Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login

New from Cambridge University Press!


Revitalizing Endangered Languages

Edited by Justyna Olko & Julia Sallabank

Revitalizing Endangered Languages "This guidebook provides ideas and strategies, as well as some background, to help with the effective revitalization of endangered languages. It covers a broad scope of themes including effective planning, benefits, wellbeing, economic aspects, attitudes and ideologies."

New from Wiley!


We Have a New Site!

With the help of your donations we have been making good progress on designing and launching our new website! Check it out at!
***We are still in our beta stages for the new site--if you have any feedback, be sure to let us know at***

Review of  Ta(l)king English Phonetics Across Frontiers

Reviewer: Seetha Jayaraman
Book Title: Ta(l)king English Phonetics Across Frontiers
Book Author: Biljana Čubrović Tatjana Paunović
Publisher: Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Linguistic Field(s): Phonetics
Subject Language(s): English
Issue Number: 22.4139

Discuss this Review
Help on Posting
EDITORS: Biljana Čubrović, Tatjana Paunović
TITLE: Ta(l)king English Phonetics Across Frontiers
PUBLISHER: Cambridge Scholars Publishing
YEAR: 2009

Seetha Jayaraman, Dhofar University, Sultanate of Oman

Today linguistic research in any subfield has come to include aspects like
learner attitudes, learning strategies and the challenges faced in learning. The
book under review brings together research findings in comparative phonetics,
with special reference to problems in the acquisition of English as a Second
language by learners in Serbia and surrounding areas. It also serves as a
reference guide to aspiring researchers in and students of phonetics,
specifically on segmental and prosodic features. The volume is a collection of
research papers on various aspects of sounds of English. Acoustic parameters of
formant frequencies, duration and intonation are studied, both individually and
comparatively. The volume has two parts. Part I “Phoneme and beyond” focuses on
phonetic studies and has nine papers on learning problems of English as a Second
language. Part II “Phonetics and further beyond” consists of five papers and
discusses the phonological features in language learning and language use in
social context.

The editors’ Introduction states the book’s aim briefly, lays out the chapter
organization and important views on the acquisition of individual sound
segments, and reports results of research work done on the prosodic features of
some dialects of English.

The papers in Part I are based on empirical studies by scholars from different
backgrounds. The research studies were presented at the First Belgrade
International Meeting of Phoneticians, organized at the University of Belgrade,
Serbia in March 2008. The studies address issues on phonetics and phonology
based on speech samples, using instrumental phonetic techniques. They are linked
to different subfields from syntax and semantics, to pragmatics and phonology,
and emphasize the importance of the interfaces. Supporting the views of Laver
(1997), the studies reflect the belief that research on phonetics and phonology
is an interdisciplinary study and is not dissociated from other disciplines
engaged in language analysis, nor from the social contexts in which the language

In the first paper of Part I in “Acquiring L2 vowels: The Production of High
English Vowels /i:, I, u:, u/ by Native speakers of Serbian”, Maja Markovic
investigates the four high vowels in English, along the first three formant
frequencies and their durational values using spectral analysis. Observations
are made drawing on Flege's Speech Learning Model (SLM, Flege 1995) and Best's
Perceptual Assimilation Model (PAM, Best 1995) on the perception and production
of L2 phonemes by non-native speakers of Serbian. The study observed that
Serbian speakers substituted the short vowel /ɪ/ for /i:/ in long syllables and
articulated it as a lower and more retracted vowel, which is closer to their
L1, and it was also found to be more centralized than the English vowel. The
back vowel /u:/ was more fronted, a modified form of Serbian /u/. A mention may
be made here that providing a few examples from Serbian to illustrate short and
long /i/ and /u/ would have made the distinction more explicit. The absence of
diphthongal articulation among the Serbian speakers’ speech is another feature
which shows the influence of L1 visible in F1-F2 values. Thus the results
revealed varying patterns and levels in the acquisition of English vowels,
either through substitution or modification of identical or nearly identical
vowels of the learners’ L1, and they incline more towards Flege’s Model (SLM).

The second paper reports the results of a phonetic study of speech samples of
Japanese university students. The paper, “Vowel substitution patterns in
Japanese Speakers' English” by Takehiko Makino, highlights the common errors and
the tendency of the speakers to substitute sounds which may or may not exist in
their mother tongue. For instance, English /ε/ was closer in pronunciation to
Japanese /e/. and the diphthong /aɪ/ as /ɒ/, /ɪ/, /a/ and /εi/. English /æ/ was
articulated closer to Japanese /a/, and /ɔ/ was pronounced as /o/. The
pronunciation of schwa was found to vary with different speakers, both in
perception and production. The study uses a large corpus of English sentences
produced by Japanese speakers, with a focus on the five vowels of Japanese. The
vowels are classified on a 4-point scale as 'easy', 'difficult', 'variable' and
'R-diphthongs', based on a statistical analysis of the tokens and depending on
the varying percentage of results obtained. The author discusses a few
similarities between Japanese and American English vowels and the study is
diagnostic and reconfirms the earlier findings by Makino (2007).

The third paper is “Practical Advice on the Transcription of the Unstressed
Vowel System for Non-native students of English” by Brian Mott. Mott draws out
distinctions in the phonological system adopted for transcribing English vowels
in unstressed syllables. The investigation is done through different
dictionaries, viz., Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary (CEPD) and edited
by Peter Roach et al., and the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (LPD) by John
Wells. ‘Fleece or Kit’ type unstressed vowels, and ‘Foot or Goose’ type of
unstressed vowels are used as representative samples. Likewise, the
transcription of ‘Lot or Thought’ and ‘Nurse or unstressed Letter/Comma’ vowels
are observed. It is argued that the use of /ε/ in lieu of /e/ as in the first
element of the diphthong /εə/ makes the sounds clearer. Use of /i/ without the
length mark at the end of the words ‘happy, ‘coffee’ is seen as a shortened
variety of ‘Fleece’ type vowel. Both LPD and CEPD transcribe the verb + suffixes
as in ‘carry, carries, carried’ using the symbol /i/ without the length mark.
Mott also makes a few suggestions on the phonetic representation of the vowel
/i/ in unstressed phonetic environments, as in the word 'eleven', 'depend' and
so on. He finds LPD transcription more comprehensible and consistent in prefixes
like ‘anti’ /ænti/ and ‘arch-’ as /a:t∫/, as also the weak forms of ‘do’, ‘to’
and ‘be’. He advocates the use of diacritics with syllabic consonants /l/ and
/n/ in narrow transcription and individual phonemic symbols in broad
transcription, as in the final syllable of ‘certain’ and ‘journal’. The paper
presents a new perspective to phonological studies.

The fourth paper, “English-Hungarian Interferences: Hungarian EFL learners and
the English Dental Fricatives” by Erzsebet Balogh, argues that the sounds which
generally replace the dental fricatives are mostly those which are similar to
the speaker’s L1 and therefore most often result from the contact situation with
Hungarian (EFL) students. The main aim is to look at the phoneme(s) which
replace(s) English dental fricatives by Hungarian secondary school students,
based on a short extract from “Alice in Wonderland” by Lewis Carroll. The study
infers that Hungarian native speakers replace English dental fricatives with
sounds that do not exist in their native language. However, they also pronounce
the dental fricatives correctly.

In the fifth paper, “Voiced labiodental fricative /v/ and some phonotactic
statements regarding the English by Slovene Learners”, Klementina Juracic Petek
discusses the influence of L1 on the pronunciation of word-final obstruents. The
author explains the problem in relation to Natural Phonology Theory and lays
special emphasis on the effect of L1 on the acquisition of /v/ word finally and
the process of neutralization of /v/ into /f/. Juracic Petek concludes that the
phenomenon of neutralization of /v/ word finally occurs in varying degrees among
learners of English.

The sixth paper, “The Phonetics and Phonology of Darlington English” by Alastair
Wilson is a dialectal study of English. The paper examines Darlington English
(DE) as a regional variety, in terms of its phonetic and phonological features
like the lack of phonetic distinction between /t/ + palatal combination and the
affricate /t∫/, making them both sound alike in onset position and, consonant
clusters /lm/ being pronounced as /ləm/ with an epenthetic schwa. Wilson looks
at variants occurring in the phonetic realization of English diphthongs and the
allophonic variants of vowels. The striking features which identify DE as a
variety of Northern English dialect are, merging of /ʌ/ - /ʊ/, /æ/ replacing
/ɑ:/ in words like ‘class’ and ‘path’ and absence of the diphthongs /eɪ, əʊ/
being replaced by [e:, o:]. Wilson uses the term Standard Southern British
English (SSBE) over Received Pronunciation (RP), while observing the importance
given to the more socio-culturally dominant varieties, which endanger the
regional varieties.

The seventh paper is on “Accentuation patterns of recent French loan words in
English”. It deals with stress assignment to French loan words borrowed into
English in the last two centuries and which have found their way into the
lexicon of Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. The process of stress
placement varies from one language to another. French word stress is fixed (on
the last syllable), whereas in English, word stress varies with sense group (for
instance, the noun/verb distinction). The divergences that arise from French
loanwords and the changes that occur in the French-French words and the
French-English words, and the factors that affect stress placement in loan words
are discussed elaborately. The study is a two way process involving the first
phase of observation of a corpus of words and the second phase is based on the
responses obtained from students through a questionnaire. The key factors on
which the word accentual pattern depends are frequency of their occurrence in
English, syllable type, social status and phonological changes that occur in the
loan words. These include assimilation, substitution and vowel reduction. Loan
words are grouped according to their stress assignment, which differs markedly
from the conventional rules of stress placement and are accounted for the
changes and modifications that occur. The study seems challenging for the
different phonologies of the two languages being studied, both at the segmental
and prosodic levels.

The eighth paper, “Prosody Research: Rhythm and Intonation” by Jane Setter,
extends beyond the phoneme and word levels, looking at speech rhythm through
measurements of syllable duration from the point of view of British listeners.
In the real sense, the study takes us across linguistic boundaries. It analyses
speech rhythm of different varieties of English, viz. Hong Kong English (HKE),
Russian English (RE) and British English (BrE). The three varieties of English
show different patterns of syllable duration. The findings are found in line
with the description of English as stress-timed language by Abercrombie (1967).
Reference is widely made to earlier studies done by Jenkins (2000) and Setter et
al. (2007). Chinese and Arabic learners face serious problem in the acquisition
of English intonation pattern. Experimental group and control group are studied
for the placement of nucleus, in the process of acquiring pronunciation at
utterance level. The study was conducted in three phases, the first two based on
production and the third based on perception of the spoken language. The
difference in pronunciation was more prominent in prosodic features than in
individual phoneme segments. But these differences may be less important
pedagogically, if they do not impede communication.

The last paper of part I, “Patterns of Clause Intonation in English” by Ken-Chen
Kadooka, examines the functions of the English intonation system compared to
other languages, from phonetic and semantic perspectives. The analysis is in the
framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), and considers the
description of tonal system propounded by the British School of Intonation and
relates intonation to meaning. Special emphasis is laid on Halliday's theory of
5 simple tones and 2 complex tones, and the system of Tonality, Tonicity and
Tone on the one hand and utterance meaning, on the other. Kadooka draws a
comparison between English and tonal languages like Japanese and Chinese and
relates them to pitch contours as functioning along meaningful utterances, like
declarative and interrogative sentences.

Part II provides a broader phonological perspective including synchronic and
diachronic changes in language development. This part has five articles focusing
on the use of English in social contexts.

In “Phonological features of Advertising slogans in English and their
translation into Serbian”, Mirna Vidakovic analyses advertising slogans
phonologically. Phonological devices like alliteration, assonance and rhyme are
analyzed. Vidakovic discusses problems in translating slogans into Serbian,
where the focus is more on the use of language techniques than on the meaning.

The second paper, “On some phonological processes in English place names” by
Ruzica Ivanovic, treats a corpus of place names in England, synchronically and
diachronically, which have evolved through different processes of epenthesis,
elision, metathesis, assimilation, vowel shortening in compounds and so on, to
facilitate easy pronunciation. The author examines place names ending in
‘-chester’ synchronically for the probable palatalisation of initial /k/ sound
of Old English (OE) ‘ceaster’ or ‘cœster’ into /t∫/. She studies synchronic
plosive epenthesis in words like ‘Chelmpsford’ and a set of diachronic plosive
epenthesis reflected in the spellings of names like ‘Brampton’ or Hampton’,
diachronic consonant elision as in ‘Alnwick’, and explains the historical change
through metathesis and assimilation of voicing or vowel sound schwa as in
‘Banbury’, as assimilated forms of OE. She points out the unpredictability and
inconsistency in the pronunciation of place names in Modern English (MnE).

The third paper is “Pronunciation in EFL: Speaking ‘with an accent’” by Tatjana
Paunovic, and it investigates the learners' attitude towards standard and
non-standard accents in English as a Foreign Language (EFL). Long established
views on accent as important part of sociolinguistics and language learning are
considered in terms of sociolinguistic variables like age, sex, social class and
ethnic identity of the speakers. Research questions include the scope and
methodology of learning and subjectivity. Samples range from university students
to immigrants. The paper looks at attitudes of adult Serbian EFL learners
towards the most familiar and less familiar native varieties of English. The
results of the investigation show that the participants exhibited a more
positive attitude towards the familiar American variety. Choice depended on the
social status, solidarity trait, and 'correctness' criterion of 'standard',
'formal' or 'educated' variety.

The next paper, “Pronunciation Instruction with Young Learners –Does it make a
Difference?” by Milika Savic, presents findings of teaching-learning of
pronunciation in L2 phonology using two different approaches of
listen-and-repeat and awareness-raising method, with reference to the factors
influencing acquisition of English vowels by young speakers of Serbian. The
study acknowledges the existence of a large difference in the acquisition of L1
and L2 phonology, in line with earlier studies by Yule and Macdonald (1974) and
the existence of a link between approaches to teaching phonology of L2 and that
of FL to the context of a formal language class-room. The study emphasizes the
need to concentrate on the process of phonological acquisition of L2 more
extensively and to account for the problems in their teaching/learning.
Part II concludes with “Reinforcement of sound-spelling connections with EFL
students” by Bijana Radic-Bojanic and Vesna Lazovic. The authors discuss the
importance of dictation as an effective tool in language instruction. Although
the communicative approach does not encourage dictation, the authors strongly
believe that language skills are best acquired and reinforced through dictation.
Nevertheless, special care needs to be taken to select the content of the
dictation to reinforce orthography, punctuation, acquisition of homophones and
their relation to meaning. The seven types of remedial exercises advocated help
the learners in perceiving sound-spelling relations, in predicting spellings and
forming their own rules to retain the spellings acquired and above all, to
familiarize the learners with sounds that do not exist in their Mother Tongue
(MT). This in turn will benefit the learners in grammar and lexicon.
The strength of the book lies in the fact that the speech samples are drawn from
actual speech of the learners (and not controlled samples), and examined without
referring to them as native/non-native or standard/non-standard varieties. This
approach is both relevant and useful in the light of the growing need for
studying language as it is used in social context.

The book offers valuable information as an introduction to the phonetic study of
empirical data of Serbian learners of English as a Second Language (ESL) or a
Foreign Language (EFL), ranging from advanced undergraduate students to
university graduates. The book is particularly useful to scholars who intend to
work on speech samples of non-native or dialectal varieties of any language.
Teachers of ESL and EFL can find the latest findings in language acquisition and
learning problems in specific areas of speech prosody. The works presented take
the reader across linguistic frontiers and provide convenient reference data for
further research from different perspectives of phonetic and phonological
analyses. A few papers (second paper of Part II, on vowel substitution patterns
in Japanese Speakers' English) report the findings without reference to earlier
studies. Viewed more pragmatically, the limitations and constraints discussed
in the last paper of Part II are appropriate in any context of study of speech
samples. There is a wide scope for further research, e.g. in the area of
phonetic transcription and functional use of language as in the case of
advertising slogans. I must mention the usefulness of dictation in language
teaching, a technique relevant and apt in a language classroom with non-native

Abercrombie, D. 1967. Elements of General Phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.

Best, C. 1995. A direct realist view of cross-language speech. In Speech
perception and linguistic experience, (ed.) W. Strange 171-204.Baltimore: York

Flege, J.E. 1995. Second Language speech learning: Theory, findings and
problems. In Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in
cross-language speech research, (ed.) W. Strange, 233-277. Timonium, MD: York Press.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1967. Intonation & Grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1970. A Course in Spoken English Intonation. London: Oxford
University Press.

Halliday, M.A.K. 2000. ‘The Phonology of English as an International
Language’.London: Oxford University Press.

Laver, J. 1994. Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Makino, T. 2007. A Corpus of Japanese Speaker's Pronunciation of American
English: Preliminary Research. In Proceedings of the Phonetics Teaching Learning
Conference 2007 (PTLC2007) CD-ROM. Also found at proceedings/ptlcpaper_02e.pdf.

Setter, J., V. Stojanovik, L. van Ewijk and M. Mreland. 2007. The Production of
speech affect in children with Williams Syndrome. Clinical Linguistics and
Phonetics 21 (9):659-672.

Yule, G. & D. Macdonald. 1994. The Effects of Pronunciation Teaching. In
Pronunciation Pedagogy and Theory, New Views, New Directions, (ed.) J. Morley,
109-118. Bloomington, Illinois: Pantograph.

Dr. Seetha Jayaraman is a faculty member at Dhofar University at Salalah, Sultanate of Oman, where she teaches English language skills to undergraduate students. Her research interests include sociolinguistics, comparative linguistics, articulatory and acoustic phonetics of English, French and Indian languages, comparative phonetics, and L2 acquisition and mother tongue influence.

Format: Hardback
ISBN: 1443813036
ISBN-13: 9781443813037
Pages: 245
Prices: U.K. £ 39.99