Chapter three

Contrastive analysis
A classic question in phonetic theory is: "What sounds can a language have? It has
been asked about vowel inventories (Lindblom, 1986) and consonant inventories
(Lindblom and Maddieson, 1988). Every speech sound belongs to one or other of
the two main classes known as vowels and consonants. Describing the vowel and
consonant inventories is a start in describing the salient phonetic structure of a
language. The standard view is that the sound inventory in a language is the result of
two competing forces: one favors sounds that are easy to produce while the other
force pulls the system towards more distinctiveness, i.e. maximal contrast between
elements of the system (Lindblom, 1986). The native language (source language) of
L2 learners plays the role of a Phonological filter which deeply influences the L2
learners pronunciation so that it deviates from that of native speakers of the target
language (Polivanov, 1931; Trubetzkoy, 1939/1969). As a result L2 learners have
perceptual blind spots which lead to perceptual errors. These blind spots prevent the
L2 listeners from identifying the foreign phonemes correctly. Instead, they substitute
their own L1 sounds for the foreign phonemes.
In this chapter I will give the sound inventories of three languages, General
American English (GA),
1
Standard Dutch (Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands,
ABN)
2
and Standard Mandarin Chinese (Putonghua).
3
These are the native
languages of the three groups of speakers and listeners that will be studied in the
present dissertation. More details on the choice of experimental subjects will be
provided in Chapter four.
3.1 Vowels
A vowel is defined as a typically voiced sound in the production of which the air
issues in a continuous stream through the pharynx and mouth, there being no
obstruction and no narrowing such as would cause audible friction. Vowels are
1
The American subjects for the final experiment in this research are from Los Angeles,
California, which is generally regarded as a place where GA is used. Californian English is a
dialect of the English language spoken in the U.S. state of California. As a variety of
American English, Californian English is similar to most other forms of American speech in
being a rhotic accent, which is historically a significant marker in differentiating different
English varieties.
2
The Dutch subjects come from the cities around Leiden called city belt (Dutch: Randstad),
where people speaking standard Dutch, ABN, can easily be found.
3
The language for the Chinese subjects in our experiment is Standard Chinese, which is the
present-day dialect of Beijing promulgated as a standard language in Mainland China, Taiwan
and Singapore. Our Chinese subjects come from the northeast of China, Changchun, where
people speak the Northeast dialect, which is very close to Standard Mandarin Chinese.
CHAPTER THREE 40
usually described in terms of quality and duration. Since vowels are distinguished
from one another chiefly by whether they are produced in the front, centre, or back
of the mouth, whether the tongue position is high, mid or low, and whether the lips
are spread or rounded, the basic building blocks of most vowel systems are the three
qualities, as many of the vowels of the worlds languages can be described simply
by the three traditional dimensions high-low, back-front, and rounded-unrounded.

back
front
high
low
rounded
unrounded

unrounded
X
Y
Z
Figure 3.1. The location of the eight cardinal vowels in a three-dimensional articulatory
vowel space defined by backness (X dimension), height (Y dimension), and rounding (Z
dimension) [after Ladefoged (1971: 72), Ladefoged and Maddieson (1990: 94)].
This figure shows the location of a set of reference vowels, i.e., the cardinal vowels
described by Jones (1956), within a space defined by these dimensions. What Jones
effectively gave phonetics in his CV system (Cardinal Vowel system) was a
mapping system which presented what is essentially auditory and acoustic
information in a convenient visual form.
4
It is the only widely used system for
vowel description. It gave phoneticians a yardstick for measuring the vowel quality
which is invaluable in phonetic description.
Another element which is considered by some to be of importance in
determining vowel quality is the state of the tongue and lips as regards muscular
tension. Those who consider that vowels may be differentiated by degrees of
muscular tension distinguish two classes, tense vowels and lax vowels. Tense
vowels are supposed to require considerable muscular tension on the part of the
tongue; in lax vowels the tongue is supposed to be held loosely. The difference in
quality between the English vowel seat and sit is described as a difference in
tenseness: the vowel in seat is considered tense and the vowel in sit lax (Jones,
1956).
4
Joness system has been be criticized by Collins and Mees (1981) as follows: [Jones] took
no account of the significance of the root of the tongue and its relationship to the pharynx
wall. Indeed, he disregarded the pharynx cavity altogether, mentioning only tongue height in
his theory. Later research has shown that it is the relative sizes of the oral and pharyngeal
cavities which are the crucial factors in vowel quality.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 41
In some languages there are vowels which are distinguished by duration alone.
For instance, in Danish, there is an opposition between long and short vowels, and in
Estonian even between short, long and superlong (Lehiste 1970). In many
languages, similar oppositions between sets of vowels are also marked by
differences in vowel quality. Such combinations of duration and vowel quality are
employed in Dutch and English.
3.1.1 Vowel inventories in the three languages
In the following sections I will compare the vowel inventories of English, Dutch and
Mandarin Chinese. I will present literature data consisting of structural vowel tables
published for the languages and of formant measurements. Formant measurements
have been used since 1950 as an semi-objective way to determine vowel quality.
The technique will be discussed at greater length in Chapter four; for the purpose of
the present chapter it is sufficient to know that the centre frequency of the lowest
resonance in the speech signal (first formant, F1) varies with the degree of mouth
opening and that the second-lowest formant (F2) corresponds inversely with the
degree of backness. Acoustic vowel charts plot F1 from top to bottom against F2
from right to left; in this way the configuration of vowel points assumes the same
orientation as in a traditional articulatory vowel chart, with /i/ in the top left-hand
corner, /u/ in the top right-hand corner, and /a/ at the bottom. In the charts we
present below, we did not plot the formant frequencies in hertz but transformed the
hertz-values to Bark units. Equal distances in the Bark space correspond to equal
differences in perceived timbre (or: vowel quality). For details we refer to Chapter
four.
3.1.1.1 English vowels
The vowel system of General American English (GA, as exemplified for instance in
the American English pronouncing dictionary by Kenyon and Knott, 1944, see also
Gussenhoven and Broeders, 1976: 186-195) is best described as composed of four
vowel heights and three degrees of backness. Height is a four-level parameter with
high, high-mid, low-mid and low as the phonetically relevant degrees. Backness has
three degrees, viz. front, centre and back. English has a split in its vowel system
such that most vowels are tense (long duration, peripheral articulation) but some are
lax (short duration, more centralized pronunciation). The four degrees of height are
defined on the tense vowel set; the back vowels require four degrees. When tense
and lax vowels are kept apart, three degrees of height suffice for the front vowels
(high/close for /i:/ (heed, bead), mid for /e:/ (hayed, stayed) and low/open for //
(had, mad). For the back vowels, however, we have to distinguish between
high/close /u:/ (whod, mood), high-mid /o:/ (hoed, showed), low-mid /:/ (hawed,
clawed), and low/open /:/ (father). In many American dialects and probably also in
General American, /:/ and /:/ have merged (Wells, 1982; Labov, Ash and Boberg,
2006), simplifying the vowel system to three degrees of height, and restoring
symmetry between front and back vowels. The lax vowel set comprises just two
degrees of height (high vs. low). Textbooks on British English often mention so-
called centring diphthongs as an extra set of vowel phonemes, as in fear, fair, poor.
CHAPTER THREE 42
These vowels could be claimed to be phonemes on the strength of such minimal
triplets as bead ~ beard ~ bid. It seems to me, however, that these vowels can be
treated as positional allophones of tense vowels followed by coda-/r/. The reason
why the underlying vowel should be tense rather than lax has to do with the
phonotactics of the centring diphthongs: they cannot be followed by any other
consonants than the alveolars (/t, d, s, z/), which is the same environmental
constraint that applies to other tense vowels; lax vowels can be followed by a larger
variety of consonants and clusters, which are not possible as codas after murmur
diphthongs. For instance, centring diphthongs cannot be followed by coda clusters
except when the last consonant is one of the set /t, d, s, z/, i.e., the set covering the
suffixes used to code plural, past tense, or third person singular after stems with
either voiceless consonants (/-t, -s/) or with voiced sounds (/-d, -z/). Quite probably
also [a:] should be analysed as a surface phenomenon in non-rhotic varieties of
(British) English. In rhotic varieties, and especially in General American, this vowel
sound can be analyzed as // followed by coda-/r/.
GA has two diphthongs, /ai, ou/, which start at an open position and glide
towards a close position along the front and back side of the vowel space,
respectively. The third diphthong is /oi/, which runs from back to front in the mid
part of the space. Table 3.1 summarizes the vowel inventory of GA. The unstressed
neutral vowel schwa (/a/) is not included in table 3.1.
Table 3.1. The General American vowel inventory. Vowels in parentheses are allophones in
GA before /r/, but have surface-phonemic status in RP English.
front central back
tense lax tense lax tense lax
High i: (ia
r
) u: (oa
r
)
hi-mid e: (ca
r
) i o: (oa
r
) o
lo-mid c a:
r
o:, oi o
Low ai o:, ou
Figure 3.2 presents the classical formant data collected for American English by
Peterson and Barney (1952) drawn separately for male (squares) and female (circles)
speakers, and broken down by the tense (solid lines) versus lax (dotted lines)
subsystems.
5
The F1 and F2 frequencies have been transformed to Bark units, in
5
Peterson and Barney (1952) identified the primary acoustic features of the American English
vowels on the basis of /hVd/ productions by 28 women, 33 men, and 15 children (ages not
specified). They found a general correspondence between vowel type and frequencies of the
first and second formants (F1 and F2). Hillenbrand, Getty, Clark and Wheeler (1995)
replicated and extended the Peterson and Barney study. Hillenbrand et al. sampled 45 men, 48
women, and 46 10- to 12-year-old children. Analysis of formant data by Hillenbrand et al.
showed differences from the formant data in the Peterson and Barney study, both in terms of
mean frequencies of F1 and F2, and the degree of overlap among adjacent vowels. However,
the data were similar to Peterson and Barney regarding vowel-specific formant frequencies, as
well as change in formant values according to vocal tract size and shape.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 43
order to create a visual display in which equal distances between vowels represent
auditorily equal differences in vowel quality (timbre). Note that the vowel //, which
is a lax vowel in terms of its distributional properties (may not occur in an open syllable
at the end of a word) is considered a tense vowel (see 5.2). Also, the vowel /o/ is
treated as tense (see 5.3).
The American English vowel system consists of 11 distinct vowels (or
monophthongs) /i, i, e, c, , , u, o, o, o, o/ (Peterson and Barney, 1952).
Categorization of vowels according to features of tongue articulation reveals a vocal
tract vowel space which consists of four distinct corners corresponding to a
quadrilateral shape. Vowels identified for each corner are /i/ (high-front), / / (low-
front), /u/ (high-back), and /o/ (low-back).
Figure 3.2. The tense (solid lines) and lax (dotted lines) vowels of General American plotted
in an F1 (top to bottom) by F2 (right to left) display. Male (squares) and female (circles)
vowels have been plotted separately. (After Peterson and Barney, 1952, with Bark-
transformed frequency values for F1 and F2).
3.1.1.2 Dutch vowels
The Dutch vowel system (Table 3.2) is in many respects similar to English. It also
has tense and lax vowels, and distinguishes four degrees of height and three degrees
of backness. However, the central part of the vowel space is more densely filled as
Dutch has (rounded) central high and high-mid vowels. In the lax front vowels
Dutch distinguishes two degrees of height for the /i ~ c/ contrast, where English has
three: /i ~ e ~ /. Dutch is underdifferentiated relative to English in the high back
vowels, where English has the tense ~ lax opposition /u: ~ o/ while Dutch only has
CHAPTER THREE 44
/u:/. Dutch also has a number of vowels that are absent in the English system; such
overdifferentiation is hardly ever a source of confusion (cf. Lado, 1957).
Dutch has three full diphthongs, /ci, oy, ou/, the first two of which have their
starting point at a low-mid vowel height and the latter at a fully open position. Also,
Dutch has some degree of diphthongization on the tense high-mid vowels, so that
/e:/, /:/ and /o:/ are realized as [e
i
], [
y
] and [o
u
], respectively. There is a sixteenth
vowel, schwa, which is not included in the table. This neutral vowel cannot be
stressed; if it is, it will change to /o/, the rounded lax central vowel.
Table 3.2. The basic Dutch vowel inventory (Rietveld and Van Heuven 2001).
front central back
tense lax tense lax tense lax
high i: y: u:
hi-mid e: i : o o:
lo-mid ci c oy o
low a: ou o
Figure 3.3 gives the arrangement of the twelve monophthongs of Dutch (excluding
schwa) in an acoustic vowel diagram. Dutch also has tense and lax vowels, but the
lax subsystem seems reduced along the height dimension only, not also along the
backness parameter, as it is in English.
Figure 3.3. Dutch monophthongs plotted in an F1 by F2 plane (Barks). Male data (50
speakers) adapted from Pols et al. (1970), female data (25 speakers) from Van Nierop, Pols
and Plomp (1973).
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 45
3.1.1.3 Chinese vowels
There has been a longstanding controversy in the literature on the number of
underlying vowel categories in Mandarin, and the relationship of the myriad of
surface vowel forms to these phonemic categories (e.g., Chao, 1934, 1968), R.
Cheng, 1966; C. Cheng, 1973; Pulleyblank, 1984; Lin, 1989; Wang, 1993; Wu,
1994). The reason for this controversy is that most phonetic manifestations of
vowels in Mandarin occur in a fairly narrow range of contexts, which suggests that
they probably can be reduced to a smaller set of basic vowel categories. There is
disagreement both on the number of surface (phonetic) vowels in Mandarin as well
as on the number of underlying, abstract (phonological) vowels. Surface vowels can
be as many as twelve or thirteen; the number of underlying vowels varies between
four and six (Wan and Jaeger, 2003). The large majority of sources distinguish
twelve surface vowels (see also Flege et al., 1997; Li and Thompson, 1981; Light,
1976; Maddieson, 1984; Wu 1964), which can be reduced to a smaller number of
underlying vowels in different ways, yielding different numbers. We assume that
positive and negative transfer of vowels from L1 to L2 is located towards the surface
level rather than at some deep level of representation. Cheng (1966) relates the
twelve surface vowels to their underlying forms as follows:
/i/ [i], [r],[.]
/y/ [y]
/u/ [u]
/a/ [e], [a], [o], [x]
/a/ [a], [o], [c]
The twelve surface vowels can be represented in a structural way as exemplified in
Table 3.3.
As the table shows, Mandarin has no length (i.e. no tense ~ lax) contrast;
contrasts such as /i: ~ i/, /u: ~ o/, /o ~ o: ~ o:/, and /e ~ / do not occur.
Table 3.3. The Mandarin surface vowel inventory.
front central back
round +round round +round round +round
high i y . u
high-mid e a x o
low-mid c o
low a o
Chinese is different from both Dutch and English because Chinese is a tone
language, in which tones are lexically specified. In general, all full syllables carry a
lexical tone, whereas weak syllables have the neutral tone (or are toneless). As far
as we know, however, the tones of Chinese do not interfere in any way with the
production or perception of English sounds by Chinese learners. This does not rule
CHAPTER THREE 46
out the possibility that tonal interference may be found in the learning of English
(sentence) prosody, but this is outside the scope of the present research.
Studies examining acoustic characteristics of vowel production in Mandarin are
limited. Wu (1964) examined vowels produced by Mandarin speakers (four male
adults, four female adults, four children). His measurements included, among other
properties, F1, F2, F3 frequencies of formants for six standard vowels /i, e, y, u, o, /,
as well as of allophones of /i/ and /e/. A later study by Howie (1976) acoustically
analysed these six vowels produced by two male speakers.
Figure 3.4 presents formant measurements of F1 and F2 plotted in the same way
as we did for English and Dutch. These formant values were published by Li, Yu,
Chen and Wang (2004) for five male and five female speakers of Mandarin
producing seven monophthongs /i, y, u, e, , o, /. Five of these have a fairly
unrestricted distribution; /e/ and /o/, however, may be considered allophones of /i/
and /u/, respectively, which surface in specific environments only.
Figure 3.4. F1 versus F2 (Bark) for seven monophthongal vowels of Mandarin (Beijing
dialect) spoken by five men and five women (adapted from Li et al. 2004).
6
3.1.2 Prediction of pronunciation problems in vowels
In Table 3.4 below, I have attempted to present together the vowel inventories of
Dutch, Mandarin and (American) English in a crude contrastive analysis. Here I use
the principles that were advocated by Lado (1957), and which also underlie the
6
F2 for male /u/ is specified by Li et al. (2004: 257) as 9.147862 Bark. I assume that the first
digit is in error and corrected it to 7. This decision is supported by Figure 3 in Li et al.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 47
categories of Fleges (1987) Speech Learning Model (SLM), in order to define three
classes of speech sounds in a target language. The first is the category of identical
sounds. These are sounds that are transcribed with the same narrow IPA symbol in
source and target language; they should constitute no learning problem. In the table
they have been left unmarked. The second category are sounds in source and target
language that are written with the same IPA base symbol but differ in diacritic
marks. These sounds are phonetically similar but not identical; such similar sounds
are predicted to constitute long-term learning problems in second-language
acquisition. In the table, similar sounds are indicated in grey cells. The third type are
new sounds. Here a sound is needed in the target language which does not occur in
the source language. The sound in the source language that is phonetically closest to
the target is written with a different base symbol in the IPA. The prediction is that
such new sounds constitute a learning problem in the initial stages of the acquisition
process, but sooner or later the new category will emerge, and that it will be quite
authentic. In the tables, new sounds are printed in white against a black background.
Table 3.4. Contrastive vowel analysis of Dutch and English (upper panel) and of Mandarin
and English (lower panel). Grey cells in source languages denote source sounds that are not
needed in the target language. White, grey and black cells in the target language represent
identical, similar and new sounds, respectively.
Place of Constriction
V-height
Front Central Back
Source: Dutch
Tense Lax Tense Lax Tense Lax
High i y u
High-mid e: i : o o:
Low-mid c o
Low a: o
Diphthong ci oy ou
Target: English
Tense Lax Tense Lax Tense Lax
High i: u:
High-mid e: i o: o
Low-mid c
Low o
Diphthong ai oi ou
CHAPTER THREE 48
Table 3.4. Continued.
Place of Constriction (across) V-height
(down) Front Central Back
Source: Mandarin
round +round round +round round +round
High i y . u
High-mid e a x o
Low-mid c o
Low a
Diphthong ai oi ou
Target: English
Tense Lax Tense Lax Tense Lax
High i: u:
High-mid e: i o: o
Low-mid c
Low o
Diphthong ai oi ou
It is rather unclear how realistic the predictions of SLM are. The vowels in the
Dutch inventory have an unrestricted distribution, and can readily be employed in
English. Some of the Mandarin vowels are highly context-sensitive allophones,
which may or may not generalize to English. Moreover, Mandarin has no length (or
tense~lax) contrast. The lax members of the opposition in English are transcribed
with separate base symbols and are therefore new sounds. The tense (long)
members differ from the Mandarin counterparts in a diacritic only (length mark) and
are therefore similar sounds.
In the next sections we will review comments made by experts on English
pronunciation teaching to Dutch ( 3.1.2.1) and Mandarin ( 3.1.2.2) learners. These
comments are not predictions based on an a priori comparison of source and target
sound systems but summarize classroom experience.
3.1.2.1 Dutch ~ English
This section summarizes comments made in pronunciation text books at the
university level for Dutch learners of English (e.g. Gussenhoven and Broeders;
1976, 1981; Collins, Hollander and Rodd, 1977; Collins and Mees, 1981). When in
these comments Dutch and English are called similar, the term does not necessarily
have the same status it has in Fleges SLM. The authors of the textbooks, who are
accomplished phoneticians with a keen ear for minute phonetic differences between
sounds, hardly ever call a pair of sounds in source and target language identical or
the same. Therefore similar sounds may refer to pairs of Dutch/English sounds that
are written with the same base symbol and diacritics. The summary is presented in
Table 3.5.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 49
Table 3.5 Survey of pronunciation problems with vowels by Dutch learners of English,
derived from Collins and Mees (1981) and Gussenhoven and Broeders (1976: 88). D = Dutch,
E = English.
English
target
Dutch substitutions/typical errors/comments
/i:/ Absent in D; similar sound D /i/ is the usual replacement.
Too close, too front, especially too short. The articulation is also con-
siderably tenser than E /i:/.
/i/ Absent in D; D /i/ is similar to this sound. Generally D learners have no
problem with this sound.
7
/e:/ Similar to D /e:/. Both E and D /e:/ are phonetically diphthongized, E /e:/
has a slightly lower onset and a stronger glide element. D /e:/ is within
the range of acceptable pronunciations of E /e:/.
/c/ D learners use similar D /c/ as a replacement. D learners are generally
unaware of the E /~e/ contrast so that perceptual confusion may result.
// Absent in D; most D learners will substitute D /c/. Perceptual confusion
is predicted between E /~e/.
/o:/ Absent in D; typically replaced by D /a:/, which varies considerably in
quality. There is considerable overlap between D /a:/ and E /o:/.
/o:/ Absent in D; there appears to be no regular substitution from Dutch
speakers. Some use an extended D /o/, whilst others use the marginal
vowel D /o:/ (as in French loan words). Others use the allophone of D
/o:/ that occurs before D /r/.
/o:/ E /o:/ and D /o:/ are phonetically realised as diphthongs. E /o:/ has lower
onset and somewhat stronger diphthongization but no perceptual con-
fusion will arise with any other E vowel.
/o/ Absent in D.
E /o/ is perhaps the most difficult vowel for D learners. There is no D
vowel near E /o/. Most D speakers confuse E /o/ and E /u:/, hearing both
in terms of D /u/.
/u:/ Absent in D, but similar to D /u/.
Some speakers substitute D /u/. This vowel is closer to E /u:/, and the D
sound is shorter (except before /r/). The D articulation is also tenser.
Most D speakers regularly confuse E /u: ~ o/.
// Absent in D; D learners tend to substitute D /o/ for E //. More advanced
students sometimes substitute D /o/ for this sound.
/a:/ Absent in D; usually replaced by D /:r/ or /or/. Neither substitution is
acceptable, having inappropriate lip-rounding, and too close a tongue
position.
7
Speakers from The Hague, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Antwerp, may confuse E /i:~ i/.
Speakers from Dordrecht, Nijmegen, Noord-Brabant and Limburg may have a very open
quality, which may give rise to confusion with English /e/.
CHAPTER THREE 50
Table 3.5. Continued
// The quality of D // is similar to that of E // in most contexts and
transfers well into E.
Difficulty may arise word-finally. D final allophone tends to be closer
and is rounded, giving a markedly different effect from the very open
word-final E. E // is similar to // in syllable final-position, D // is
closer to D //.
// Absent in D. The usual D substitution for E // is D //, which is too
close, too round and generally over-tense. Tenseness of D realisation of
E // is especially noticeable before fortis plosives.
A less common error is to pronounce // too front and unrounded, so
losing contrast with //. Mispronunciation of // is a very persistent error,
often heard from otherwise proficient speakers. It appears to be difficult
for D native speakers to detect.
/ai/ Absent in D; is often replaced by D VC sequence /a:j/, whose vowel part
is too long, esp. before voiceless plosives, so that confusion may arise
with voiced plosive (e.g. tight ~ tide).
/u/ Similar sound D /u/ is substituted; its onset may be too rounded but no
perceptual confusions arise.
/i/ Absent in D; D vowel+glide sequence /o:j/ is often substituted, whose
onset is too close but does not lead to perceptual confusion
3.1.2.2 Chinese ~ English
Although many textbooks have been produced describing the differences between
the sound systems of Dutch and English (see above) and giving detailed analyses of
pronunciation errors of Dutch learners of English, such studies are virtually non-
existent for Chinese learners of English. In fact, I know of just one pedagogical
study by Zhao (1995), which makes a comparison between the sounds of Mandarin
and of English and contains a discussion of pronunciation errors of Chinese learners
of English. Much of what will be discussed in the following paragraphs has been
taken from Zhao (1995); it should be borne in mind that her comments, too, relate to
the sounds of British English, specifically RP. This is not a great concern as long as
we are dealing with the consonants, since these do not differ very much between
British and American English. It is a major concern when dealing with the vowel
system.
The Chinese sound system that Zhao (1995) uses as her reference is that of
Mandarin (also called Putonghua or Common Speech), which is comparable in
status to RP in England. Like RP in English, there is also a standard form of
pronunciation in modern Chinese. This pronunciation, which is being popularized
throughout the P.R. China, is based on the northern dialect family, with Beijing
speech sounds as the norm. In China, TV and radio announcers use the Common
Speech. Teachers and students in school are required to use it, too. It is the main
language spoken in China and one of the worlds major languages, ranking among
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 51
the official working languages at the United Nations and other international
organizations.
According to Zhao (1995), experience shows that Chinese learners of English
who speak the Common Speech have fewer difficulties in acquiring a good English
pronunciation than those who speak with broad local accents, who often have many
difficulties to overcome before they can pronounce English acceptably. This would
be because there are more similarities between the pronunciation of Common
Speech and that of English. These claims seem rather speculative and remain to be
tested in future research; such testing is clearly beyond the scope of the present
dissertation.
Figure 3.5 has been copied from Zhao (1995). It is a traditional cardinal vowel
chart with the RP-English vowels drawn as solid black circles and the Chinese
vowels as open circles.
i:
i
ano
o:
o
u
o
u::
o:

a:
x
o
c

e
i
a
a:
a
Figure 3.5. Comparison of RP English (solid markers) and Mandarin (open markers) vowels
in a traditional Cardinal Vowel diagram (after Zhao, 1995).
For the purpose of the present dissertation Figure 3.5 has to be interpreted with some
caution, as we will use General American as the pronunciation norm for English. As
will be shown in more detail in Chapter five, the vowel system of English, whether
British or American, can be conceived of as two subsystems, one of which is
peripheral, with so-called tense (and long) vowels along the outer edge of the vowel
diagram, and the other is more centralized, with four vowels configured along an
inner circle. Zhao (1995) does not treat tense /e:/ and /o:/ as monophthongs. Rather,
she deals with these vowels as half diphthongs, which is why they have not been
included in Figure 3.5. The positions of the RP vowels seem quite reasonable;
However, I would question the locations of the Chinese vowel sounds. Zhao seems
to suggest that Chinese /i, a, o, u/ are identical to cardinal vowels 1, 4, 5 and 8,
respectively. It would seem rather unlikely that a language such as Mandarin,with a
smaller vowel inventory than English, would have its vowels in more peripheral
CHAPTER THREE 52
positions.
8
The high central vowel /y/, which is one of the vowels of Chinese, has
been omitted from the chart, most likely as Zhao believes that this vowel is never a
reasonable substitute for any vowel of English. The half-close unrounded vowel //
is given in the figure; Zhao claims that it is used as a substitute for English //.
I will now present a list of vowel pronunciation errors as identified by Zhao
(1995). Later, in Chapter six, we will have occasion to check the predictions in this
list with the confusion data collected in our own experiments. We will then be able
to either confirm or disconfirm whether such errors do indeed occur. Moreover, we
will examine our data to see whether there are any systematic errors that were not
predicted by Zhao. If such errors should be found, the added value our experimental
approach would be shown: we predict that even a trained teacher of English as a
foreign language may well miss systematic pronunciation errors in foreign-accented
English (especially when the teacher is a native speaker of the same language as that
of the learners), that can only be brought to light through experimental methods.
The following table is a summary of Zhaos treatment of the English vowel
sounds by Chinese learners. It lists all the vowel phonemes of (RP) English in the
left-hand column. In the right-hand column I first specify if the particular sound has
no counterpart in Chinese. When no remark is made as to the absence of the vowel
in Chinese, Zhao implicitly claims that there is some vowel in Chinese that Chinese
learners of English will use as a reasonable substitute for the target sound in English.
Sometimes the substitute is a good match for the target sounds, in which case no
further comments are made. Most of the time, however, the substitute differs from
the target; the table will then specify how the substitute differs, and what perceptual
confusions are likely to arise as a result of the substitution. The perceptual
consequences are sometimes explicitly mentioned by Zhao, but when she makes no
explicit claims, I have derived the predictions myself.
Zhao (1995) makes two claims with respect to the diphthongs of English. The
first is that Chinese learners tend to reduce the contrast between long and short
vowels in English, which would follow from the fact that Chinese does not use
length as a distinctive feature. She then goes on to say that diphthongs are like long
vowels, implying that Chinese-accented diphthongs will be too short. Chinese has
both falling and rising diphthongs. A falling diphthong has its most prominent
element first and the less prominent (semivowel, glide) element last, while a rising
diphthong has the more prominent element last. English has falling diphthongs
only.
9
Zhao adds a warning that there are rising diphthongs in Chinese and the
beginning of these rising diphthongs is less prominent than the end. She seems to
8
At first glance one would be tempted to believe that the open circles in figure 3.5 are in fact
the cardinal vowel positions, given as reference points. However, these are explicitly the
articulatory positions indicated by Zhao (1995) for the vowels of Mandarin. It is unclear from
her description how these positions were determined, nor did she supply any references.
9
It would be possible, however, to analyze the realization of tense /u:/ as [ju:] after certain
consonants as a rising diphthong. Examples would be: puke [pju:k], beauty [bju:ti], mew
[mju:], tune [tju:n], dune [dju:n], new [nju:], cue [kju:], and many others. Since the glide [j]
only occurs in combination with tense /u:/ (including its centring diphthong allophone [],
there is no point in increasing the set of onset clusters with a large number of /Cj/ sequences.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 53
imply, therefore, that Chinese learners tend to substitute rising diphthongs for
English target diphthongs. However, given the large inventory of falling diphthongs
in Chinese we do not think it very likely that Chinese learners of English will ever
use a rising diphthong as an approximation to an English target except perhaps for
/Cju:/ (also see note 2), but then the substitution would be highly felicitous.
Table 3.6. Survey of pronunciation problems with vowels by Chinese learners of English,
derived from Zhao (1995). M = Mandarin, E = English.
English
target
Mandarin substitutions/typical errors
/i:/ M /i/, too short, not tense enough, not high enough; confusion with E /i/
/i/ absent in M, M /i/ substituted, too long, too tense, too high, confusion
with E /i:/
/e/ Generally no problem, but Northern speakers may substitute [ai] or [ei],
yielding confusion with E /ai/ and with E tense /e:/
// Absent in M, pronunciation will be too close, confusion with E /e:/
/o:/ M has three allophones: [a] (open syll.), [n] (closed syll.) and [o] (before
nasal coda).
Realization not open enough, confusion with E //.
/o/ Sound does not exist in M. Diphthong [au] substituted with glide and not
enough lip-rounding. Confusion with E /au/
/o:/ M [o)] substituted, too open but quite similar to modern (closer) British E
pronunciation for /o:/
/o/ M [u] substituted. Too long, confusion with E /u:/
/u:/ M [u] substituted. Too short, confusion with E /o/
// Sound does not exist in M.
M [n] substituted. Too open, confusion with E /o:/
/a:/ [x] and [o] substituted. Too short, too close, too backward, confusion
with /o/ and/or /o:/
The central vowel /a/ is actually a retroflex [a]; this sound would be
quite similar to the American E realization of /a:/
/a/ [x] and [o] substituted. Too long, too close, too backward, confusion
with /o/ and/or /o:/
3.2 Consonants
Consonants are made by causing a complete or partial obstruction in the mouth or
pharynx, and are usually described in terms of where the obstruction is made in the
mouth (or: place of articulation), how the sound is made (or: manner of articulation),
and whether or not the vocal cords vibrate (or: voicing). Consonants, therefore, all
differ from each other in at least one of these ways.
In terms of the size of the inventories, Chinese has the largest variety with 26
different onset consonants, but only two of these may occur in the coda (while some
CHAPTER THREE 54
consonants can be considered variants of each other). English has a slightly less rich
inventory of 24 consonants including three that are exclusively found in the coda.
Dutch has the smallest inventory with 21 consonants, nine of which cannot occur in
the coda.
3.2.1 Dutch consonants vs. English consonants
The classification of consonants involves at least three factors, the state of glottis,
the place of articulation, and manner of articulation. The two charts Dutch vs.
English (Table 3.7) and Chinese vs. English (Table 3.8) include all the consonant
symbols in English, Dutch and Chinese. The horizontal axis shows the various
places of articulation, the vertical axis the various manners of articulation, while the
voiceless consonants are distinguished from voiced ones by placing the former on
the left in any box and the latter on the right. Consonants that occur both in the
Dutch and in the English inventory are in white cells. Dutch sounds in grey-shaded
cells are absent in English, English (target) sounds in black cells are absent in Dutch.
Grey cells in the English panel contain target sounds that occur also in Dutch but
which have different phonetic realizations. These would be transcribed with the
same broad phonemic symbol but differ from their Dutch counterparts in phonetic
detail, i.e. in diacritic marks. These similar sounds, as they would be classified by
Flege, are indicated in the bottom panel against a gray background. Here we simply
count 24 consonants in the English inventory, six of which do not occur in the Dutch
inventory and seven of which differ in phonetic detail from their Dutch counterparts.
Specific predictions of learning problems will be discussed later.
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 55
Table 3.7. Consonant of Dutch (upper panel) versus English (lower panel) in a manner (down)
by place (across) table. Further see text.
Place of Articulation
Manner
labial
labial-
dental
dental Alveolar
Alveolar-
palatal
(retroflex) palatal velar glottal
Source: Dutch
Stop p b t d k
Nasal m n q
Fricative f v s z ] ,
Affricate
Approx. c r j
Lateral l
Target: English
Stop p b t d
k

g
Nasal m n q
Fricative f v 0 s z ]
Affricate t] d
Approx. w j h
Lateral l
3.2.2 Chinese consonants vs. English consonants
n the bottom
anel represent sounds that occur in English but are absent in Chinese.
Table 3.8 presents a contrastive listing of the consonants of Chinese and English
arranged by manner (down) and place (across). When a table cell contains two
sounds, the one on the left represents the fortis (aspirated) and the one on the right
the lenis (unaspirated voiceless) member of a pair of obstruents. Grey cells in the
Chinese panel denote sounds that do not occur in English, black cells i
p
CHAPTER THREE 56
Table 3.8. Consonant sounds of Chinese (upper panel) versus English (lower panel) in a
manner (down) by place (across) table. Further see text.
Place of Articulation
Manner
labial
labial-
dental
dental Alveolar
Alveolar-
palatal
(retroflex) palatal velar glottal
Source: Chinese
Stop p b t d k g
Nasal m n q
Fricative f s
Affricate ts ts t t
t
t
Approx. w [ j
Lateral l
Target: English
Stop p b t d k g
Nasal m n q
Fricative f v 0 s z ]
Affricate t] d
Approx. w j h
Lateral l
The table reveals that of the 24 English consonants ten do not occur in Chinese;
however, the remaining 14 should be quite similar to their Chinese counterparts.
3.2.3 Prediction of pronunciation problems in consonants
As we did for vowels, we will now present tables containing the most likely errors in
the production and perception of English consonants by Chinese and Dutch learners.
The consonant data are largely based on Zhao (1995) for Chinese learners of English;
the Dutch data are based on Collins and Mees (1981) and Gussenhoven and
Broeders (1976). Again, since both textbooks deal with pronunciation difficulties of
British English (RP) sounds we adapted some of the claims so as to be applicable for
American English.
3.2.3.1 Dutch-English consonant transfer
Table 3.9 presents a summary of remarks and observations made by Collins and
Mees (1981) on differences between the Dutch and English consonants. A pervading
problem in the pronunciation of English consonants by Dutch learners is that Dutch
does not allow voiced (lenis) obstruents in coda positions; in such positions the
voiced ~ voiceless (or lenis ~ fortis) opposition is neutralized, and only the voiceless
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 57
(fortis) member of the pair will be realized. We will not discuss this problem in the
table below; rather we consider this a consequence of a rule difference between
Dutch and English depending on a sounds position in the syllable; the matter will
therefore be discussed in 3.3.
Table 3.9 Survey of pronunciation problems with consonants by Dutch learners of English,
derived from Collins and Mees (1981) and Gussenhoven and Broeders (1976: 142143). D =
Dutch, E = English.
English
target
Dutch substitutions/typical errors
/f/ D /f/ is identical to E /f/.
/v/ E /v/ has less friction than its D counterpart. Most D speakers substitute
D /v/ for E / v/; these are similar sounds.
10
/0, / Both are absent in D. These two sounds pose major problems of
recognition and articulation for the learner. // is far harder for D
learners than /0/.
Replacement of // by /d/ is one of the most common and persistent D
errors.
/0/ is easier for D learners; the traditional instruction of tongue between
teeth obtains the slit tongue shape characteristic of /0/, which
distinguishes it from /s/.
/s, z/ The articulation of /s, z/ is different from that of E.
D /s, z/ are typically articulated with a portion of the tongue between
front and blade whilst the tip is kept down behind the front teeth. With
some speakers there may also be some lip-rounding. D /s/ has less firmly
held stricture than E /s/; the jaw is more open with a laxer articulation.
As a result, the friction of D /s/ is graver than the sharp friction which
characterises the English sound.
Some D speakers produce a D /s/ which is acceptable if transferred into
E, whilst others produce a sound which is between E /s/ and E /]/. Some
of the D accents lack a contrast /s ~ z/. Other accents have no contrast /s
~ sj/ and /z ~ zj/.
/], / The D sequence /sj/ in chef has more obvious palatal off-glide than its E
counterpart. The articulation is often unrounded; the effect of this is to
make D /sj/ sharper in friction.
/h/ E /h/ tends to have somewhat stronger glottal friction than D /h/, and
voiceless pharyngeal friction can be heard from some speakers. E /h/ is
only voiced between some voiced sounds, whereas D /h/ tend to have
breathy voice in all contexts. Breathy (voiced) /h/ does not compromise
its identity in E.
10
The Dutch labio-dental semivowel /c/ would be a better substitute but Dutch speakers do
not do this.
CHAPTER THREE 58
Table 3.9. Continued.
/m, n, q/ These are identical in D and E. One difficulty likely to arise is excessive
nasalization of preceding vowels (plus deletion of the conditioning
nasal). This is especially noticeable in open vowels. Nasal release of /t,
d/ may provide problems for D students, particularly into syllabic
consonants. D learners tend to insert /a/ between stop and nasal, e.g.
rotten /rotan/.
/l/ The distribution of clear [l] and dark [I] is similar in D and in E, though
for many D speakers intervocalic /l/ is dark. Many D accents (Rotterdam
and Amsterdam) have dark [l] in all contexts including initial position.
Articulation of clear [l] is similar in D and in E. Dutch /l/ is not devoiced
following fortis plosives, compare E plan [pln] and D plan [plon]. D
dark [I] is significantly different from E dark [I]. No perceptual
confusions will arise from the differences.
/j, w/ D /j/ is similar to the E sound, but is often realized with friction, thus
giving a voiced palatal fricative [j

]. Because of the similarities of E /j/

and D /j/ there are few significant problems for the learner.
/w/ For E bilabial /w/ the typical substitution is D labio-dental /c/.
/w/ presents a major problem for Dutch learners both in terms of
articulation and in confusion of E /w ~ v/ contrast.
/r/ D onset /r/ is either an alveolar or uvular trill (or fricative in clusters). E
/r/ is a retroflex approximant. D coda /r/ may also be an approximant.
Although substitution of trill and fricative may sound foreign, no
perceptual confusion will arise.
/p, b/
/t, d/
/k/
D /p, t, k/ have very short VOT and are not aspirated. These realisations
are substituted for E /p
h
, t
h
, k
h
/, and may be confused with E /b, d, g/. D
lenis stops /b, d, (g)/ have negative VOT (prevoicing); no perceptual
confusion should arise when these sounds are substituted for their E
counterparts.
/q/ Absent in D; D /q/ occurs mostly in loanwords or as an allophone of /k/.
It is not available as a substitute for E /q/. D /k/ may be substituted, even
in the onset. Perceptual confusion with /k/ is expected.
/t], d/ Absent in D; these affricates are either replaced by/confused with the
fricatives /], / or by some sequence of /t(s)j/, /d(z)j
3.2.3.2 Chinese English consonant transfer
The following Table 3.10 summarizes the typical errors and substitution patterns
observed for English consonants spoken by Chinese learners of English. Again our
main source of information is Zhao (1995).
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 59
Table 3.10. Survey of pronunciation problems with simplex consonants by Chinese learners
of English, derived from Zhao (1995). M = Mandarin, E = English.
English target Mandarin substitutions/typical errors
/b, d, g/ E voiced (lax) plosives have 0 VOT (and therefore have no voice
lead nor voice lag). This is as in M; no problems are predicted.
/p, t, k/ Voiceless (tense) plosives are aspirated both in M and in E but
more strongly in E. Confusion with E /b, d, g/ may result as a result
of insufficient aspiration
/f, v/ /v/ is absent in M, /f/ exists. /f/ is not a problematic target sound but
/w/ and /f/ are substituted for /v/ (the latter especially in the coda)
/0, / Both are absent in M.
/t/, /s/ and /f/ are substituted for /0/, and /d/, /dz/ and /v/ for //
/s/ /s/ in M is articulated with the tongue blade against the back of the
upper teeth, in E with blade against alveolar. Substitution is either
unnoticed or confusion with /0/ arises
/z/ /z/ does not exist in M; the unaspirated voiced affricate /dz/ is
substituted, which may be confused with E /d/ or even with /t]/
/], / These fricatives do not exist in M. No substitutes are given; no
confusions are predicted.
/t], d/ /t]/ is approximated by M [ts
h
] and /d/ by [ts]. No specific
confusions are predicted.
/w/ M and E /w/ are quite similar. M /w/ is in free variation with /v/.
As a result /w/ is often incorrectly replaced by /v/ (and vice versa).
/w/ ~ /v/ confusion is predicted.
/j/ M /j/ is similar to E. No problems predicted
/h/ M no /h/; the uvular fricative [] is substituted. This will not lead to
confusions but the substitution will be unacceptable.
/l/ The clear /l/ is exactly the same as the M lateral /l/ The dark /I/ is a
more difficult sound for M learners, because in M, the lateral
consonant never occurs in the coda
/m, n, q/ English /m/, /n/, /q/ are quite similar to M /m/, /n/, /q/. However, M
/m/ and /n/ never appear in the coda; M learners tend to pronounce
the last phoneme unclearly, or even omit it unintentionally.
11
Word-medial /q/ is claimed to be difficult for M learners.
/r/ E onset /r/ is replaced by the M fricative /z/ which is quite similar
to the target but has slight friction; confusion with E /z/ is
predicted.
12
No problems are predicted with coda-/r/; here the
Chinese retroflex vowel is an adequate substitute.
11
Some Chinese learners, especially people from Hunan, Sichuan, Fujian and Anhui
provinces, may replace /n/ with /l/ or /l/ with /n/, as these sounds are free variants in the local
dialects.
12
One common error among Southern Chinese learners of English is the confusion of /r/ with
/l/ and also with /n/. They produce right /rait/ as light /lait/ or night /nait/. Since this is not a
problem for Northern Chinese (Mandarin) speakers, we have not included this confusion in
the table.
CHAPTER THREE 60
3.3 Syllable structure
Human speech is basically spoken as a sequence of opening gestures of the mouth.
Of course, once the mouth has been opened, it has to be closed before it can be
opened a second time. One cycle of opening and closing the mouth produces a
phonetic syllable. The alternation of opening and closing gestures takes place at a
rate of some five cycles per second. When the mouth is maximally open, vowel
sounds are produced; when the mouth is completely or partially closed, consonants
are produced. The segments (consonants and vowels) within a syllable are subject to
the sonority principle: louder and more sonorous sounds are produced in the middle
of the syllable when the mouth is maximally open, and sounds of decreasing
sonority are produced as they are closer to the edges of the syllable.
Languages differ widely in the complexity of syllable structures they allow. The
simplest type of syllable structure is a regular alternation of a single consonant (C)
and a single vowel (V). Many languages only allow regular CVCV alternation and
in all languages CV is the most frequent syllable type. Mandarin comes rather close
to such a CV language. English and Dutch have a richer variety of syllable types,
and they allow up to three consonants in sequence in the beginning of a syllable and
up to four in the final part of the syllable. Many consonants have rather different
pronunciations depending on whether they precede the vowel or follow it within the
syllable. Research has indicated that positive transfer of consonants is limited to
source and target segments that have the same position in the syllable (Lado, 1957;
Flege, 1995). Also, speakers of a language that has a simple CV structure find it
difficult to produce sequences of consonants that are not interspersed with vowels. It
is therefore important to review some of the differences in syllable structure among
the three languages under consideration.
3.3.1 English
English is a language that allows complex syllable structures. Syllables are split up
in an onset and a rhyme portion; the rhyme is further subdivided into the vocalic
nucleus and the coda, which contains all postvocalic consonants. Onsets in English
may vary in length from zero to three consonants. If the onset has its maximal length,
i.e. three segments, the very first segment must always be /s/. Given this severe
restriction the /s/ is considered to be outside the onset and given special appendix
status. The vocalic nucleus either contains a long (or tense) vowel or a short (or lax)
vowel. A word (or syllable) may not end in a lax vowel; lax vowels have to be
followed by at least one coda consonant. Tense vowels may occur at the end of a
word (or syllable). Given that diphthongs may occur at the end of a word, it follows
that a diphthong functions as a tense vowel in English. The maximal number of
consonants that can follow the vowel is three if the vowel is lax and two if the vowel
is tense. In maximally long coda strings the last consonants are restricted to {t, d, s,
z}, on the grounds of which this final constituent has been given appendix status.
These can only occur as realisations of some suffix (past tense, past participle, plural,
third person singular, as in milked, ranged, milks, fields). The velar nasal takes up
the position of two coda consonants. Semivowels (glides) /j, w and h/ cannot occur
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 61
in the coda; they are restricted to the onset. Voiced (lenis) and voiceless (fortis)
obstruents may occur in the onset and in the coda.
3.3.2 Dutch
The syllable structure of Dutch, which is closely related to English, has much in
common with the English system. The syllable is hierarchically subdivided in much
the same way. Dutch has zero to three consonants in the onset, with special appendix
status for initial /s/. The vocalic nucleus contains either a short/lax vowel or a
long/tense vowel, which again is functionally equivalent to a diphthong. Lax vowels
may not occur at the end of a word or syllable; they have to be followed within the
rhyme by at least one coda consonant. The maximum number of coda consonants is
four, which can only occur after a lax vowel and then contains appendix consonants
{s, t, st, ts} as in herfst /hrfst/ autumn. The velar nasal counts as two consonants;
/h/ cannot occur in the coda. However, other than in English, semivowels /w, j/ may
occur in the coda but only after a long/tense vowel, as in haai /ha:j/ shark, geeuw
/e:w/ yawn. Voiced as well as voiceless obstruents occur in the onset; in coda
position voiced obstruents are impossible; these are neutralized to their voiceless
counterparts.
Coda clusters are often broken up in Dutch by the insertion of an epenthetic
vowel schwa. The insertion typically takes place when two adjacent consonants in
the code do not differ enough in sonority, as in melk > [mlk], herfst > [hrfst].
No vowel epenthesis takes place before obstruents which may occur in the appendix
(i.e. /s/ and /t/) (see e.g. Van der Hulst, 1984).
3.3.3 Chinese
Traditional Chinese phonology divides the syllable into an Initial and Final. The
Initial is the way a syllable begins, usually with a consonant. The Final is the
syllable minus the Initial. For example, in ta, chi, jin, chuang, the Finals are a, i, in,
and uang, respectively. The longest form of a Final consists of three parts: a medial
(or: semivowel), a main vowel (or: head vowel), and an ending (or, in the case of
retroflex suffixes, sometimes two endings, as in the er-sound minger tomorrow).
A Final in Mandarin comprises one of four medials: (empty), /i/, /u/, or /iu/ (=
[], one of three vowels: /a/, /e/, or /o/, and one of six endings: , -i, -u, -n, -, and []
(phonetically -r).
13
Actually, there are only 40 different Finals (if Finals involving
retroflex suffixes are not counted). As a result of these very severe restrictions on
possible syllables in Mandarin, no obstruent clusters are possible in the onset
(Initial) nor in the coda (Final). Onset clusters can maximally have a length of two
segments, in which case the consonant closest to the vocalic nucleus must be a
semivowel. Coda clusters are disallowed; in fact, syllables are generally open, i.e.
end with a vowel. The only possible coda consonants are the nasals /n/ and //. In
compound vowels with /a, e, o/ as the first segment and /i, u/ as the second element,
the latter are phonetically realised as semivowels, creating a diphthong. Phonetically,
13
This gives rise to 4 2 6 = 48 possible Finals, since a and o count as allophones of one
phoneme.
CHAPTER THREE 62
the retroflex approximant [] could also be considered a coda but this sound
functions as a vowel.
3.3.4 Dutch versus English syllable structures
Generally, the syllable structures of Dutch and English are highly similar; in fact,
Dutch syllable structure seems even less constrained than English, given that Dutch
allow onsets such as /kn, pn, n/ (in written obstruent+/n/ clusters the obstruent is
not pronounced in English). As a result, Dutch speakers of English are expected to
have few problems in realizing the complex syllable structures of English.
Complex clusters are no problems as such. However, due to some language-
specific restrictions and peculiarities of Dutch some interference phenomena may
arise. A very serious difficulty for Dutch speakers of English is to maintain the fortis
~ lenis (voiceless ~ voiced) contrast in coda obstruents. Lax/voiced coda obstruents
are consistently realised as their fortis/voiceless counterparts, which may lead to
perceptual confusion in English in minimal pairs such as bad ~ bat, lies ~ lice, ridge
~ rich, leave ~ leaf, mouth (verb) ~ mouth (noun), and many more.
Dutch speakers have a predictable tendency to break up English coda clusters,
using their epenthetic vowel rule. Although the pronunciation of milk as [mk]
sounds foreign, intelligibility will not be compromised by the epenthetic vowel.
3.3.5 Chinese versus English syllable structures
Since Mandarin allows no onset clusters except C+glide, Chinese speakers of
English are predicted to have problems with the pronunciation of all other CC and
CCC clusters of English. They are expected to break up awkward clusters by
inserting an epenthetic vowel. Examples given by Zhao (1995: 95) indicate that // is
inserted in between the members of CC clusters (spy > /spai/, pray > [pre
i
]. No
examples are given of pronunciation problems involving CCC onset clusters.
Even more problems are expected in the realisation of English coda clusters.
Given that Mandarin only allows /n/ and // in the coda, any other consonant in that
position will be awkward. Problems will increase when the coda contains two or
more consonants. Chinese learners of English employ two strategies to cope with
coda consonants. One is to add an epenthetic vowel [] after the coda consonant,
which is then resyllabified to the onset of a separate syllable; this is what often
happens in single C codas. When the coda is a cluster, it is often simplified by
deleting one of the members of the cluster (after which epenthesis and re-
syllabification may take place). Given the absence of obstruents in Mandarin codas
and the absence of coda clusters, it is an open question how Chinese learners of
English will deal with the fortis ~ lenis opposition in English codas. English is one
of a minority of languages that maintains this contrast in coda position; in the
majority of the worlds languages the contrast is neutralised and only the voiceless
member surfaces. One would predict that the realisation of marked phenomena in
the target language (English) are a learning problem when these phenomena are
absent in the source language (Mandarin). This prediction follows from the
Markedness Differential Hypothesis (MDH, Eckman, 1977).
CONTRASTIVE ANALYSES 63
Zhao mentions one special strategy whereby Chinese learners arguably
substitute Mandarin onset affricates [
h
] and [] for English coda clusters /ts/ and
/dz/, respectively. Since the place of articulation of the Mandarin affricates (tip of
the tongue against the back of the upper teeth) is not the same as that of the English
targets (tongue blade and the teeth ridge), this strategy will only be partially
successful.
3.4 Concluding remarks
In this chapter we have reviewed the extensive literature on differences in sound
structures between Chinese, Dutch and English. Some of the literature, especially
that relating to the acoustical properties of vowels, was experimental in nature. The
vast majority of the sources consulted, however, is based on observations made by
teachers of English as a foreign/second language or by linguistic phoneticians using
observation unaided by instrumental analysis. We will not be able to test each
individual observation against experimental data to be collected in the next
chapter(s). However, Chapter three will provide a database of observations we may
turn to when discussing our experimental results. Very often we will point out
correspondences between observations made in Chapter three and later experimental
results, and on a few occasions we will also discuss experimental findings that have
gone unnoticed in the (pedagogical) literature.