PacSLRF 20006 What Makes English Consonant Clusters Difficult for Cantonese-speaking ESL Learners? PacSLRF 2006 Brisbane, Australia Cathy S.P. Wong Department of English The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Differences in Syllable Structure between Cantonese and English syllable onsét rhynie nucleus coda Cantonese (C) v (c)* English ccycy(c) Vv (e)(c)(c(C) * coda C in Cantonese isliited to /p + k mn nf only cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2008PacSLRF 20006 July 2006, CC Problems Encountered by Cantonese Learners (1) ial CCs: /r/ is the problem r]in clusters...” (Walmsley, 1977: p.262) [pr] is sometimes replaced by [p8], jetimes by [p1];..." (Walmsley, 1977: p.263) Ipr/ > [piztz] or [prt] for pretty (p.276) ~ Simplification of consonant clusters + [icf > (21 in frankly (Luke & Richards, 1982: 59) ~ “the phonetic realizations of /r/, /w/, and 71] in consonant clusters are a relatively variable phenomenon.” (Hung, 2000: p.353) + [tr/ > [efe] in tries, trim (p.352) + Dkr) > Die] in crib (p.353) + [ar] > {asw] in drain (p.354) + [kn] > [4 in quote, quarter (p-354) ~ deletion of initial /r/ in cluster (Stibbard, 2004: p.131) + for] > [bits] / Poxt§] / [p's tS] for bridge CC Problems Encountered by Cantonese Learners (2) + Final CCs: plosives are the problem — simplification of consonant clusters + [sk/ or /st/ > [s]in task, most (Luke & Richards, 1982: p.59) + [sts] > Teel in aspects + /ft/ > [2] in loft (Bolton & Kwok, 1990: p.153) ~ deletion of coda /t/ or /d/ under suffixation for one subject + [pts/ > [pal [asept] for accept but [aseps] for accepts (Peng & Setter, 2000: p.92) ~ deletion of /t/ of /a/ between /s/ and another C + [odgast] for adjust but [odgasnont] for adjustment (Peng & Setter, 2000: p.99) ~ morphological suffixes omitted + [> Pore ~ [arp] for sippect [atop] for stepped, ~ [Lok? ap] for looked up; [ast] for hurts (Walmsley, 1977: .267): cathy wong on consonant clusters 2PacSLRF 20006 CC Problems Encountered by Cantonese Learners (3) ~ Word-final consonant clusters errors (Eckman, 1987: pp.148-9) + [pt > [t] in opt, adopt, sept, ripped, gapped + [pts/ > [ts] o [pt] or [ps] or [t] in opts, accepts, adopts + Ipts/ > [4] or [ps] in septs + /ft/ > Ce] in raft, ture /fts/ > [ft] or [fs] in sifts, hafts + /2ts/ > [pslin gifts + [skt/ > [st] oF [sk] or [ks] in husked, asked, taxed, waxed + [it] > [t] in act, pact, fact, sect, tucked + [ts/ > [0] in eats, cats + [sks/ > [sk] in asks, masks + [sts/ > [s] or [st] in tests, dusts + [st/ > [s]in post + [kts/ > [ts] oF [kt] or [ks] in acts, sects, ducts Summary on Studies on HK Cantonese-speaking ESL Learners CC Problems Reported: + Syllable-initial CC involving /r/ + Syllable-final CC involving /t/ or /a/ + Syllable-final CC involving /s/ Strategies Observed: 1) Syllable-initial CCs: mostly substitution with some deletion 2) Syllable-final CCs: mostly deletion cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 July 2006 Phonological Factors (General) + Position of Cluster ~ Syllable-final CCs more problematic than syllable-initial (Eckman, 1977; Anderson, 1987) + Length of Cluster ~ 3-member CCs more problematic than 2- member CCs (Anderson, 1987; Weinberger, 1987) ~ Eg. #/skr/ is more difficult than #/sk/ or #/kr] (Eckman, 1991: 25) + Constituents of Cluster ~ Sonority; Markedness; Individual Segments + Eg. /fr/ is more problematic than /py/ (Broselow and Finer, 1991: p.41) + Eg. /kt/# is more problematic than /st/# (Eckman, 1991: 253) + Eg. #/gr/ is more problematic than #/kr/ (Eckman & Iverson, 1993: 242) + E.g, Nasals are difficult for Mandarin speakers (Stockman & Pluut, 1999) Strategies Reported (General) + Epenthesis / Deletion = More epenthesis in word-initially CCs than word-finally CCs (Anderson, 1987; Tarone, 1980) ~ Epenthesis employed by Mandarin speakers in monosyllabic words but deletion used in bisyllabic words (Browselow, Chen and Wang, 1998) ~ Epenthesis found in Spanish speakers (Carlisle, 1999; Abrahamsson, 1999) ~ Stylistic variation (Major, 1994; Lin 2003, 2003) + Devoicing ~ Reported in Mandarin speakers (Browselow, Chen and Wang, 1998) cathy wong on consonant clusters 4PacSLRF 20006 Research Aim To provide a more holistic view of the acq! ion of English consonant clusters by Cantonese-speaking ESL learners. Research Questions 1) What is the effect of the length of the consonant cluster? 2) What is the effect of the position of the consonant cluster? 3) Which types of consonant clusters pose the most difficulty? 4) What are the strategies employed? Methodology + Test words: 112 English words in 34 sentences + Final CCs — 2-member CCs "Nasal + Stop / Fricative (damp, mint, length, rings...) + Liquid + Stop / Fricative / Affricate (help, melt, walls...) + Fricative + Fricative (/ifth, cuffs, paths) + Fricative + Stop (grasp, disc, loved) + Stop + Fricative (ship's, box, towards...) + Stop + Stop (/ooked, begged...) ~ 3-member CCs + Nasal + CC (jumped, bands, months...) + Liquid + CC (twelfth, faults; sil...) ricative + CC (,ifths; lifts) Stop + CC (fixed, acts, sixth...) ember CCs Stop + GCC (sixths, texts) Nasal + CCC (prompts, instincts) + Liquid + ccc (twelfths) cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 lide (play, dwell, green...) + elearve + Liquid / Gla (at, red, through, Sheil, Bhs ilquid/ Gide / taza Ficative/ Stop ly, svi, snow, sphere, spill.) ~ 3-member CCs: “"Is] 4 Sto + Liquid | Glide spl pring, sti ‘scripts. The data presented today in this study were taken from the audio recording of one subject—a Year 1 English major with advanced English proficiency. + The subject was asked to read aloud each of the test sentences twice. An. audio recording was made in a sound- proof booth. + The test words were then extracted for transcription and acoustic analysis Summary of Test Items Total |2¢s |3¢s |4cs initial CCsitems [47 [446 final CCsitems [77 [51 |2t_ | 5 Total items: 424 (in 142 words) Test Sentences |34 cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 July 2006, Analysis + Since each test word was produced twice, only the CCs which were produced accurately in both attempts were regarded as correct. The results were then tabulated and analyzed with reference to the research questions: — the length of the cluster ~ the position of the cluster ~ the type of cluster involving difficult clusters — the strategies . Overall Performance ____|Total_|2-cs acs |4-Cs AMl(N=t24) | 44 ‘ % 33% Initial (N=47)_|28 24(N=41) |4(N=6)_|NA % 60% —_|59% 67% Final (N=77)_|43 43 (N=54) [0 (N=21) |0 (N=8) % 17% _|A7% 0% 0% cathy wong on consonant clusters 7PacSLRF 20006 July 2006 Findings (1) (1) What is the effect of the position of CCs? — Syllable-initial CCs are less problematic: + 60% accuracy for initial CCs + 17% accuracy for final CCs (2) What is the effect of the length of CCs? ~ The more Cs in final, the more difficult ~ Not applicable to initial CCs * Another piece of evidence to show that position of CCs does have affect performance Findings (2) (3a) Which type of initial Cs is the easiest? Initial 2-member CCs (N=41) /s/ + Liquid / Glide / Nasal [9/11 |81% / Stop / Fricative (e.g. smoke) Stop + Liquid / Glide (e.g. [7/23 |30% pray) Fricative + Liquid / Glide 2/7 [29% (e.g. three) Initial 3-member CCs (N=6) /s/ + Stop + Liquid / Glide [4/6 [67% (e.g. spring) cathy wong on consonant clusters 8PacSLRF 20006 Findings (3) (3b) Which types of initial CCs are difficult? - dreamed — fdsimd/ > [agxmt] ~ drink /aaxyk/ > [t§*rok"] — through /0xu:/ > (8y] ~ three /0.2i/ > [oywil ~ improve /xmp.uv/ > [xmpur f] ~ glass /glas/ > [g2as] ~ doth /108/ > [shot] — please /pliz/ > [p'lwis] - dwell /dwel/ > [dio] & [deo] — swim /swzm/ > [Syam] / [syzm] — thwart JOwoxt/ > [80] = snow /snou/ > [shlou] + CCs with C + sonorant (/r 1 w n/) Findings (4) (3c) Which type of final CCs is the easiest? Final 2-member CCs (N=51) Fricative + Fricative / Stop |7/16 |44% (e.g. grasp, paths) Nasal + Stop / Fricative (e.g.|4/12 |33% damp, chance) Stop + Fricative / Stop (e.g. [2/14 [14% ships, looked) Liquid + Stop / Fricative/ [0/9 0% Affricate (e.g. melt, shelf) Final 3-member CCs (N=21) [0/21 |0% Final 4-member CCs(N=5) [0/5 [0% cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 Findings (5) (3b) Which types of final Cs are difficult? ~ Post-vocalic /1/ is either deleted or vocalized + world’s Jwaildz/ > {wavs] + films /ixim2/ > [f2n5] + melt Inelt/ > [nevt] + cold Ikovla/ > fk*oug] twelfths two f0s/ > [tweof?s] ~ Final /t/ or /d/ is often deleted, regardless of whether it occurs word-finally or non-finally, whether it is a suffix or not (cf. Walmsley, 1977; Peng & Setter, 2000): + that’s [8ets/ > [des] + must {nast/ > (mas) + last Neist/ > {nas} & (189) + Atos Jordz/ > [23] 8 [078] + scripts fakrzpts/ > (sk*zps] & [sk"sps] + lapsed /lepst/ > (leps] & [leps] + ranked Jregkt/ > (aepk*) & (aepk™t"] Findings (6) (4)What are the strategies? © Initial 2-member CC modifications - Substitution (7) + drink (darks > [eS"rpk"] - Co-articulation (5) + break Posezk/ > [btexk™] ~ Deletion of sonorants (4) + thwart /Bwort/ > [80] & [G0] - Insertion of Consonant (3) * please /p'liz/ > [p*lwis] - Devoicing (1) + dreamed /dsimd/ > [dgzrmt] - Epenthesis ?? (1) + three /®1i/ > [@ywi] cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2008 10PacSLRF 20006 Findings (7) + Final 2-member CC modifications = Substitution (17) + fitth Jixt0/ > (tree) — Devoicing (16) + serves /savz/ > [898] & (safs] — Deletion (12) + land /isnd/ > (Jen] ~ Insertion of Consonant (1) + rings daxge/ > {axpts] + Final 3- & 4-member CC modifications = Deletion (21) lifts Axfts/ > [xfs] = Substitution (10) + fixed /irkst/ > [fs8sd] = Devoicing (4) + bands Moendz/ > [bens] ~ Insertion of Consonant (2) + texts Jteksts/ > [tYe?srs] Discussion + The ease with initial /s/ ~ The special status of /s/ in clusters is discussed in Barlow (2001) and she suggests that /s/ may be an adjunct toa syllable (p.11). ~ This may account for the relative high accuracy of this learner. ~ This issue needs further investigation. + The absence of epenthesis ~ Different from previous studies, this Cantonese-speaking subject did not demonstrate any epenthesis. ~ Style does NOT seem to be a factor. ~ Li background? ~ Learner's proficiency? « The strategy of co-articulation cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 ranked [zent"] bee cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2006PacSLRF 20006 July 2006 Conclusion + Findings show that all four factors determining the production of English CCs: position, length, constituents, and strategies are intricately related. ~ E.g. initial /s/ is not difficult at all but final /s/ is often devoiced or deleted. + Strategies employed by learners have been examined in terms of position, different L1 background, style, etc. The issue of proficiency may need to be taken into consideration in future studies. Selected References (1) + Barlow, Jessica. 2001. A preliminary typology of initial Glusters in acquisition Cihical Linguistics and Phonetics, + Bolton, Kingsley and Helen Kwok. 1990. The Dynamics, of the Hong Kong Accent: Social Identity and Sociolinguistic Description. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 1: 147-72. + Broselow, Ellen, Su-I Chen, and Chilin Wang. 1998. The Emergence of the Unmarked in Second Language Phonology. .SSLA, 20: 261-280. + Eckman, Fred R,.'1991. The Structural Conformity Hypothesis and the Acquisition of Consonant Clusters in the Interlanguage of ESL Learners. Studies in Second Language Acquistion, 13: 23-41. + Eckman, Fred R. and Gregory K. Iverson, 1993. Sonority and markecness among onset clusters in the interlangquage of ESL learners. Second Language Research, 9: 234-52. + Hung, Tony, 2000, Towards a phonology of Hong Kong‘English. ‘World Englishes 19(3): 337-356. + Lin, Yuh-Huey. 2001. Syllable Simplification Strategies: A sbylistic Perspective. Language Learning 51(4): 661- cathy wong on consonant clusters 13PacSLRF 20006 Selected References (2) + Luke, Kang-kwong and Jack C. Richards. 1982, English 'n Heng Kong: functions and status. English World Wide + Peng, Long & Setter, Jane. 2000. The emergence of systematicity in the English pronunelations of two Cantonese-speaking adults in Hong Kong. English World-Wide 21(1): 81-108. + Stibbard, Richard. 2004. The Spoken English of Hong Kong: Study of Co-occurring Segmental Errors. Language, Culture and Curriculuni 17; 127-142, + Tarone, Elaine E. 1987. Some Influences on the Syilabié Structure of Interlanguage Phonology. In Georgette Loup and Steven Wenberae (Eds), jpterlanguage Phonology pp.232-247. Cambridge, Mass, Newbury House Publishers. + Walmsley, 3.8. 1977. Cantonese-English: An Essay in Diagnostic Linguistics. Proceedings of the Third AILIA Congress Copenhagen 1: 261-77. + Weinberger, Steven. 1987. The influence of linguistic context On Syllable simplification. In G. loup and S. Weinberger (Eds.), Interianguage Phonology: The ggquisiton ofa second language sound system, pp.401- 417. Rowley, MA.: Newbury House. Acknowledgements * The data presented in this paper was collected for a research project funded by a PolyU ICRG research project entitled “How do Cantonese-speaking ESL Learners Cope with Consonant Clusters?” * I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Ms Mimi Ng, the RA of the project, for her contribution. * Thanks are also extended to the subjects who have kindly agreed to participate in the research project. cathy wong on consonant clusters July 2008 14