ELT Worldwide Volume 4 Number 2 (2017)

P-ISSN 2203-3037; E-ISSN 2503-2291

The Phonological Interference of Students’ First Language in

Pronouncing English Sounds (A Case Study on Buginese and
Makassarese Students)
Dian Hera Utami
[email protected]

Basri Wello
[email protected]

Haryanto Atmowardoyo
[email protected]
State University of Makassar, Indonesia

ABSTRACT
The study indicates the phonological interferences experienced by the Buginese and
Makasserese students in pronouncing English sounds and the factors affect pronunciation
interference of Buginese and Makasserese students in pronouncing English sounds. The
respondents were eight university students majoring English Department. They are four
Buginese students which their L1 is Buginese and four Makassarese students which their L1
is Makassarese. This research was conducted through a case study design. The instruments
used to collect the data were oral test by reading three different texts and interview about
students’ problems in pronouncing English sounds. The result of data analysis showed that
there is 46 kinds manner of articulation that the students made when they produced English
sounds; 32 vowels and 14 consonants. The data also showed that the main factor that
influences the students while pronouncing English words is interlanguage transfer. In
conclusion, both Buginese and Makassarese students similar negative transfer when
pronouncing English words. The implication of this research can be expected upon teaching
and learning process. The students should put more awareness toward the L1 interference in
pronouncing English vowels and consonants and drill more the correct pronunciation. The
study also suggests that the teachers should give an extra attention to this problem. The
teacher is expected to be able to help the students to reduce the mispronounced words. The
study also has some contributions to the language field where teachers/lecturers need to take
a special attention of this phenomenon.

Keywords: Phonology, Interference, First Language

INTRODUCTION

The number of languages or language variations in Indonesia makes Indonesian as

bilingual or even multilingual. The influence of the variation of language causes the
tendency of one language to another. The interference in communication is usually caused
by the interaction of these languages. Selinker (1972) states that when the speakers or
language learner s use a second language then their habits will affect the target language.
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
206 Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …

Language learners have their psychological structure hidden in their brain which is
automatically active, so that pronunciation often occurs when a speaker or learner use the
second language.

The lingual factor is one of the main causes of the appearance of students’ first language
interference. Chaer and Agustina (1995) add if the errors are caused by the interference
where the first language deviates from the elements of the second language. In addition,
Weinrich (1968) describes interference as a disturbance in language systems of the
bilinguals.

Interference is also called language transfer or cross-linguistic influence, though these

terms refer to a broader phenomenon is often used interchangeably. Transfer suggests a
practice in which some kind of influence is essential for it to happen (Odlin: 2005). In
simple terms, it is a process in which the learner tends to assume that the system of L2 is
more or less the same as his L1 until he discovers that it is not (Ringbom, 1987). In other
words, one’s native language (or another previously acquired language) influences the
language being studied, with the result being one of transfer. Such influence may be called
positive when it facilitates the learning of a skill, given similarities between two languages,
or negative when a skill transferred from the L1 results in a production that is different
from target language expectations (Noor, 1994).

Dulay and Krashen (1982) stated that interference is an automatic transfer that occurs due
to custom, overlapping between the first language of the target language. The target
language deviation is a result of their familiarity with more than one language. They
distinguish interference into two parts, namely psychological and sociolinguistics.
Psychology shows the influence of old habits, while sociolinguistics shows the interaction
of language when two language communities are in contact. Kridalaksana (1985)
mentioned there are difficulties that the students faced in mastering a second language due
to the interference, which is influenced by old habits, familiar with the mother tongue, and
the interaction of two languages in society. Interference can occur in phonological,
grammatical, lexical, and semantic systems.

In South Sulawesi, people may develop bilingualism because most of people can speak by
using Buginese language and Makassarese language, Buginese and Indonesian, Buginese
and English, Makasserese and Indonesian, Makassarese and English, and others. There are
even people who multilingual because they can speak Buginese and Makassarese as well as
English, and so on. Negative transfer of Buginese and Makassarese towards pronouncing
English sounds a lot going on. For example, if the Buginese speaker pronounces sound /θ/
/f/, /z/, /ʃ/, and so forth. The speakers pronounce word ‘think’ /θɪŋk/ become /ting/, ‘of’/əv/
become /op/, ‘all’ /o:l/ become /al/, ‘zoom’ /zu:m/ become /sum/, shy /ʃaɪ/ become /sai/,
and so forth.

In a line with the discussion are highlighted in this research is interference of Buginese and
Makassarese language in speaking English. Phonological interference of first language
made by the students in speaking English is seen by the researcher as an urgent problem to
be solved. The cause of the problem is the inappropriate phonology made by the students
when they produce English sounds.
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …
207

Based on the previous illustration, the objective of this research was to find out:

1. The phonological interferences made by the Buginese and Makasserese students in

pronouncing English sounds.
2. The factor affects pronunciation interference of Buginese and Makasserese students in
pronouncing English sounds.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Previous Related Studies

Many researchers have been conducting studies related to the interference of L1 to L2.
Weda and Sakti (2017) discussed and analyzed the effects of formal instruction on the
acquisition of English short vowels of students of English Literature Study Program
Faculty of Languages and Literature Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia. Their
research found that the formal instruction relates significantly to the improvement of
students‟ acquisition of English short vowels. The also found that the majority of the
students transcribed the short vowels as long vowels, e.g., ǝ becomes e: as in docter; ɪ
becomes i as in sit. Conspicuously, the Indonesian learners’ problems in pronouncing short
vowels: ɪ, e, æ, ʌ, ɒ, and ʊ need more attention from the teachers and language
practitioners, especially in countries where English becomes a compulsory subject at
schools and universities and also taught as a Foreign Language (FL).

A research conducted by Nada (2012) related to the cause of errors made by Iraq EFL
students related to L1. It is revealed that most of the students rely on or depend on their
mother tongue when they speaking or expressing their ideas. The main cause of this
problem is a grammatical error. Thus, it shows the influence of Arabic on students’ writing
of English.

Akhyaruddin (2011) conducted a research to analyze the interference of Bugisnese

language in learning of Indonesian language at SD Kabupaten Tanjung Jabung Timur,
Jambi. The data is an oral language which is spoken by the students who the mother
language is Buginese. His research found that there are three types of the interference
which are occurred in students’ conversation: phonological, morphological, and syntax
interferences. The interference of Buginese does not occur consciously, but it occurs
because there is an effect from daily life so that the element of Buginese words or
sentences is still carried in the communication at the school.

Bennui (2008) conducted a research to analyze the problems that Thai EFL students faced
with transfer phenomena in the learning process while trying to communicate their ideas.
The research revealed that there was a significant level of L1 interference that represents
more negative transfers than positive transfers in students' written English. In addition, the
results show the different types of errors such as the use of vocabulary, phrases, clauses
and sentence structure, as well as the language style of paragraph writing. It can be
concluded that at the end of the study it is possible to identify that all aspects of L1
interference should be seriously considered by teachers in writing courses so that negative
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
208 Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …

transfers will be reduced and positive transfers will appear and become a useful tool for
students when analyzing the structures both structures.

METHOD

This research was a qualitative case study. This research aimed to find out what
phonological interferences occurred by the Buginese and Makasserese students in
pronouncing English sounds and the factors cause it. The data are taken from eight sources,
they are four Buginese students and four Makassarese students of English Education
Department of Muhammadiyah University of Makassar. The students had been chosen
based on some considerations.

Two kinds of instruments were used to collect the data, namely oral test and interview.
Oral test was used by reading three different texts. The interview was used to get the data
concern with students’ problems to the English pronunciation. In this research, audio
recording used to collect data. The data gathered was analyzed by using Ellis’ (1997) steps
to find the students’ errors when they pronouncing English sounds. The steps were collect
the sample of this research, identify the error, describe the errors, explain the errors, and
evaluate the errors.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The Phonological Interferences Occurred by the Buginese and Makasserese Students

in Pronouncing English Sounds

The researcher found that there are 4 Bugisnese students and 4 Makassarese students made
some errors on the test that the researcher gave. Of the 8 students, the researcher found that
there is 46 kinds manner of articulation that the students made when they produced English
sounds, consist of 32 vowels and 14 consonants.

The most frequent error that the Buginese and Makassarese students made when they
pronounced word “of”. All of the students made an error on it. Then, there are 7 students
made an error when they pronounced word “she”, and “thus”. The last is there are 6
students made an error when they pronounced word “especially” and “equal”.

Table 1. Modification of English Vowels

Modification
No. English vowels Words
(Buginese and Makassarese)
1. /ɒ/ open back /ɔ/ open-mid back rounded vowel Of, nonsense, honour,
rounded vowel involved, blond,
/a/ open-low front unfounded vowel Was, parliaments
2. /ə/ mid-central vowel Privet, inflicted,
/ɪ/ wanted, behind,
near-close near- indigenous
front unrounded /e/ close-mid front unrounded Descendants,
vowel vowel especially, pretended,
indigenous,
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …
209

parliaments, inflicted,
removal, indignity,
expect, wanted, privet
/ʌ/ open-mid back unrounded Character
vowel
/a/ open-low front unfounded vowel Charater
3. /ə/ /e/ close-mid front unrounded Nonsense, as, an,
mid central vowel vowel confidence,
mistreatment, self-
evident, genertion,
parliaments,
governments, a
/u/ close back rounded vowel Today, tomorrow,
together, cultures,
mysterious, useful,
director, future,
successive
/ɒ/ open back rounded vowel Aboriginal, apologize,
honour, history,
profound
/ɔ/ open-mid back rounded vowel Director, oppression,
content, history,
aboriginal
4. /ɔ/ open-mid back /a/ open-low front unfounded vowel Called, although,
rounded vowel former, small, all, also
/e:/ long unround mid front vowel Small
5. /æ/ /e/ close-mid front unrounded Have, that, chapter,
Near-open front vowel families, thank, man,
unrounded vowel land, fact
/a/ Transformed,
open-low front unrounded vowel character, families,
chapter, aboriginal,
hadn’t, fact
6. /ɑ/ open back /ə/ mid central vowel Large
unrounded vowel

Table 2. Modification of English Vowels

Modification
No. English vowels Words
(Buginese and Makassarese)
7. /e/ /ʌ/ Open-mid back unrounded Difficulties, strait
close-mid front vowel
unrounded vowel /i:/ long unround high front vowel Men, neck, met,
fellow
/ɔ/ open-mid back rounded vowel Fellow
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
210 Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …

/ə /mid central vowel Descendants, content

8. /ʌ/ /u/ close back rounded vowel Son, suffering, thus,
open-mid back injustice, cultures,
unrounded vowel such
/ɔ/ Governments,
open-mid back rounded vowel discover, brotherhood,
colour, sons, country,
mothers, culture, one
9. /a/ open-low front /ɔ/ open-mid back rounded vowel Out, down, now,
unfounded vowel found, about
/e/ close-mid front unrounded Character
vowel
10. /i:/ /e:/ long unround mid front vowel Equal, secret, deeply,
long unround mistreatment
high front vowel /ɜ:/ long unrounded open-mid Heat
central vowel
/ə/ Descendants, content
11. /ɜ:/ /i:/ long unround high front vowel Firm, her
long unrounded /ʌ:/ long open-mid back unrounded Hurt
open-mid central vowel
vowel /u:/ long round high back vowel Turn
12. /u:/ /ɔ:/ long round open-mid back Rooted, move
long round high vowel
back vowel / ɒ:/ long open back rounded vowel Truths

The most frequent errors of modification vowel sounds that the Buginese and Makassarese
students made are the change of near-close near-front unrounded vowel /ɪ/ to mid-central
vowel /ə/, close-mid front unrounded vowel /e/, open-mid back unrounded vowel /ʌ/, and
open-low front unrounded vowel /a/. Then, mid-central vowel /ə/ change to close-mid front
unrounded vowel /e/, close back rounded vowel /u/, pen back rounded vowel /ɒ/, and open-
mid back rounded vowel /ɔ/.

Table 3. Modification of English Consonants

English Modification
No. Words
consonants (Buginese and Makassarese)
1. /ʒ/ voiced palato /s/ voiceless alveolar fricative Usual
alveolar fricatives
2. /ʃ/ voiceless /s/ voiceless alveolar fricative She, especially
palato-alveolar /tʃ/ voiceless palatal affricatives Moustache
fricative
3. /θ/ voiceless /t/ voiceless alveolar plosive Truths, anything, thin,
dental fricatives everything, nothing,
think
4. /t/ voiceless /θ/ voiceless dental fricatives Righting
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …
211

alveolar plosive
5. /dʒ/ voiced /k/ voiceless velar plosive Page
palatal /g/ voiced velar plosive Apologise, generation,
affricatives page, aboriginal
6. /n/ alveolar nasal /ŋ/ voiced velar nasal Strange, inflicted,
down, and, thin
7. /v/ voiced /f/ Voiceless labiodental fricatives Very
labiodental
fricatives
8. /tʃ/ voiceless /t/ voiceless alveolar plosive Cultures, future
palatal /s/ voiceless alveolar fricative Such
affricatives /k/ voiceless velar plosive Such, chapter
9. /z/ voiced /s/ voiceless alveolar fricative This, as, has, these
alveolar fricative
10. /m/ voiced /n/ alveolar nasal Confidence
alveolar nasal

The most frequent errors of modification consonant sound that the Buginese and
Makassarese students made is the change of voiceless palatal affricatives /tʃ/ to voiceless
alveolar plosive /t/, voiceless alveolar fricative /s/, and voiceless velar plosive /k/.

Factor affects pronunciation interference of Buginese and Makasserese students in

speaking English.

The researcher found that there are three main factors that influence the students when
pronounced the English words. They are, (1) The interlingual factor, (2) The overextension
of analogy, and (3) Transfer of structure. From those three causes, the researcher can
conclude that the Buginese and Makassarese students may realize that English sounds and
their L1 sounds must be distinguished when they speak in foreign language. Some of the
students have known about the rules but sometimes they forgot to apply it when produced
the English sounds. It might be because the interference of L1, the limitation of memory,
psychological problem, and or do not understand the material of the subject.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

All Buginese students and Makassarese students made some errors on pronouncing English
sounds. It was found that there are 46 kinds of similar articulation mistakes made by both
Buginese and Makassarese students. It consists of 32 consonants and 14 vowels.

There is no significant difference between Buginese and Makassarese students on

pronounce English sounds. Generally, they have similar problems in pronouncing English
sounds. The students may realize that English sounds and their L1 sounds must be
distinguished when they speak in foreign language. Some of the students have known about
the rules but sometimes they forgot to applied it when produced the English sounds. It
might be because the interference of L1, the limitation of memory, psychological problem,
and or do not understand the material of the subject.
 ELT Worldwide Vol 4 No 2 (2017)
212 Utami, Wello, Atmowardoyo: The Phonological Interference of Students’ …

The implication of this research can be expected upon teaching and learning process. The
teachers should give attention more about this problem. In other that, the students can
reduce the mispronouncing when they produce English sounds. This research also suggests
that the students should put more awareness toward the L1 interference in pronouncing
English vowels and consonant and drill more the correct pronunciation. The study also
indicates some remarkable contributions to the language field where teachers/lecturers need
to take a special attention of this phenomenon.

REFERENCES

Akhyaruddin. 2011. Studi Kasus Interferensi Bahasa Bugis dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa
Indonesia di Sekolah Dasar Tanjung Jabung Timur, Pena Vol. 1 No. 1 Desember
2011: 29-39 ISSN 2089-3973. FKIP Universitas Jambi.

Bennui, P. 2008. A study of L1 interference in the writing of Thai EFL Students, Malaysian
Journal of ELT.Research 4.Thaksin (Thailand): University of Thailand.

Chaer, A., & Agustina, L. 2010. Sociolinguistik: Perkenalan Awal. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Dulay, H., Burt, M. & Krashen, S., 1982. Language Two. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. 1997. Second Language Acquisition Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kridalaksana, H. 1985. Tata Bahasa Deskriptif Bahasa Indonesia: Sintaksis. Jakarta: Pusat
Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.

Nada, S.A.R. 2012. The Effect of EFL Learners’ Mother Tongue on Their Writings in
English: An Error Analysis Study,” Iraq Journal of the College of Arts. Basrah
(Iraq): University of Basrah.

Noor, H. 1994. Some Implications of the Role of the Mother Tongue in Second Language
Acquisition. Linguistica Communicatio, 6(1-2), 97-106.

Odlin, T. 2005. Crosslinguistic Influence and Conceptual Transfer: What are the Concepts.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics Vol. 25. Cambridge University Press.

Ringbom, H. 1987. The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language Learning.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Selinker, L. 1972. “Interlanguage”. Journal International Review of Applied Linguistics.

Weda, Sukardi & Sakti, A.E.F. (2017). The Effect of Formal Instruction on the Acquisition
of English Short Vowels. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR),
Volume 6 Issue 5, May 2017.

Weinreich, U. 1968. Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton.