Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1. INTRODUCTION
The role that one’s native language plays in the acquisition of a second or foreign
language has always been of interest to linguists. Earlier discussions of language transfer
between his/her native language and the target language. The Contrastive Analysis
Hypothesis (Lado 1957), argued that target language forms that were different from the
equivalent forms in the native language (L1) would be difficult to learn. This hypothesis
hypothesis) or explaining (the weak version) the learning difficulties that a second
language (L2) learner has, as there was evidence showing that differences between
languages did not always lead to learning difficulties (Odlin 1989). In view of the
Markedness Differential Hypothesis. This hypothesis predicts not only the areas of
difficulty for second language learners, but also the relative degree of difficulty on the
basis of a systematic comparison between native and target languages and markedness
marked than B if, cross-linguistically, the presence of A (the implicans; Eckman 1984)
necessarily implies the presence of B (the implicatum; Eckman 1984), but the presence
of B does not necessarily imply the presence of A (Eckman 1981a, 1981b). Markedness,
in this sense, refers to “the relative frequency or generality of a given structure across the
(i) those areas of the target language that differ from the native language
and are more marked than the native language will be difficult;
(ii) the relative degree of difficulty of the areas of the target language that
are more marked than the native language will correspond to the relative
(iii) those areas of the target language that are different from the native
language but are not more marked than the native language will not be
Although the goals of the Markedness Differential Hypothesis and those of the
Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis are essentially the same, the former is able to
account for the relative degrees of difficulty of acquisition, for the areas of
difference between the native language and the target language that will not
cause difficulty, as well as for the fact that a learner can make progress in
between the native language and the target language are paramount in the
the basis of differences between the native language and the target language.
Difficulties in an area where there is no difference between the native and target
languages, thus, fall outside the scope of the hypothesis.
areas of difficulty and relative degree of difficulty. Studies that have examined
second/third language phonology acquisition have focused on, among others things, the
acquisition of voicing contrasts (Bhatia 1995; Eckman 1981a; Edge 1991; Major and
Faudree 1996), consonants and/or consonant clusters (Benson 1986; Eckman 1987,
1991), and syllable structures (Anderson 1987; Stockman and Pluut 1992; Tarone 1987).
The results of these studies generally support the Markedness Differential Hypothesis, in
the sense that the presence of the more marked implicans in the second learner’s
interlanguage (Selinker 1972) implies the presence of the less marked implicatum.
difficulties in the implicans, but those who experience difficulty in the implicans do not
found that the marked longer English consonant clusters are more difficult than the
unmarked shorter ones, and that the marked final clusters are more difficult than the
unmarked initial ones for learners whose native language differs from English in terms
(1981b) data confirm the relative degree of difficulty between word-final voiced
obstruents and word-final voiceless obstruents, finding that the former are more difficult
notwithstanding, there has been some criticism of the hypothesis ever since it was
launched (Kellerman 1979; Zobl 1983). Research studies showing the inadequacy of
the hypothesis are not lacking. In their study of the acquisition of French consonants
by Cantonese speakers, Cichocki et al. (1999) have observed several patterns that the
Markedness Differential Hypothesis incorrectly predicts. Major and Kim (1999) also
condemn the hypothesis’ disregard of the nature of the similarities or differences that
exist between the target language and the native language in its prediction of relative
degree of difficulty. The fact that relative ease or difficulty of acquisition is not
A number of researchers whose work has been inspired in one way or another by
the notion of universal markedness have either modified the theoretical constructs of
relationships between L1 and L2) into Eckman’s theory. Eckman (1991) himself, in
explaining word-final devoicing in the English of native Farsi speakers, proposes the
(between L1 and L2) and simply claims that interlanguages obey primary language
universals. Major and Kim (1999), on the other hand, put forward the Similarity
claiming that dissimilar phenomena are acquired at faster rates than similar
phenomena. They argue that markedness and similarity interact in interesting ways
and that the former is a mediating factor affecting second language acquisition.
proposed by Best (1994), which argues that non-native contrasts are perceived in
listener’s native language (Harnsberger 2001); and the Speech Learning Model
proposed by Flege, which claims that “the greater the perceived phonetic
dissimilarity between an L2 sound and the closest L1 sound, the more likely it is
that phonetic differences between the sounds will be discerned” (Flege 1995:239).
native language and the target language may not necessarily be the main determining
The concept of markedness itself has also come under severe attack. Because the
linguistic data. Observed patterns that contradict markedness at the level of individual
languages, however, have led researchers to view markedness from other perspectives.
Hume (2004) argues that the notion of universal markedness is insufficient to explain
languages differ in terms of the elements that make up their systems and how the
The relationship between frequency and language acquisition has also provided
language are often much higher in frequency. However, where markedness and
frequency make opposite predictions, both markedness and frequency play a role in
determining language development (Stites et al. 2004). Thus, when two options for a
given entity are present, both can be selected as unmarked (Rose 2003). The loss of
related, and models based on input frequencies are seen as a better account than
universals, Major and Kim (1999) also argue that the markedness relationship
between voiced obstruents and voiceless obstruents does not necessarily apply to
individual sounds, because some voiced obstruents (e.g., /b/) are found in certain
languages (e.g., Arabic) while their voiceless counterparts (e.g., /p/) are not. All these
discussions show that the notion of markedness needs to be revisited. The validity of
the Markedness Differential Hypothesis and thus the appropriateness of its theoretical
2. THIS STUDY
English pronunciation by Cantonese learners has not been the focus of much second
language acquisition research. Though there has been supporting evidence showing
(Eckman 1991) and the typological universal concerning voicing contrasts in word-
final obstruents (Eckman 1981b), many universal generalizations have not been
investigated. It is not clear, for instance, to what extent the Markedness Differential
Hypothesis is valid for predicting and explaining the relative degree of difficulty for
Eckman (1984) documents two implicational relations that are relevant to the present
study:
These two implicational universals entail the following markedness hierarchy (where
learners whose native language differs from the target language in the system of
word-final consonants, sonorant consonants should be the easiest to learn and voiced
obstruents the most difficult. While it is true that many Cantonese learners
(Chan and Li 2000). In this context, a study was carried out to analyze the
Hypothesis for second language phonology acquisition by these learners. The relative
the results of the study show that learner difficulties conform to the markedness
consonants and the articulation of the segments. In terms of inventory, while all English
consonants except /h j w/ can occur in syllable-final (coda) position,1 only the nasals /m
(voiced or voiceless), and other sonorant consonants, such as the lateral /l/, are not
In terms of articulation, whereas English final plosives in isolated words are often
released and those in connected speech are also sometimes released, final plosives in
Cantonese are obligatorily unreleased regardless of speech rate. For the voiceless bilabial
/p/, the lips remain closed; for the voiceless alveolar /t/, the tongue tip clings to the
alveolar ridge; and for the voiceless velar /k/, the back of the tongue touches the velum
and remains there without air being released (Chan and Li 2000).
The articulation of the sonorant consonant /l/ also differs significantly in the two
1
In Received Pronunciation (RP) English, the liquid /r/ does not occur in syllable-
final position, although it is found syllable finally in many other varieties (e.g., North
American English).
languages because of distributional differences (and corresponding allophonic
variations). In Cantonese, /l/ always surfaces as a clear [l] with the raising of the front of
as a velarized, dark [lÚ] with the back of the tongue raised (Ladefoged 2006; see also
4. OBJECTIVES
Given that the Markedness Differential Hypothesis predicts difficulty on the basis of
differences between the target language and the native language, and that there exist
significant differences between the consonantal systems of English and Cantonese, the
basic requirements for testing the hypothesis are met. The objectives of the study are (i)
by Eckman (1977), is valid for describing the acquisition of English word-final singleton
consonants by Cantonese learners of English as a second language, and (ii) to look into
the relevance of universal markedness (voiced obstruents > voiceless obstruents >
5. METHODOLOGY
The research methodology of the present study is modelled on that of similar studies,
2
Because non-rhotic accents are widespread in Hong Kong, word-final /r/ is not
Twelve Hong Kong Cantonese ESL learners at intermediate and advanced levels of
English proficiency participated in the study. The participants included six students from
a local secondary school, all in Forms 4 or 5 (five females and one male), and six first-
or second-year local university students, all English majors (three females and three
males).3 The ages of the students ranged from 15 to 25 years at the time of the study, and
they all started learning English as a second language at four or five years of age. The
secondary students had not received any formal phonetics training before, but all the
university students had taken at least one course (lasting 13 weeks) in English phonetics
and phonology during their first year of university studies. They learned the accent of
Received Pronunciation English. Three native speakers of English (one female and two
males) residing in Hong Kong served as a comparison group to provide baseline data.
They were between 23 and 35 years of age at the time of the study. They had been in
Hong Kong for different lengths of time, ranging from one year to 23 years. All the
native speakers of English had received formal phonetics training comparable to that
received by the university participants. They all had experience teaching English to ESL
students in Hong Kong or elsewhere, and two of them had extensive experience teaching
3
Form 4 and 5 students in Hong Kong are comparable to grade 10 and 11 students,
respectively, in the U.S. and Canada. The participants’ proficiency levels were
identified based on their class levels: Form 4 and 5 students were categorized as
students at similar class levels may differ due to individual differences. However, as
no comparison was made between the two groups, it is not know if or how such
One of the native speakers of English (female, 23 years old), was born in Hong
Kong. She received her primary and secondary education largely at international
schools and uses English as her first language for daily communication, study, and
work. At the age of 16, she started teaching English to local students. Her accent is
Each participant performed four speech tasks during a single 20-minute session in a
quiet room. The instructions for each task were given in English, written on a piece of
four tasks was recorded using a high-quality portable mini-disk recorder (SONY MZ-
R910).
The participants read a randomized list of 167 monosyllabic and disyllabic words one by
one. So that they would not be distracted or impeded by long and difficult words, only
high-frequency monosyllabic and disyllabic words such as cup, meal, sing, and lemon
were included. Care was taken to ensure that different preceding vowel environments
were included. For example, the list included words with final nasals following
diphthongs (such as nine and lime), as well as words with final nasals following pure
vowels, long or short (such as ten and deem), or high or low (such as teen and palm).4
The participants looked at a series of 101 pictures depicting different objects, actions, or
scenes and were asked to produce a word appropriate to the content of each of the
pictures. Cues eliciting the appropriate response were given where necessary.5 The aim
of this task was to elicit words with the target final consonants without the use of
spelling cues such as those used in the word-list reading task, thus eliminating the
possibility of visually prompting the use of the target consonants. Although a context
such as a cueing sentence or phrase was provided for some of the pictures, the
participants were asked to say just the target word in isolation, not the whole sentences
or phrases.
4
Words with complex codas of the form rC, such as fork or shark, were also
included in the study because none of the participants is a rhotic speaker and the
orthography of forms with post-vocalic /r/ does not seem to have influenced the
ii. a picture showing a person jumping into the swimming pool, together
with a cueing clause He is jumping into the swimming ____ to elicit the
word pool.
These cues were given on the picture cards in order to facilitate the participants’
narrative passage, a descriptive passage, and a fable. Only simple passages were
vocabulary items that would hinder students’ reading fluency. The passages were
selected specifically for the study to elicit words containing the final consonants under
investigation. The use of three different short passages instead of one long passage
ensured that a variety of topics and words were included. Their length was so decided in
Since spontaneous speech would produce speech samples more akin to performance in a
real communicative situation, each participant was interviewed individually for the
elicitation of spontaneous speech. The participants were given a choice of topics relating
to personal experience and were asked to select one for a 15-minute discussion.
Examples of the conversation topics included, My favourite hobby, The movie star I
like best, and My friends and family, among others. Topics related to personal
experience were offered because such topics are more likely to elicit spontaneous speech
than topics relating to politics or world affairs. The interviews were conducted in a
conversational manner, with the interviewer asking cueing questions to help elicit
In the design of the test materials, care was taken to ensure a similar number of test
items across the three categories and within each category. However, this was difficult to
achieve, because there are more English nasals than the English lateral /l/. As a result,
more words with English nasals were elicited or cued than words with the English
lateral.
5.3. Data analysis methods
A total of 3658 tokens of voiced obstruents, 4645 tokens of voiceless obstruents, and
6056 tokens of sonorant consonants were analyzed and transcribed by two transcribers
who had attended a series of coaching sessions conducted by the researcher to ensure
accuracy and consistency. Both the transcribers were very proficient in English (having
each obtained a First Class Honours degree in English), had received formal training in
linguistics and phonetics, were well versed in phonetic transcription, and had taught
For a study like the present one, human transcription of the recordings is sufficient,
because the features of the final consonants under investigation, such as the release (or
and the presence (or absence) of a nasal, can be easily identified without the help of
instrumental analysis. To ensure reliability, the study tracked both inter-rater and intra-
rater judgments. For productions that were regarded as difficult to judge, the two
examining the participants’ pronunciation of a certain segment, they took into account all
the features associated with it, including the manner of articulation, the place of
articulation, and the state of the glottis (Roach 2000). The precise ways the target words
were produced by each speaker were also noted. These included, among others, the
substitution sounds used to replace a particular target sound, the presence or absence of
final voicing (for voiced sounds), and the presence or absence of final release (for
plosives).
Although Hong Kong is cosmopolitan and different varieties of English are used by
both native and non-native English speakers, the accent most widely taught at schools
and taken as the norm is Received Pronunciation (RP) English. For this reason, RP was
was 90%, 90%, 91%, and 88% for the word list reading, picture list reading, passage
reading, and conversation tasks respectively (89% overall),6 which were considered
the items and made a third judgment, and chose the majority option.
A frequency count was used to arrive at the participants’ performance on each target
consonant and their overall performance on the three categories of consonants: sonorant
consonants (subclassified into nasals and lateral), voiceless obstruents (subclassified into
plosives, fricatives, and affricate), and voiced obstruents (subclassified into plosives,
fricatives, and affricate). Separate frequency counts were carried out to analyze the
participants’ performance in each task, and a summative frequency count was done to
compute their overall performance in the four tasks. Productions that deviated from the
counted as non-target productions, and those that were in line with target-language
norms or were produced in comparable ways by native speakers were counted as target
6
Inter-rater reliability was computed by dividing the number of identical
made.
(by each participant) was obtained by dividing the total number of target productions by
the total number of tokens cued or attempted. The average percentage of target
6. RESULTS
Because the main objective of the study is to examine the explanatory power of the
Markedness Differential Hypothesis, the relative degree of difficulty between the three
results of the study (see below) reveals that certain subcategories of consonants (e.g.,
lateral) within a particular category (e.g., sonorant consonants) are significantly more
problematic than other subcategories (e.g., nasals) within the same category. The
following discussion of results will therefore focus on the subcategories within each
category.
Participants
Word list Picture list Passages Conversation Total
S1 21% 37% 45% 66% 53%
S2 31% 44% 92% 93% 81%
S3 4% 33% 60% 53% 48%
S4 21% 59% 67% 84% 67%
S5 21% 30% 59% 89% 64%
S6 17% 26% 27% 54% 36%
S7 24% 48% 71% 85% 68%
S8 0% 4% 42% 70% 46%
S9 10% 0% 14% 50% 28%
S10 0% 0% 42% 63% 43%
S11 21% 7% 61% 70% 57%
S12 24% 48% 55% 58% 52%
Comparison group
Word list Picture list Passages Conversation Total
C1 0% 7% 84% 84% 67%
C2 21% 4% 78% 73% 62%
C3 21% 0% 80% 82% 65%
As for fricatives and the affricate /tS/, substitution of a non-target sound for a target
sound is noted, though infrequently for fricatives and very rarely for /tS/. Examples of
substitution include the replacement of /T/ (e.g., tooth) by [f]. The percentage of non-
target productions made for fricatives is about 6% in the four tasks (6%, 5%, 3%, and
9% in the word-list reading, picture-list reading, passage reading, and conversation tasks
respectively), whereas the percentage of non-target productions made for /tS/ is about
1% in the four tasks (0%, 1%, 2%, and 1% in the word-list reading, picture-list reading,
Average 6% 5% 3% 9% 6%
Voiceless affricates
Word list Picture list Passages Conversation Total
0% for all 0% for all 0% for all 0% for all 0% for
participants participants participants participants
except S9 except S1 except S2 all
(17%) (29%) (9%)
particip
ants
except
S1(8%),
S2 (3%), and
S9 (4%)
Average 0% 1% 2% 1% 1%
comparison group, but is typically limited to the passage reading and interview tasks.
80% of the final voiceless plosives are unreleased in these two tasks. Not only is non-
release found when a final plosive is followed by an initial consonant across word
boundaries, but it is also found when the plosive is phrase final or when it precedes a
pause. Unlike for the Cantonese participants, for the native speakers of English the non-
release of final plosives in isolated words is more rare in the word-list and picture-list
reading tasks. Only about 9% were unreleased: 14% and 4% in the word-list and picture-
list reading tasks respectively; see Table 1. Non-release of final voiceless plosives, being
The Cantonese participants have a very strong tendency to devoice word-final voiced
obstruents: nearly all the instances of voiced fricatives and affricate cued or attempted
61% of the voiced plosives cued or attempted in the four tasks are unreleased by the
participants; 33%, 37% , 64%, and 81% in the word-list reading, picture-list reading,
passage reading, and conversation tasks, respectively; see Table 4. Because of this, the
systematic contrast between voiced and voiceless final plosives is neutralized in many
cases. For those voiced plosives that are indeed released, nearly all the instances are
devoiced. Such results are in line with previous studies that investigated production of
1992).
comparison group
[sQ˘d|] with a lengthened [Q˘]. A total of 36% of final (released) plosives are devoiced
by the comparison group: 67%, 43%, 25%, and 34% in the word-list reading, picture-list
reading, passage reading, and conversation tasks, respectively; see Table 3. Voiced
fricatives, especially /z v D/, are seldom devoiced (5% overall; Table 3), but devoicing
of the affricate /dZ/ is quite common (69%; Table 3). Though devoicing is also
occasionally found among the comparison group, a comparison between the participants’
performance and the native speakers’ performance suggests that devoicing of final
obstruents without lengthening of preceding vowels is much more common among the
In the present study, the lateral /l/ is found to be one of the most difficult segments for
Cantonese participants despite the fact that other sonorant consonants, namely nasals, do
not pose many problems. Relatively fewer non-target productions are made to the final
nasals cued or attempted in the study. Only about 2%, 6%, and 9% of /m n N/
respectively are modified (an average of 5%; see Table 5). Most of the non-target
productions are substitution of a non-target sound for a target sound (e.g., [n] for /m/ in
dim). Omission is also occasionally found (e.g., sign pronounced [s I]). Vocalization
and omission are the most common strategies employed to cope with /l/. About 90% of
/l/ are modified, either by omission or by vocalization by a [u]-like vowel (Table 5).
Omission is typically found when a preceding vowel is [+back], such as /ç˘/ (e.g., call),
the preceding vowel. Thus, the word hill, which has a preceding front vowel, is often
pronounced [hIu], and the word ball, which has a preceding back vowel, is often
pronounced [bç˘u]. It should be noted that when the [u]-like vowel is used to replace /l/,
it is likely to surface as the sonorant [w] and be syllabified in the nucleus of the syllable
as the second member of a [-w] diphthong (sound combinations such as /i:w/ and /a:w/
are sometimes regarded as diphthongs in Cantonese; Bauer and Benedict 1997). This is
in accordance with recent spectrographic studies that show that Cantonese ESL learners
often use a velar glide [w], rather than a [u]-like vowel, to substitute for /l/ (Hung 2000).
l m n N Nasals as a group
S1 98% 0% 10% 29% 10%
S2 97% 0% 14% 1% 6%
S3 100% 1% 12% 13% 9%
S4 98% 10% 10% 13% 10%
S5 94% 1% 1% 3% 1%
S6 90% 0% 1% 22% 4%
S7 100% 0% 9% 1% 5%
S8 91% 0% 4% 2% 1%
S9 93% 1% 6% 9% 6%
S10 59% 0% 2% 0% 1%
S11 97% 1% 3% 7% 5%
S12 75% 14% 5% 1% 6%
Average 90% 2% 6% 9% 5%
Vocalization of final /l/ is also found among the comparison group, but it is
typically limited to words with a labial articulation such as careful or people, in line with
exhibit vocalization of /l/ in other contexts such as ill or ball, and it is not found in the
word-list reading task at all (Table 6).7 In view of the significant differences between the
participants’ performance and the native speakers’ performance, as well as the contexts
The participants’ different performances on specific subsets of the same superset, that is,
lateral versus nasals for the set of sonorant consonants, has significant effects on their
performance on final /l/ than on final nasals, the actual number of tokens in which the
final lateral is cued or attempted may have substantial effects on the overall results of the
category of sonorant consonants. Had the number of words containing a final lateral
been increased, the overall results of the category of sonorant consonants would have
worsened. Conversely, had the number of words containing a final lateral been
7
Vocalization of /l/ is common in many dialects of English (e.g., Cockney English,
the subsets. Because of such inconsistent performance, comparisons between the three
misleading. Nonetheless, it is obvious from the above discussion that the participants’
performance on the lateral /l/, a sonorant consonant, is much worse than their
7. DISCUSSION
The previous section outlined the participants’ performance on the three categories (and
subcategories) of consonants for four different tasks. In light of the results, this section
Markedness Differential Hypothesis and its theoretical constructs, and the validity of
implicational universals.
The results of the study show that the Cantonese ESL participants encounter some
difficulties in acquiring English word-final voiced obstruents and the lateral /l/ regardless
Pronunciation English for at least one semester, the university participants, like their
phenomena noted are also found in the comparison group, the percentages of such
productions made by the Cantonese participants is much higher, and there is no evidence
view of the fact that Received Pronunciation, or a standard model for pronunciation, is
what most Hong Kong speakers (both teachers and students) aspire to, we have reason to
believe that devoicing of voiced obstruents and vocalization of /l/ are indications of
Nasals and voiceless obstruents, on the other hand, do not pose many problems for
and the voiceless affricate /tS/ is largely unproblematic. Their performance on voiceless
plosives may be the result of mother-tongue interference and their lack of awareness of
the typical feature of English plosives, but given the equally widespread non-release of
final plosives by the comparison group in similar contexts, there is no hard and fast
evidence to suggest acquisitional difficulties in this respect.
The participants’ performance patterns suggest that the relative degree of difficulty
between the different categories of consonants does not invariably parallel the
difficulty between word-final voiceless and voiced obstruents does receive significant
support, the degree of difficulty between word-final sonorant consonants and word-final
voiceless obstruents does not. Participants encounter more difficulties with final /l/ (a
less marked item) than with voiceless obstruents (a more marked item), and they make
many more non-target productions to the former than to the latter, to a degree which is
especially when the internal make-up of a sound category is taken into consideration.
Because different members of a sound category (e.g., sonorant consonants) can form
subsets (e.g., lateral and nasals), implicational universals relating one subset to
another are important for the determination of the relative markedness between
different subsets. If the different subsets of a superset are not equally marked, the
markedness relationships between different supersets may not follow (see section
however, are not explicit about these subsets. The Markedness Differential
Hypothesis, thus, makes no prediction regarding the relative degree of difficulty of the
individual segments (or subsets) within a superset. For this reason, predictions made
with regard to the relative degree of difficulty of different supersets may not be borne
out.
The English lateral is a good example of this problem. The results of this study
suggest that /l/ should not be treated as equally marked as English nasals, yet both
subsets belong to the same superset of sonorant consonants. The possible effect of /l/
on the relative degree of difficulty between different supersets (i.e., voiced obstruents,
Differential Hypothesis.
It appears from the data of this study that certain factors other than implicational
universals should be given due attention when explanations for participants’ performance
are invoked. One factor that requires attention is the difference between a phoneme and
its allophones. As is well known, phonemes are abstract entities whose allophonic
regarding the presence or absence of sounds or sound sequences, linguists often use
phonemes, rather than allophones, as the basis. Frequency counts are also made in terms
phonemes has already been observed in the speech learning literature. Strange (1992),
for example, has found that Japanese learners of English perceive and produce
his Speech Learning Model, Flege (1995) hypothesizes that positional allophones in the
second language are related to the closest positionally defined allophone in the first
language. Flege and Wang also conclude that speech production skills must be “learned
on an allophone-by-allophone basis” (1989:303). Allophonic variation is thus an
language.
allophone may be more frequent (and more basic) than other less frequent (non-basic)
ones that differ from the basic one by possession of a marked feature (Greenberg 1966).
The velarized (dark) [lÚ] occurs less frequently than the clear [l] across languages
(Maddieson 1984). Although sonorant consonants are less marked than obstruents cross-
respect. The infrequent distribution of dark [lÚ], coupled with the secondary articulation
which is required in the production of the allophone, may render the English word-final
lateral a much more marked element across languages. Thus, this may obscure the
relative markedness (and thus the relative degree of difficulty for second language
learners) between English sonorant consonants and obstruents (voiced or voiceless) and
result in an otherwise unexpected pattern of second language acquisition, such as the one
While there is no doubt that, all things being equal, a marked item should be
universals should be used to form the basis of markedness (Major 1996; Rutherford
1982), and more importantly, whether markedness alone should be used as a predictor
are only made on patterns that are supposed to be universal. The markedness
Other factors such as allophonic variation, frequency effects, predictability, and the
8. CONCLUSION
Learners encounter the most difficulties with voiced obstruents and the lateral /l/, while
overall. The results of the study suggest that the Markedness Differential Hypothesis
does not make the correct prediction regarding second language phonology acquisition
by Cantonese ESL learners, and that implicational universals should not be used as the
This study has both theoretical and pedagogical implications. On the theoretical
side, the data have provided a significant test case for the Markedness Differential
pedagogical side, the findings may serve as input to the focus of pronunciation teaching.
Given that the relative degree of difficulty of different subsets of the same superset is
different, teaching professionals should devote more attention to the more difficult
consonants has been investigated, the relationships that exist between other categories of
sounds or sound sequences have not yet been dealt with. Learners’ perceptual abilities
have not been examined either. As is well known, second language learners often need to
precisely perceive new phonemic contrasts before they can produce these same contrasts
accurately. The Speech Learning Model discussed earlier has also been devised on the
way the sound is perceived. Given the focus of the present study, it is unclear how
learners’ perceptual abilities might affect their production abilities and whether the
Markedness Differential Hypothesis could account for this. Further research is needed
sounds.
REFERENCES
Anderson, Janet I. 1987. The markedness differential hypothesis and syllable structure
sound system, ed. Georgette Ioup and Steven Weinberger, 279–291. Cambridge:
Newbury House.
Anderson, Jennifer L., James L. Morgan, and Katherine S. White. 2003. A statistical
Bauer, Robert S., and Paul K. Benedict. 1997. Modern Cantonese phonology. New
perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words, ed. Judith C.
development. In The teaching and acquisition of South Asian languages, ed. Vijay
Bolton, Kingsley, and Helen Kwok. 1990. The dynamics of the Hong Kong accent:
Communication 1:147–172.
Linguistics 3:15–23.
Chan, Alice Y.W., and David C.S. Li. 2000. English and Cantonese phonology in
Cichocki, Wladyslaw, A.B. House, A.M. Kinloch, and A.C. Lister. 1999. Cantonese
supplement 1:95–121.
Cruttenden, Alan. 2001. Gimson’s pronunciation of English. 6th ed. London: Arnold.
Eckman, Fred R. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language
Learning 27:315–330.
307.
In Sound patterns in second language acquisition, ed. Allan James and Jonathan
Eckman, Fred R. 1991. The structural conformity hypothesis and the acquisition of
13:377–393.
Flege, James E. 1995. Second language speech learning: Theory, findings and problems.
Flege, James E., Murray J. Munro, and Laurie Skelton. 1992. Production of the word-
final English /t/ - /d/ contrast by native speakers of English, Mandarin and Spanish.
Flege, James E., and Chipin Wang. 1989. Native-language phonotactic constraints affect
how well Chinese subjects perceive the word-final English /t/ - /d/ contrast. Journal
of Phonetics 17:299–315.
http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/~ehume/papers/Hume_markedness_BLS30.pdf).
Hung, Tony T.N. 2000. Towards a phonology of Hong Kong English. World Englishes
19:337–356.
Kellerman, Eric. 1979. The problem with difficulty. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin
4:27–48.
Ladefoged, Peter. 2006. A course in phonetics. 5th ed. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.
Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Levelt, Clara C., Niels O. Schiller, and Willem J. Levelt. 2000. The acquisition of
In Second language acquisition and linguistic variation, ed. Robert Bayley and
Major, Roy C. 2001. Foreign accent: The ontogeny and phylogeny of second language
Acquisition 18:69–90.
Major, Roy C., and Eunyi Kim. 1999. The similarity differential rate hypothesis.
Roach, Peter. 2000. English phonetics and phonology: A practical course. 3rd ed.
Roark, Brian, and Katherine Demuth. 2000. Prosodic constraints and the learner’s
Rose, Yvan. 2003. Place specification and segmental distribution in the acquisition of
435.
Learning 32:85–108.
Sproat, Richard, and Osamu Fujimura. 1993. Allophonic variation in English /l/ and
Stites, Jessica, Katherine Demuth, and Cecilia Kirk. 2004. Markedness vs. frequency
Stockman, Ida J., and Erna Pluut. 1992. Segment composition as a factor in the
sound system, ed. Georgette Ioup and Steven Weinberger, 232–247. Cambridge:
Newbury House.
Zobl, Helmut. 1983. Markedness and the projection problem. Language Learning
33:293–313