen and Brouha (1998) and Sato (1984), which were adapted

When variations on word-final consonant productions appear in conversations, intelligibility of Vietnamese speakers’ English is affected (Clements, 2015; Cunningham, 2009; Luu, 2011; N guyen, 2007; Nguyen, 2012) As a result, the intelligibility test was designed comprising problematic word-final consonants mentioned above This test was used

to investigate the extent to which native and non-native English speakers recognized these problematic word-final sounds spoken by the Vietnamese learners Therefore, the

intelligibility was judged by listeners coming from the UK, the US, Australia, Thailand, Cambodia, M yanmar, and Vietnam

S cope of the S tudy

This research was conducted at An Giang University, Vietnam in the first

semester of the academic year 2018 - 2019 and it focused on English major students’

production of English word-final consonants Furthermore, it also drew comparisons between the high English experience group and the low English experience group in terms of

producing English word-final consonants

The current study consisted of two groups of the participants, English major students at An Giang University, and the native and non-native English speakers as judges The native and non-native English speakers were judges of intelligibility related to

pronouncing English word-final consonants

In English words, positions of consonants can be initial, medial or final

However, this study merely concentrated on English final consonants This is because

variations on English word-final consonant pronunciation were the most frequent and

influenced intelligibility of Vietnamese people’s English

Definitions of Terms Used in the Study

The following terms and their definitions were used in the present research

English word-final consonants are consonants which appear in a final position of

a word In the current research, English word-final consonants refer to both single word-final consonants and final clusters

Interlanguage means a linguistic system which Vietnamese learners of English

have and use This linguistic system is distinct from the English language and the Vietnamese language and individuals can have different interlanguages depending on their level of

English proficiency

English language experience is experience in acquiring English in many ways

such as continuous exposure to English, age of onset, experience in an English-speaking country, means of instruction, length of learning time, learning environment, etc Pongprairat (2011:8) states that “language experience of an individual learner provides complete

information about the process of acquisition of the learner, accounting for the difference in their performances.”

Variations on English final consonants are variations where English

word-final consonants are not pronounced like native English speakers do and this causes difficulty for listeners to understand what the speakers are trying to say Variations are the

pronunciations which are different from the targeted pronunciation

A token is an individual pronunciation

A target is a targeted pronunciation

Intelligibility means the capacity to recognize English word-final consonants in

English words To evaluate the intelligibility, the native and non-native English speaker judges are asked to fill in the missing words in the spaces of the script read aloud by

Vietnamese learners of English

Native English speakers are “those born and raised in one of the countries where

English is historically the first language to be spoken.” (Jenkins, 2003: 14) For example, the native English speakers used in the current research are from the US, the UK, and Australia

Non-native English speakers are those who were not born and raised in one of the

countries where English is historically the first language to be spoken (Jenkins, 2015) For instance, the non-native English speakers used in this study come from Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Myanmar

Significance of the S tudy

This study attempted to answer the following two issues regarding English final consonants First, Vietnamese speakers’ production of English word-final consonants has still been unclear to researchers, teachers, students and so on because there have been few studies

on this issue Their samples or research participants were very few and most of these studies might not be done systematically In addition, danger of not pronouncing word-final

consonants correctly has not been mentioned convincingly Secondly, the extent to which the production of English word-final consonants affects the intelligibility has not been

researched When teachers of English know the forms of variations on English word-final consonants, they would be able to design teaching materials to teach their students how to pronounce English word-final consonants correctly

The English major students in this research, students or learners and teachers of English can raise their awareness of pronouncing English word-final consonants This is because English word-final consonants influence intelligibility

This research compared Vietnamese learners’ pronunciations of English final consonants at different interlanguage development Consequently, it provided insights into features of the English word-final consonants in each group of learners in various phases throughout the developmental process so that teachers of English can pinpoint the same and different characteristics at varied stages As a result, these teachers will understand which variations are easy or difficult to be remedied and what specific fields they should focus on Based on English word-final consonant variations happening in these developmental stages, a strategy will be suggested to remediate these serious variations so that English word-final consonants can be pronounced intelligibly

word-CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter focuses on the spread of English in the world and on a discussion about contrastive analysis, error analysis, and interlanguage followed by comparisons

between the Vietnamese language and the English language, Thai and English, Burmese and English, Khmer and English in reference to consonants and word-final consonants Then, the chapter mentions research on the influence of English language experience on English

proficiency The next part is about reviews of previous studies of word-final consonants pronounced by Vietnamese speakers and of intelligibility This chapter ends with its

According to Galloway and Rose (2015), the dispersal of English through

globalization was related to historical coincidence and American economic and political power Although most of Britain’s former colonies became independent in the mid-twentieth

century, English continues to be used in many of these countries Besides, English is the dominant language of the USA, which is a center of economic power When globalization occurs, there are economic developments on an international scale, modern communication technologies, the appearance of big multinational companies, increased strength of the

newspapers, and so on

According to Gray (2002: 153-154), there was a link between globalization and English in three primary ways as shown below:

In the first place, the rise of transitional corporations does much to promote the spread of English Typically these organizations have headquarters located in Europe, North America or Japan, and geographically dispersed (yet flexible) cent ers o f production, all of which are conn ected electronically This can imply business and legal

documentation being produced in English, oral and written communication skills training in English for staff, possible spinoffs for the local hotel and tourist industries, and more English being taught in local schools Secondly, the increase in the number of world organi zations, many of which are themselves implicated in globalized networks, means that English continues

to be in demand globally The third area is linked specifically to the Internet English currently predominates on the Internet

Hamid and N guyen (2016: 28) stated that English and globalization got married

to each other and “the relationship between them is symbiotic and mutually beneficial: if English provides the linguistic and communicative infrastructure to globalization, the latter promotes the cause of English by making the language imperative for participation in

globalized networks, markets and resources.”

English emerged in Vietnam after Chinese and French The road to t he

emergence of English in Vietnam is described in the table below

Table 1

English in Vietnam

Dates Events

1957 English was widespread in the South of Vietnam because the

American government was involved in this region (Do, 2006)

1975 - 1990 English lost its importance and Russian language was popular

(Nguyen, 2012)

1990 - 2000 Vietnam implemented a dynamic diplomacy (Abuza, 1996)

and English re-gained its significant status (Nguyen, 2012)

1996 - 2006 English developed unprecedentedly in Vietnam (Do, 2006)

Nguyen (2012: 263) indicates that English is currently “the first choice of most foreign language learners in Vietnam and the most desirable skill of most employers

regardless of government-owned, private, or foreign-invested structures.” In Vietnam,

English is the main foreign language at schools, colleges and universities and it has expanded nationwide in different fields such as politics, economy, tourism, education, science,

technology, etc

Politics

English is the only language for communicating with foreign countries and

international organizations In 1994, the Vietnamese government issued the Instruction TTg underlining that state administrators and cadres should improve foreign language

422-(mainly English) competence, especially the speaking skill, because Vietnam had relations with foreign countries So, the country could access advanced technology and science, learn skills and develop a market-driven economy (Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 1994)

Vietnam is a member country of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and English is its official language When becoming a member of ASEAN in 1995, Vietnam suggested French as the second official language of ASEAN but this suggestion was rebuffed with the curt answer “No, English only” (Okudaira, 1999: 101) ASEAN bureaucrats considered English (as the only working language of ASEAN) advantageous because

ASEAN could save money and labour regarding the translation and interpretation service In its 2009 Charter, Article 34 says that “the working language of ASEAN shall be English.”

(Kirkpatrick, 2010: 7-14) and “the role of English as ASEAN’s only working language is one obvious factor in increasing the demand for English.” (Kirkpatrick, 2010: 61)

Media and Employment

English is used in most of the Vietnamese media Almost every provincial TV and radio station in Vietnam has programs in which English is spoken by Vietnamese

correspondents For example, people can watch English news in the M ekong Delta on Can Tho Channel, on An Giang Channel, or in Ho Chi M inh City In addition, the Vietnam

Television Station – the national television station – has VTV4 which is an international channel opened in 2000 This channel brings news and information about Vietnamese

culture, politics and economics It also gives programs which introduce well-known

destinations in Vietnam and many Vietnamese films with English subtitles In addition, the Vietnamese government agreed with the Voice of Vietnam (VOV) about launching the 24/7 English Radio Channel, which operated in the 3rd quarter, 2015 M ore importantly, there are more and more Vietnamese newspapers in English both online and in print, i.e Tuoi Tre News, Thanh Nien News, Vietnam Net, Saigon Times, Viet Nam News, Nhan Dan

Newspaper, Vietnam News Agency, etc

English is not only a language used in media but also a gateway to make a living

in Vietnam According to M ai (2011), in today’s society, to have a job in all fields,

knowledge of English is a prerequisite for job applicants Furthermore, if students graduate from university, their knowledge of a major and English will help seek for a job easily

because it can meet recruiters’ demands Besides, there are many varying occupations

available for students holding qualifications or bachelors’ degrees in English

Tourism

Jenkins (2003: 36) states that English is “the leading language of international tourism.” Every year there are more than 5 million turns of Vietnamese going on holiday

abroad (to China: about 1.1 million turns, to Cambodia: nearly 1 million turns; to Thailand: 850,000 turns; to: M alaysia over 300,000 turns; to Singapore: over 300,000 turns; to Western Europe: 200,000 turns; to Korea: 140,000 turns; to Japan: 150,000 turns, etc.) (XC, 2015)

So, travelling to a foreign country is not strange to Vietnamese people While Vietnamese tourists are abroad, English is their life buoy to communicate with foreigners

Vietnam is well-known for tourist attractions Every year, it welcomes millions

of overseas travellers Specifically, in 2014 there were 7.8 million foreign visitors to

Vietnam (Hanh Thuy, 2015) According to the Overseas Communist Party’s Committee for Propaganda and Education and Vietnam News Agency’s Board of Editorial Secretary

(2017), receiving 10 million visits of international tourists in 2016 is the first time of the Vietnam Tourism, which is 25% increase compared to those in 2015 This results in the fact that English is extremely essential for every department related to tourism in Vietnam, e.g hotels, restaurants, immigration office, tour agencies, tour advertising companies and so on Trinh (2002) on a trip to Vietnam noted that English was used in a restaurant in Hanoi,

hotels in Hanoi and Hai Phong and in shopping although this English was not correct in standard English Additionally, restaurants in scenic spots usually have menus written in both Vietnamese and English like the Temple Club in Sai Gon, Co Tranh Restaurant in Cu Chi District, Long Trieu Restaurant in Ho Chi M inh City, or Lanterns Vietnamese

Restaurant in Nha Trang, etc Similarly, English appears on most of the websites and

brochures of restaurants, hotels, and tourist agencies like M uong Thanh, Pandanus Resort in Phan Thiet, Victoria CanTho Resort, Hai Au Hotel in Nha Trang, SaiGon-Tourist Company, Vietravel Tourist Company and so on

Clearly, English is popular in Vietnam as a foreign language and it is regarded as part of Vietnamese people’s life This is because English helps meet their different goals, especially in communication

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Vietnam

Jenkins (2015:11) defines EFL as follows:

English as a Foreign Language is the English of those whose countries were nev er colonised by the British, and for whom English serves little or

no purpose within their own borders

Although this statement can be seriously questioned as in the case of the present Myanmar, more and more people today from all walks of life learn English at the centers in their leisure time According to N.Loan (2016), there are three reasons why Vietnamese people should study express English First, English is a popular language which appears everywhere in life, e.g in media, movies, music, electronic devices, etc Second, English is useful in the environment of integration and especially after Vietnam’s participation in the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) This is because Vietnamese people will have more chances to seek for jobs and to do

business if they have English They should be well-equipped with English by themselves to become international workers Finally, English is recruiters’ top criterion in Vietnam

M oreover, Vietnamese people like to learn English so that they can study abroad The Vietnamese M inistry of Education and Training stated that in 2016, the number of

Vietnamese students learning overseas was about 130,000 as illustrated in the table below (Ha Phuong, 2016)

N.Loan (2016) concludes that English is not only a need but also an essential requirement which Vietnamese citizens should meet to conveniently communicate in life and

at work There have been hundreds of English centers which have been set up all over the country and these centers have attracted both children and adult learners and Do (2006) mentions that Ho Chi M inh City only has got approximately 300 English centers with more

or less 10,000 teaching staff and over 900,000 learners attending different English classes People can easily see the emergence of the British Council, the Australian Centre for English Training (ACET), the Vietnam USA Society English Centers (VUS), the American Apollo etc along with the Cambridge International Examinations and other exams such as IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC and so on These centers have been opening many English classes with different levels and administrating institutional and international tests of English to meet Vietnamese learners’ various needs (Hoang, 2013)

There are more or less 100,000 teachers of English at state schools in Vietnam (Van Chung, 2014) The Vietnamese education system comprises three levels with 12 grades

or forms as follows (Hoang, 2013):

Table 3

Three Levels in the Vietnamese Education System

Upper secondary (high) Grade 10 – Grade 12 15 - 18

In Vietnam nowadays, English is a compulsory subject in primary (starting from Grade 3), secondary and upper-secondary schools Secondary school students from Grade 6

to Grade 8 study English for three periods a week and two periods a week for Grade 9

students In addition, English is learned for three periods a week at Grades 10 - 12 at secondary or high schools (Hoang, 2013)

upper-Dang and Nguyen (2008) conducted research on students’ perception of selecting

a foreign language in nine major universities in Vietnam and the findings pointed out that 85.8% of the foreign language majors and 87% of the non-foreign language majors agreed that English should be taught in universities The students chose English mostly because of its practicality and popularity A recent study indicated that of five foreign

languages known at the tertiary level (English, French, Chinese, Russian, and German)

nearly 94% of undergraduates and some 92% of graduates learned English as an obligatory

subject (Hoang et al 2008, cited in Hoang 2013) Especially, many colleges and universities

in Vietnam regard English as a compulsory foreign language and a graduation requirement (Nguyen, 2012) In addition, English is considered as a major and a subject at universities or colleges Students study English as a major to gain a Bachelor’s Degree, a M aster’s Degree

or a Doctoral Degree in English and become teachers, translators, interpreters, linguists, editors, researchers, etc of English Hoang (2013) noted that in Vietnam there were some tertiary institutions offering both undergraduate and graduate programs in English

The Vietnamese M inistry of Education and Training drafted the project

“Language Strategies in Vietnam’s Schools” in the early 2000s and stated that English was the main foreign language in schools According to Le (2008), English should be an obligatory course starting at the elementary level so that students could seek for and learn sources of knowledge in English when entering higher education schools and English is a

“must-have” tool in order for Vietnamese people to work in the environment of

globalization

On September 30th, 2008 the Vietnamese government passed the Decision

No.1400/QD-TTg to renovate the teaching and learning of foreign languages within the national education system As a result, Vietnam’s National Foreign Language 2020 Project (NFL2020), which Hoang (2013) said was worth VND 9,378 billion (nearly USD 450

million), was established and was managed by the Vietnamese M inistry of Education and Training This was a national project whose purpose was to enhance Vietnam’s foreign

language (mainly English) teaching and learning capacity; as a result, by 2020 the majority

of Vietnamese youths graduating from vocational schools, colleges and universities had enough capacity to use English independently and confidently to communicate, to study and

to work in a multicultural and multilingual environment (Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 2008)

However, many Vietnamese learners of English have difficulty pronouncing English sounds (Cunningham, 2009; N guyen, 2013) Ha (2005) commented that English pronunciation of many Vietnamese people was unintelligible because they made so many phonetic ‘errors’ In addition, Cunningham (2013) stated that Vietnamese learners of English lacked knowledge of pronunciation and phonological rules of the Vietnamese language were usually applied to the English language Remarkably, ‘errors’ in word-final consonants are the most common (Clements, 2015; Nguyen, 2007; Pham, 2009) This, thus, affects

intelligibility of Vietnamese speakers’ English (Clements, 2015; Cunningham, 2009; Luu, 2011; Nguyen 2007; Nguyen, 2012) and many foreigners, especially native English speakers, complained about this issue It has been argued that word-final consonants are very difficult for Vietnamese learners of English to pronounce correctly (Clements, 2015; Dang, 2000; Nguyen, 2007; Nguyen 2008; Nguyen, 2012; N guyen, 2013; Osburne, 1996) because there is interference of the Vietnamese language (Pham, 2009) The current research investigates Vietnamese learners’ production of word-final consonants in relation to interlanguage

encompassing the contrastive analysis and error analysis These theories are used as the theoretical framework of this study and are discussed in the following section

Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis and Interlanguage Contrastive Analysis

Contrastive analysis comes from behaviorism because second language learning

is viewed as the establishment of habits The contrastive analysis has two typical traditions First, the North American tradition emphasizes language teaching, particularly language learning and doing contrastive analyses between two languages to improve classroom

materials Secondly, the European tradition looks at language comparison to understand the nature of language In terms of second language acquisition, the North American tradition is used (Gass and Selinker, 2008)

Contrastive analysis is defined as “a way of comparing languages in order to determine potential errors for the ultimate purpose of isolating what needs to be learned and what does not need to be learned in a second-language-learning situation”(Gass and Selinker, 2008: 96) Similarly, contrastive analysis is the study of differences between a target

language and a native language (Suksiripakonchai, 2014) According to Hadlich (1965: 426), contrastive analysis is “the comparative analysis of the native and foreign language systems, the points of difference, so that more effective language-learning materials, based precisely

on these learning problems, can be developed.” The idea of contrastive analysis appeared in the 1940s and then Robert Lado introduced the ‘Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis’ theory in

1957 (Suksiripakonchai, 2014) Lado said:

We have ample evidence that when learning a foreign language, we tend

to transfer our entire native language system in the process We tend to trans fer to that language our phonemes and their variants, our stress and rhythm pattern, our transitions, our intonation patterns and their interaction with other phonemes…(Lado, 1957: 11, cited in Suksiripakonchai, 2014)

The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis has some basic assumptions as follows (Gass and Selinker, 2008: 96-97):

1 Contrastive analysis is based on a theory of languag e that claims that language is habit and that language learning involves the establishment of a new set of habits

2 The major source of error in the production and/or reception o f a second language is the native language

3 One can account for errors by considering differences between the L1 and the L2

4 A corollary to item 3 is that the greater the differences, the more errors that will occur

5 What one has to do in learning a second language is learn the differences Similarities can be safely ignored as no new learning is involved In other words, what is dissimilar between two languages is what must be learned

6 Difficulty and eas e in learning are determined respectively by differences and similarities between the two languages in contrast

These assumptions of Contrastive Analysis have a relative orientation towards pedagogy Errors due to differences between the native language (NL) and the target

language (TL) are emphasized by extensive drills in order to establish a new set of habits so that these errors can be eradicated In addition, both the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis and the Audiolingual M ethod are based on a theory of language learning which is behaviorism because they regard language learning as developments of required habits According to Celce-M urcia et al (1996), in the Audiolingual classroom, pronunciation was significantly focused on and was explicitly instructed from the beginning According to this teaching method, a teacher modeled a sound and students mimiced or repeated M oreover, the teacher usually used a teaching technique originated from the viewp oint of differences in structural linguistics, i.e the minimal pair drill M ore importantly, according to the Contrastive

Analysis, the best teaching materials should describe similarities and differences between the target language and the native language M oreover, they concentrated on these differences, which caused difficulties for L2 learners and they could ignore the similarities safely because there was no new learning Fries (1945: 9; cited in Selinker, 1992: 6) with the notion of Contrastive Analysis showed how to choose materials to teach pronunciation as follows:

“The most effi cient materials are those that are based upon a scientific description of the languag e to be learned, carefully compared with a parallel description of the native languag e of the learner.”

There are two versions of the Contrastive Analysis such as the predictive (strong) view and the explanatory (weak) view In the predictive view, based on a comparison

between the native language and the target language, occurrences of errors can be predicted thanks to differences and predictions about success of language teaching materials can be made The explanatory view deals with analyzing learners’ recurring errors (Gass and

Selinker, 2008) There are criticisms of Contrastive Analy sis assumptions in terms of the predictive version First, the Contrastive Analysis lacks empirical basis It does not predict

an error in actual learner production and errors predicted by the Contrastive Analysis do not happen Second, a hypothesis which is theoretical underpinnings of the Contrastive Analysis

is much criticized and leads to the end of the Contrastive Analysis because this hypothesis says that the native language is the driving element of second language learning Empirical research shows that transfer from the native language is applicable in one language, but not

in the other (Gass and Selinker, 2008) Furthermore, the concept of difficulty in the

Contrastive Analysis is also opposed Differences mean difficulty and difficulty equals

errors However, it is indicated by empirical studies that difficulty does not unilaterally equal errors (Gass and Selinker, 2008)

As a result, the Contrastive Analysis becomes inadequate to explain errors

happening in the second language acquisition and people begin to explore the relationship between L1 and L2 in the process of acquisition as regards learner errors from which an approach called error analysis is developed