Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Variability in interlanguage phonology of Malaysian learners of English

By Alias Abd Ghani


This study is a synchronic investigation of variability in interlanguage phonology of Malaysian learners of English. The study investigates patterns of style shifting in the speech performance of the Malaysian learners of English as they vary according to various stylistic environments i.e. verbal tasks viz, minimal pairs reading, word list reading, dialogue reading and free conversation representing\ud different contexts of situation ranging from the most formal to the most casual form of speech styles.\ud \ud The main objective of this thesis is to establish patterns of style stratification in the speech production of the subjects and to trace whether there exists any systematic patterning in the subjects' pronunciation of the target English sounds of both the individual subjects and across the group of subjects who come from different ethnolinguistic backgrounds. This study is also undertaken in order to determine the extent to which Labovian 'attention to speech' may be used as a causal explanation for variability in the speech production of the subjects.\ud \ud This study is adapted from the variability model developed by William Labov (1970) and extended by Lorna Dickerson (1974) in her interlanguage investigation of Japanese learners of English for showing stylistic variation of\ud speakers at a given point in time (synchronic variation) with the use of a single linear scale as a method of data analysis.\ud \ud An experimental investigation involving an interview method with the individual subjects, using four-part, Labov-style, self-administered tests were carried out at the University of Science, Malaysia. The results of this study showthat there is phonological variation in the subjects' performance of all the phonemes under investigation and this variation seems to be systematic in nature. The speech\ud performance of the Malaysian subjects in this study is responsive to the nature of the verbal tasks they are engaged in and in their production of most of the target\ud English phonemes they produced the predicted ranking of style shifting according to the Labovian 'attention to speech' hypothesis. According to the hypothesis the\ud subjects' speech performance should record the highest index score in the task which requires the greatest attention to be paid to the speech (minimal pairs\ud reading) with the lowest index score in the tasks which has the least attention (free conversation). As the results reveal, in most cases the subjects record the highest\ud index scores in the reading of minimal pairs. This is followed by word list reading, then dialogue reading and finally free conversation which records the lowest index\ud scores of all. However, the only exception to this regular patterning is in the subjects' performance of phonemes /v/ and in where it may be due to factors such as phonological transfer from Bahasa Malaysia (for phoneme Id) or inadequate\ud data for comparison (for phoneme /v/ as well as phonemes /p/, /b/ and /g/ in free conversation) . The results of statistical analysis using a Repeated Measurement of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) indicate that there is significant difference in the performance of the subjects across the four verbal tasks with the reading of minimal pairs the highest in the rank, followed by word list reading then dialogue reading and finally free conversation, the lowest in the rank. The results of this study suggest that 'attention to speech' could be used to account for variability in the subjects' speech performance of most of the TL phonemes under investigation across the four different verbal tasks. However, it cannot adequately explain variability in the subjects' performance of the TL phoneme /r/. \ud \ud \ud The results also suggest that though the subjects' speech performance is also sensitive to the position of phonemes in the words (i.e. word initial, medial or final), their production of those phonemes seems to be governed by the nature of the verbal tasks they are engaged in.\ud \ud As regards the group performance according to subjects' ethnolinguistic backgrounds, the results reveal that in most cases there is no significant difference in the performance of the subjects who come from different ethnolinguistic groups viz. Malay, Chinese and Indian. This is supported by statistical results which indicate no significant difference in the performance of the subjects according to groups with the exception of subjects performance of /0/ and /g/ where in their production of the target phoneme /0/, subjects who come from a Malay background records the highest mean scores followed by subjects who come from a Chinese background and finally those who come from an Indian background. As regards,\ud phoneme /g/, the results suggest that subjects from a Chinese background record the lowest mean scores of all

Publisher: Linguistics & Phonetics (Leeds)
Year: 1995
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (1987). (1896) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford, Basil Blackwell Weinberger, doi
  2. (1975). A Case study of a Japanese Child Learning ESL. doi
  3. (1980). A Critical Overview of the Methodology of Urban British Sociolinguistics. doi
  4. (1987). A Model of Interlanguage Phonology. doi
  5. (1971). A Non-contrastive Approach to Error Analysis, doi
  6. (1988). A Practical Introduction to Phonetics. doi
  7. (1974). A Sociolinguistic Study of Spoken Kannada in Bagalkot. PhD Dissertation.
  8. (1983). Accommodation Theory: An Explanation for Style Shifting in Second Language Dialects.
  9. (1992). An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology. doi
  10. (1989). An Introduction to Phonology. doi
  11. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language205 Acquisition Research.
  12. (1969). An Investigation of the Phonological Features of the English of Singapore and Their Relation to the Linguistic Substrata of Malay, Tamil and Chinese.
  13. (1984). Applied Sociolinguistics. doi
  14. (1994). Approaches to Second Language Acquisition.
  15. (1971). Approximative Systems of Foreign Language Learners. doi
  16. (1973). b) The Patterning of Language Variation
  17. (1992). Bilingual Education in Malaysia. doi
  18. (1976). Change and Variation in Hawaiian English: General Phonology and Syntax.
  19. (1988). Chinese. Cambridge; doi
  20. (1972). Covert Prestige and Linguistic Change in the Urban doi
  21. (1986). Descriptive Phonetics.
  22. (1980). Dialectology. Cambridge: doi
  23. (1973). Education Malaysia. The Teachers' Handbook for the Post-1970 Primary School Syllabus. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka,
  24. (1981). English in Malaysia.
  25. (1983). English in Malaysia. In
  26. (1984). English in the Malay Archipelago: Nativization And Its Functions In A Sociolinguistic Area.
  27. (1992). Fonetik dan Fonologi. Satu Tinjauan. Penang: Penerbit Sarlis Asmah Hj Omar
  28. (1994). Gimson's Pronunciation of English. Fifth Edition. doi
  29. (1986). Hughes A doi
  30. (1971). Idiosyncratic Dialects and Error Analysis. doi
  31. (1979). Interlanguage as Chameleon. doi
  32. (1974). Internal Patterning of Phonological Variability in the Speech of Japanese Learners of English: Toward a Theory of Second Language Acquisition.
  33. (1981). Invitations, Complaints and the Competence of the Native Speakers.
  34. (1954). Is Structural Dialectology Possible? doi
  35. (1991). Language Acquisition: A Linguistic Introduction. doi
  36. (1987). Language and Social Networks. 2nd edn. doi
  37. (1991). Language Processing in Bilingual Children. doi
  38. (1969). Language Transfer. doi
  39. (1977). Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations. doi
  40. (1970). Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. 7th printing. The Hague:
  41. (1979). Learning How to Speak Properly: Lectal Variants, Language Planning and Language Teaching. In Applications of Linguistics to Language Teaching.
  42. (1983). Linguistic Systems and Linguistic Change in an Interlcmguage, doi
  43. (1992). Linguistic Variation and Change. doi
  44. (1982). Models for Non-Native Englishes. doi
  45. (1982). Native Speaker English for the Third World Today?. In Pride, doi
  46. (1987). Observing and Analysing Natural Language. A Critical Account of Sociolinguistic Method. doi
  47. (1976). On the Nature of Interlanguage System.
  48. (1983). On the Variability in Interlanguage Systems. doi
  49. P(1979) Accommodation Theory: Optimal Levels of Convergence.
  50. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. doi
  51. (1979). Phonetics and Linguistic Markers in Speech. In Scherer,
  52. (1984). Phonological Processes in Second Language Acquisition: Another Look at Interlanguage Syllable Structure. doi
  53. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change. Volume 1: Internal Factors. doi
  54. (1981). Problems in Teaching Pronunciation,
  55. (1988). Psycholinguistic Issues in Second Language Acquisition. In
  56. (1992). Rediscovering Interlanguage. London: Longman.210 Siegel,
  57. (1990). Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology. Kent: Hodder and Stoughton.
  58. (1983). Rules of Speaking. In
  59. (1987). Second Language Acquisition in Context. London: doi
  60. (1983). Simplification Features in the Structure of Colloquial Malaysian English.
  61. (1981). Social and Situational Factors Affecting the Communicative Strategy of Dialect Code -switching. doi
  62. (1974). Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: doi
  63. (1979). Social Markers in Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University doi
  64. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. doi
  65. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. doi
  66. (1980). Sociolinguistic Variation and Styleshifting in Second Language Acquisition. doi
  67. (1983). Sociolinguistics, 2nd edn. doi
  68. (1984). Speech Accommodation Theories: A Discussion in Terms of Second Language Acquisition. doi
  69. (1979). Speech as a Marker of Situations.
  70. (1976). Speech Events and Natural Speech: Some Implications for Sociolinguistic Methodology. doi
  71. (1979). Speech Markers and Social Class.
  72. (1988). Speech Physiology, Speech Perception and Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge: doi
  73. (1972). Studies in Area Linguistics. doi
  74. (1977). Studies of the Non-Fluent Bilinguals .
  75. (1992). SystematiciOt of Phonetic Variation in Natural Discourse. doi
  76. (1982). Systematicity and Attention in Interlanguage. doi
  77. (1985). Tamil. Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars. London: Routledge Augustine, doi
  78. (1987). Task Variation in Interlanguage Phonology.
  79. (1984). The Chinese Language. Facts and Fantasy. Honolulu; doi
  80. (1984). The Current State of Interlanguage Studies: An Attempted Critical Summary.
  81. (1982). The Ethnography of Communication. An Introduction doi
  82. (1975). The Learner's Interlanguage as a System of Variable Rules. doi
  83. (1992). The Linguistic Scenery in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. doi
  84. (1994). The Malaysian English Mosaic: An Outline of the Three Social Dialects and Hybrid Style of a Vigorous 'New English' English Today. doi
  85. (1984). The New Englishes. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul Preston,
  86. (1987). The Phonology of Interlanguage. In doi
  87. (1978). The Pidginization Process: A Model for Second Language Acquisition. doi
  88. (1976). The Psycholinguistic Unit of Language Learning and Language Change. doi
  89. (1983). The Roles of English in Malaysia in the Context of National Language Planning.
  90. (1974). The Significance of Learners Errors. In Richards,
  91. (1971). The Social Differentiation of English in doi
  92. (1966). The Social Stratification of English in doi
  93. (1970). The Study of Language in its Social Context. Stadium Generale
  94. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. doi
  95. (1987). Theories of Second Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.206 Milroy J and Milroy L doi
  96. (1967). Three Areas of Experimental Phonetics.
  97. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. doi
  98. (1979). Understanding Variability in Second Language Learners'212 Pronunciation Systems: Some Implications for Linguistic Research and Language Teaching.
  99. (1985). Variability in Interlanguage Use: A Study of SO/le-shifting in Morphology and Syntax. doi
  100. (1991). Variation in Interlanguage Morphology. doi
  101. (1984). Variation Theory and Language Learning. doi
  102. (1988). Wrestling With 'Context' in Interlanguage Theory. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.