8

CHAPTER II.

REVIEW OF LITERATURES, CONCEPTS, AND THEORETICAL

FRAMEWORK

2.1 Review of Literatures

The research in this paper had been done before by others‟ with their own

excellences and weaknesses, one of them is Ida Ayu Inten (2010), with her paper

entitled “Spoken English in „3 Idiots‟ Movie”. It analyzed the differences between

spoken English in “3 Idiots” movie and Standard British English, and the factors that

affected the spoken English. The similarities between this paper and my paper are the

theory of Sociolinguistics and Dialects were used, it analyzed the spoken English in a

country, and its data was taken from the actors of a movie.

The differences were the object of the study, the method of analysis, and the

micro linguistics which was being studied. The method of this analysis is single

sampling method. The weakness of this paper compared to my paper is this paper

analyzed about Indian English while my paperanalyzed African American Vernacular

Language. Indian has 18 official languages and 1,576 mother tongue languages

(according to 1991 census) which is a large number and has a role in affecting the

speaker of Indian English, and several data from one movie could hardly represent all

of Indian English characteristics in terms of phonological features and its

9

pronunciation. African American Vernacular Language is one of minority groups of

people in the United States and it only has 154 dialects.

Another weakness of this paper is that the data was so small in number, one

sentence of the spoken English for one phonological feature. On the other hand, the

strength of this paper is the data was available for all of the phonological features. It

has one sample of the spoken English compared to Standard British English‟s

phonetics.

The paper that brings out the Slang Language based on a movie is Djereng

(2009), with her paper entitled “The Analysis of American Slang Words and Phrases

Found in the Movie Script entitled “8 Mile” written by Scott Silver. It analyzed the

types of slang words and phrases used by the characters on the movie. The

documentary method was used to collect the data and qualitative method to describe

based on the theory of Chapman (1988), who divided the types of slang. Moreover,

the theory of Zorc (1993) was also used; who proposed the process of creating slang,

which supported the word formation, abbreviation word, blending word and the

meaning of slang was taken from some dictionaries of American slang. Slang word

that was used by the characters was different from literal meaning. It could be

concluded that the primary slang was mostly found and used by the characters in this

movie, but there were many secondary slang used by them as a group of urban street

and rapper community in America. The similarity between this paper and Djereng‟s

paper was written using sociolinguistic theory. The differences are that Djereng‟s

paper used theory of Zorc and this paper used Kelly‟s theory and the problems talked

10

about slang, while this paper discussed about pronunciation. This paper has a

weakness in its macro linguistic. It was researching about slang used as a group of

urban street and rapper community in America which is too wide in its scope and had

to be more specific. African American Vernacular Language is still less wide than

Djereng‟s paper. It is believed that finding the phonological feature of these slang

words would give more knowledge to the readers.

Compared with Suastika‟s paper (2008) entitled “The Analysis of Slang used

Among the American Undergraduate Students at Oregon State University”, his data is

more reliable. It analyzed about the differences between men and women language. It

applied qualitative and quantitative method. The data collected from 100

questionnaires to a certain class at Oregon University undergraduate students through

opportunistic sampling. The quantitative method was based on the questionnaires that

related to the percentage of the tendency in using slang between male and female

students. However, the qualitative method was used from generalization about the

students‟ opinion of slang. It used theory of Sidney Landau‟s, the definition about

slang. In Dictionary: The Art and Craft of Lexicography define slang as sometimes

grouped with the style labels (standard or non-standard), and theory of Lakoff (1975),

about slang could be pointed out where female had their own way of speaking and it

was more formal than men language. The results were the differences between men

and women using language. The similarity between Suastika‟s and this paper is using

the same Sociolinguistics‟ theory. Compared to this paper, Suastika‟s paper used

Lakoff‟s theory and discussed about women and men language while this paper

11

usedHudson‟s and Holmes‟ theory and discussing about pronunciation of dialect in a

movie. It has its own strength because it used quantitative and qualitative method

which is more accurate in numbers and it was a field research which has its own

strength and weaknesses. It is believed that finding the phonological feature of these

slang words would give more knowledge to the readers. The weaknesses could be

depended on the sample of the object or the writer as human error.

While Prabawati (2010) gave a new way to analyze the data by using

Verdonk‟s theory in her paper entitled “Stylistic Variation and Context of Situation

for Characterizing the „Characters of Lord of Flies‟ by William Golding”. It analyzed

stylistic variations and form in the novel. The data was analyzed using theory of

register and context of situation by Halliday (1985), theory of stylistic by Verdonk

(2002), theory of characterization of character by Kenney (1966). The data was taken

from written dialogues of three major characters in the novel along with the context

of situation. The result of the analysis showed that the stylistic variation found in the

novel were in the form of whole sentences, phrases, and words, which appeared as

repetition, choice of words or non-standard language. The correlation between

stylistic and context of situation could not be parted for it may have different impact

in using different stylistic or different situation. It is believed that finding the

phonological features of these style variations would give more knowledge to the

readers. The similarity to this paper is that it used the theory of sociolinguistics.

There is also one article of Journal Phonology entitled “The Origin of Vowel-

Length Neutralisation in Vocoid Sequences: Evidence from Finnish Speakers” was

12

written by Scott Myers and Benjamin B. Hansen in Phonology published online in

March 30th

, 2006.It is proposed that a vowel after a vocoid must be longarises from

the inherent acoustic ambiguity of such sequences, which are realized with a

diphthongal transition from one formant pattern to the next, with no clear boundary

between the two. Neutralization in vocoid sequences originates from listeners'

difficulties in determining the duration of vowels in this context. Lengthening of the

second vocoid arises when listeners attributed some of the transition duration to that

segment. The phonetic bases of this account were supported by three experiments

with Finnish speakers. A production study showed that speakers treat the transition as

belonging in part to the realisation of the postvocoid vowel. Two perception studies

show that increasing the duration of the transition increases the probability of such a

vowel being identified as long.

2.2 Concepts

There are several items that mostly will be discussed in this research. From

the title of this thesis, it can be concluded that the items are African American

Vernacular English, Phonological Features, and the concept of Vernacular Language

itself.

2.2.1 Concepts of African American Vernacular English

13

English as mentioned inChapter 1is the most widely used language in the

world.It is spoken as a first language by a majority of the inhabitants of several

nations, including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, the

Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, and a number of Caribbean nations. This indicates

that English has many varieties because there are many countries that are speaking

English. There are British English, American English, Australian English and many

others which have their own characteristics.

As we know, AAVE (African American Vernacular English) is spoken by

African American people which are a minority in America. Therefore, in this study,

American English will also affect AAVE in its phonological features. To fulfill the

aims of the study, British English will be compared to AAVE. American English

(AmE) is the form of English that is spoken in America.

For example of American English, Marckwardt (1980) stated that Edmund E.

Miller compared results of Lion Feuchtwanger‟s novel The Oppermans that was

translated each by American translator and British translator and found several

variant translations of the same German word or expression:

American British

Subway (train) underground (train)

furniture store furnishing store

newspaper clipping newspaper cutting

That's tough! Oh crumbs!

lousy slob great imprudent oaf

from the ground up to the last detail

Elevator Lift

14

to have the jitters to get icebergs down your back

It was nearly six o'clock.

It was getting on for six

o'clock.

What did he have to do today? What had he got to do today?

While many of these expressions are no longer current today, they do point up

the long-standing differences between British and American English. A sign is

supposed to have appeared in a Paris shop window, prior to the great influx of

American tourists following World War II, which read English spoken-american

understood.Europeans once familiar primarily with British English have, in the last

decades, grown accustomed to the American idiom.

It is apparent then that American English does possess certain qualities

peculiar to itself. On more linguistic grounds, the degree of autochthony which may

be ascribed to it has been a matter of some difference of opinion and is strikingly

reflected in the titles of two historically influential books on the subject. It is

mentioned that the term English denies the implication of a separate language. At the

same time, the modifier American is intended to indicate more than the mere

transplanting of a vernacular to a new soil, but rather to suggest its new growth as a

somewhat changed and wholly indigenous organism. The title is merely a label, and

subject to all the limitations of labeling. If dialect research of the last four decades has

taught us anything, it is that every sub-group of the population has its own linguistic

repertoire, frequently overlapping with that other groups but never being completely

identical.

15

Certain characteristic vocabulary differences between British and American

English-considered without specific reference to the sub-group repertoires indicated

above-have already been mentioned. That there are also differences in pronunciation

is so obvious as to require no demonstration. Close scrutiny will also reveal some

differences in grammatical structure, superficial in most cases but becoming

increasingly deeper as we consider some of the sub-groups. According to Marckwardt

(1980), he mentioned in his book that AAVE, for example, has recently been shown

to have preverbal been (He been ate de chicken; you been know dat) not directly

paralleled elsewhere except in Pidgin and Creole varieties from West Africa, New

Guinea, the West Indies, and other primarily insular and coastal areas around the

world. To some extent, then, the immense potential of variation in a language with

more than 800 million speakers is now being realized.

When the Ebonics controversy broke in December 1996, one of the most

frequent requests from the media was for lists or descriptions of AAVE features

which showed how it differed from Standard English (SE) and other American

dialects, and which the general public could understand. One of the most complete

and accessible (if somewhat technical) descriptions of AAVE phonology and

grammar is Fasold and Wolfram‟s often-citied (1970) article. Rickford (1999) had

compiled AAVE phonological features from previous articles and books before him.

The points are as stated below:

1. Reduction of word-final consonant clusters (i.e., sequences of two or more

consonants), especially those ending with t and d, as in han’ for SE

16

“hand”, des for “desk”, pos for “post”, and pass for “passed” (the ed suffix

in “passed” is pronounced as [t].

2. Deletion of word-final single consonant (especially nasals) after a vowel,

as in ma‟ [mæ] for SE “man”, ca‟ [kæ] for SE “cat” and ba’ [bæ] for SE

“bad”. Not as frequent as (l).

3. Devoicing of word-final voiced stops after a vowel, i.e., realization of [b]

as [p], [d] as [t], and [g] as [k], as in [bæt] for SE “bad”, and [pɪk] for SE

“pig”. The devoiced consonant may be followed or replaced by a glottal

stop, e.g. [bæɂ]. (See Fasold and Wolfram 1970:53-4, Wolfram et al.

1993: 10, Bailey and Thomas 1998:89).

4. Realization of final ng as n in gerunds, e.g. walkin’ for SE “walking”.

5. a. Realization of voiceless th [θ] as t or f, as in tin for SE “thin” and baf

for SE “bath”.

b. Realization of voiced th [ᶞ] as d or v, as in den for SE “then”, and

bruvver for SE “brother”.

6. Realization of thr sequences as th, especially before [u] or [o], as in

thodown [θodaun] for SE “throwdown”. (See Wolfram 1993: 8).

7. Deletion or vocalization (pronunciation as a weak neutral vowel) of l after

a vowel, as in he’p for SE “help”, and toah for SE “toll”. May have the

grammatical effect of deleting the “ll” of contracted will, as in “He be here

tomorrow” for SE “He‟ll be here tomorrow”, especially when the

17

following word begins with labial b, m or w (Fasold and Wolfram

1970:51-3).

8. Deletion or vocalization of r after a vowel, as in sistuh for SE “sister” or

fouh for SE “four”. This rule applies more often when the r comes at the

end of a word and is followed by a word beginning with a consonant (four

posts) rather than a word beginning with a vowel (four apples), but it can

also apply when a vowel follows within the same word, as in Ca’ol for SE

“Carol” or sto’y for SE “story”. Grammatical effects may include the use

of they for the SE possessive “their” (Labov et al. 1968: 99-119, Fasold

and Wolfram 1970:51-3).

9. Deletion of initial d and g in certain tense-aspect auxiliaries, as in “ah ‘on

know” for SE “ Idon’t know” and “ah‟m ‘a do it” for SE “Im gonna do it”

(see Labov et al. 1968: 252); the distinctive AAVE use of ain’t for

“didn‟t” (ibid.:255) probably derives historically from this rule too. Note

parallels in Gullah/ Caribbean Creole English tense-aspect markers: da ~

a, does ~ oes, ben ~ men ~en, mos bii ~ mosii, and go ~o (Rickford 1974:

108).

10. Deletion of unstressed initial and medial syllables, as in ‘fraid’ for SE

“afraid” and sec’t’ry for SE “secretary”. Strongly age-graded. According

to Vaughn-Cooke (1987:22), the unstressed syllable deletion rate for

speakers over 60 years old in her Mississippi sample was 85 percent, for

18

speakers aged 40-59 it was 70 percent, and for speakers 8-20 years old, it

was 52 percent.

11. Metathesis or transposition of adjacent consonants, as in aksfor SE “asl”

one of the biggest shibboleths of AAVE, often referred to by teachers,

personnel officers, and other gatekeepers in the course of putting down the

variety), and waps for SE “wasp”.

12. Realization of SE v and z (voiced fricatives) as d and z respectively

(voiced stops), especially in word-medial position before a nasal, as in

seben for SE “seven” and idn’ for SE “isn‟t” (phonetically, [ɪznt]). (See

Wolfram 1993: 9, Bailey and Thomas 1998: 89).

13. Realization of syllable-initial str as skr, especially before high front

vowels like “ee” [i], as in skreet for SE “street” and deskroy for “destroy”

(see Dandy 1991: 44).

14. Monophthongal pronunciations of ay and oy, as in ah for SE “I” and boah

for SE “boy”.

15. Neutralization/ merger of [ɪ] and [ε] before nasals, as in [pɪn] for SE “pin”

and “pen”. (See Labov et al. 1968: 119-20).

16. Realization of “ing” as “ang”and “ink” as “ank” in some words, as in

thang for SE “thing”, sang for SE “sing”, and drank for SE “drink”. (See

Smitherman 1986: 18, Dandy 1991: 46).

17. Stress on first rather than second syllable, as in police

19

18. More varied intonation, with “higher pitch range and more rising and level

final contours” than other American English varieties (Wolfram et al.

1993:12; see also Rickford 1977:205).

2.2.2 Concepts of Vernacular Language

The term dialect (from the ancient Greek word Διάλεκτος diálektos,

"discourse", from διά diá, "through" + λέγω legō, "I speak") (taken from

Wikipedia.com) is used in two distinct ways, even by linguists. One usage refers to

a variety of a language that is a characteristic of a particular group of the language's

speakers. The term is applied most often to regional speech patterns, but a dialect

may also be defined by other factors, such as social class. According to Wikipedia, a

dialect that is associated with a particular social class can be termed a sociolect; a

regional dialect may be termed a regiolect or topolect. The other usage refers to a

language socially subordinate to a regional or national standard language, often

historically cognate to the standard, but not a variety of it or in any other sense

derived from it. This more precise usage enables one to distinguish between varieties

of a language, such as the French spoken in Nice, France, and local languages distinct

from the superordinate language, e.g. Nissart, the traditional native Romance

language of Nice, known in French as Niçard.(Holmes, 1992: 127)

A dialect is distinguished by its vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation

(phonology, including prosody). Where a distinction can be made only in terms of

pronunciation, the term accent is appropriate, not dialect. Other speech varieties

20

include: standard languages, which are standardized for public performance (for

example, a written standard); jargons, which are characterized by

differencesinlexicon (vocabulary); slang; patois; pidgins or argots.The particular

speech patterns used by an individual are termed an idiolect.

Vernacular language is the native language or native dialect of a specific

population, especially as distinguished from a literary, national or standard language,

or a lingua franca used in the region or state inhabited by that population. The term

Vernacular itself has been known since long days ago. In 1688, James Howell wrote:

Concerning Italy, doubtless there were divers before

the Latin did spread all over that Country; the

Calabrian, and Apulian spoke Greek, whereof some

Relicks are to be found to this day; but it was an

adventitious, no Mother-Language to them: 'tis

confess'd that Latium it self, and all the Territories

about Rome, had the Latin for its maternal and

common first vernacular Tongue; but Tuscany and

Liguria had others quite discrepant, viz. the

Hetruscane and Mesapian, whereof though there be

some Records yet extant; yet there are none alive

21

that can understand them: The Oscan, the Sabin and

Tusculan, are thought to be but Dialects to these.

According to Study.com, vernacular is a term that refers to the common

vocabulary shared by a similar group of people. The term vernacular is most

commonly contrasted with standard language.Vernacular refers to our plain everyday

spoken language. It's the words we use to have a casual conversation with our siblings

or the language we use when we text our best friend. Vernacular even includes

obscenities and slang words.Vernacular is also a specific language designed to help

us communicate. Lawyers and doctors have their own language, as do video gamers

and cinephiles. There are some examples of English Vernacular. Down South, they

call most sandwiches po'boys. In New York and Jersey, they call them hoagies. In

parts of Pennsylvania, they're called grinders. Language differences are found from

town to town and state to state. Each region of the U.S. has a distinct vernacular that

is special to that area. Even though English is the native language of the United

States, there's a good chance that some of the sayings or words used down South have

never been heard before from someone who lives in Portland or Detroit.

Especially where Europeans languages were concerned, the linguists of the

past normally concentrated on the standard forms of languages. Nonstandard

vernacular forms were silently ignored, excepting only in the study of regional

dialects, for which the speech of elderly rural speakers was considered most

22

appropriate; at the same time, the speech of younger speakers or of urban speakers

was similarly ignored.

2.2.3 Phonological Features

Phonetics and phonology are concerned with speech – with the ways in which

humans produce and hear speech (John Clark, 1990). Talking and listening to each

other are so much part of normal life that they often seem unremarkable. The term

„sounds‟ is a reminder that speech is intended to be heard or perceived and that it is

therefore possible to focus on the way in which a listener analyses or processes a

sound wave. The study of these facets of speech is usually termed phonetics.

Adopting different perspectives, phonetics can be viewed as a group of phonetic

sciences, separated as anatomy and physiology of speech, articulatory phonetics

(which often tends to deal with the identification and classification of individual

sounds), acoustic phonetics (sometimes restricted to instrumental analysis and

measurement of sound waves) and auditory or perceptual phonetics. These different

aspects of speech are of course integrated: speech sounds cannot be divorced from the

organs that articulate them; a sound wave does not exist in isolation from the source

that generates it, and so on.

Moreover, speech is a purposeful human activity: it is not just movement or

energy or noise, but a systematically organized activity, intended – under normal

circumstances – to convey meaning. The term phonology is often associated with the

23

study of this „higher‟ level of speech organization. Thus phonology is often said to be

concerned with the organization of speech within specific languages, or with the

systems or patterns of sounds that occur in particular languages. On this view, a

general description of how vowel sounds can be made and perceived might be the

province of phonetics while the analysis and description of the vowels of English

might be assigned to phonology. But both phonetics and phonology have been

variously defined and it is impossible to consider such definitions without touching

on fundamental questions about the nature of reality and its scientific exploration

(Clark, 1990:2).

There are several features in English phonology that maybe need to be

explained and cleared before we start this research. They are vowels, consonants, and

their manner of articulation to identify the units of speech. The words vowel and

consonant are very familiar ones, but when we study the sound of speech

scientifically we find that it is not easy to define exactly what they mean. The most

common view is that vowels are sounds in which there is no obstruction to the flow

of air as it passes from the larynx to the lips. What we commonly think of as a vowel

sounds are better described, when considering their articulation, as vocalic sounds.

Vocalic sounds are produced by egressive pulmonic airflow through vibrating or

constricted vocal folds in the larynx and through the vocal tract, and the sound

generated at the larynx is modified by the cavities of the tract. Then size and shape of

the tract can be varied, principally by positioning of the tongue and lips; and as the

24

tract is varied, so the perceived phonetic quality of the vocalic sound is altered. Thus

the two most fundamental articulatory maneuvers in producing various vocalic

sounds are the shape and position of the tongue, and the shape and degree of

protrusion of the lips. It is the tongue that largely determines the geometry of the oral

and pharyngeal cavities, and the lips that control the shape and area of the front of the

vocal tract. Lip protrusion also provides a means of extending the overall length of

the vocal tract.

English Cardinal Vowels are as shown below:

This picture is taken from https://neoenglish.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/vowels-and-

their-description-with-the-cardinal-reference-chart/. These cardinal vowels are a

25

standard reference system, and people are being trained in phonetics have to learn to

make them accurately and recognize them correctly. If we learn the cardinal vowels,

we are not learning to make English sounds, but we are learning about the range of

vowels that the human vocal apparatus can make, and also learning a useful way of

describing, classifying and comparing vowels. Although the lips can have many

different shapes and positions, we only consider three possibilities. These are:

- Rounded, where the corners of the lips are brought towards each other and the

lips pushed forwards.

- Spread, with the corners of the lips moved away from each other, as for a

smile.

- Neutral, where the lips are not noticeably rounded or spread. The noise most

English people make when they are hesitating has neutral lip position.

There are also diphthongs and triphthongs, such as /eɪ/, /eə/, /ʊə/ (centering), /eɪ/,

aɪ/,ᴐɪ(closing ending in ɪ), /əʊ/ and /aʊ/ (closing ending in ʊ), /eɪə/, /aɪə/, etc.

Diphthongs are like the long pure vowels (a vowel which remains constant and does

not glide). The first part of diphthong is pronounced much longer and stronger than

the second part. Nevertheless, triphthongs are the most complex English sounds of

the vowel type. They can be rather difficult to pronounce, and very difficult to

recognize. A triphthong is a glide from one vowel to another and then to a third, all

26

produced rapidly and without interruption. There is so much variation in the amount

of vowel movement according to how slow and careful the pronunciation is.

Moreover, consonantal sounds show greater constriction of the vocal tract

than vocalic sounds and have less prominence. There are two kinds of consonants,

they are fricatives and affricatives. Fricatives (continuant) are consonants with the

characteristic that when they are produced, air escapes through a small passage and

makes a hissing sound. Affricatives is begun as plosives and end as fricatives.

Chart of English Consonant Phonemes

Place of Articulation

Bilabial Labiodental Dental Alveolar Palato-alveolar Palatal Velar Glottal

(Post-alveolar)

Ma

nn

er o

f A

rtic

ula

tio

n Plosive p b t d k g

Fricative f v θ ᶞ s z h

Affricate

Nasal m

n

Lateral l

Approximant w r j

Fricative is a potentially stable articulation produced by a constriction in the

vocal tract that is narrow enough to create a turbulent airflow. The noise of this

turbulence gives many fricative sounds a characteristic hissing or sibilant quality. An

approximant is a potentially stable articulation in which the constriction is normally

greater than in a vowel, but not great enough to produce turbulence at the point of

27

constriction. For Abercrombie (1967) and Catford (1977), approximant is a narrower

class of sounds, excluding laterals. Nasal consonants have a stoppage at some point in

the oral cavity; at the same time, the velum is lowered to allow airflow through the

nasal cavity. The sounds are therefore perceived as potentially stable and continuous

rather than as stops in the true sense and it can be prolonged. A plosive is a consonant

articulation with the following characteristics:

- One articulator is moved against another, or two articulators are moved

against each other, as to form a stricture that allows no air to escape from the

vocal tract. The stricture is, then, total.

- After this stricture has been formed and air has been compressed behind it, it

is released, that is, air is allowed to escape.

- If the air behind the stricture is still under pressure when the plosive is

released, it is probable that the escape of air will produce noise loud enough to

be heard. This noise is called plosion.

- There may be voicing during part or all of the plosive articulation.

2.3 Theoretical Frameworks

2.3.1 Phonological Features

Traditional Sound Pattern of English (Chomsky and Halle, 1968) viewsthat sound

contrasts are distinguished by features. The phoneme is replaced by a feature matrix.

28

The phonetic categories are the acoustic or articulatory targetsin speech

production and the acoustic cues in speech perception.Language-specific

phonetic patterns arise from differences in mapping features to phonetic

categories (Keating, 1984).

i. [+Voice] can map to {vl.unasp} or {voiced}

ii. [Nasal] (on consonants) can map to an early velic lowering gesture, as

in English, or a later velic lowering gesture (as in French).

29

It is also mentioned in An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology: Second

Edition (1995)about Chomsky and Halle‟s universal set of phonetic features (based

on Chomsky and Halle 1968, pp. 298ff.) The features are described principally in

articulatory terms, although Chomsky and Halle also refer (occasionally) to acoustic

and perceptual correlates. Each feature is a „physical‟ scale defined by two points,

e.g. sonorant-nonsonorant. The features are binary for linguistic description – e.g. all

sounds are functionally either [+voiced] or [-voiced] – but may have several values

30

when taken as physical or phonetic scales. Where only one of the two functional

values is given below, the other is simple negative – e.g. nonvocalic, nonconsonantal.

Here is a table from English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course byRoach,

Peter (2000).

Feature Articulatory description

Major class features

1 Sonorant Produced with vocal tract cavity configuration in which

spontaneous voicing is possible

(Nonsorant = obstruent)

2 Vocalic Constriction does not exceed that of high vowels, and position of

vocal chords allows spontaneous voicing

(Syllabic) (Proposed renaming of vocalic)

3 Consonantal Radical obstruction in mid-sagittal region of vocal tract

Cavity features

4 Coronal Produced with blade of tounge raised from neutral position

5 Anterior Produced with obstruction in front of palato-alveolar region

6 High Tongue body above neutral position

7 Low Tongue body below neutral position

8 Back Tongue body retracted from neutral position

9 Round(ed) Narrowing of lip orifice

10 Distributed Constraction extends for some distance along direction of airflow

11 Covered Pharynx walls narrowed and tensed and larynx raised (in vowel

production)

12 Glottal constriction Constriction of vocal cords

13 Nasal Lowered velum

14 Lateral Lowered side(s) of mid-section of tongue

Manner of articulation features

15 Continuant Primary constriction in vocal tract does not block air flow

(Noncontinuant = stop)

16 Instantaneous release Instantaneous release (of stops)

(Chomsky and Halle's discussion, 1968, pp. 318-22, suggests two release features

16a Instantaneous versus delayed release of primary closures

16b Instantaneous versus delayed release of secondary closures)

17 Velar(ic) suction Velar closure producing suction (clicks)

18 Implosion Glottal closure producing suction (implosives)

31

19 velar(ic) pressure (Velar closure producing pressure - no evidence of use in

language)

20 Ejection Glottal closure producing pressure (ejectives)

21 Tense Deliberate, accurate, maximally distinct articulation (of

supraglottal musculature)

(Nontense = lax)

Source features

22 Heightened subglottal Tenseness in subglottal musculature producing greater subglottal

pressure Pressure

23 Voiced Vocal cord vibration (induced by appropriate glottal opening and

airflow)

(Nonvoiced = voiceless)

24 Strident Turbulence (in fricatives and affricates) caused by nature of

surface, rate of airflow and angle of incidence at point of

Articulation

Prosodic features (listed but not discussed in Chomsky and Halle 1968)

25 Stress

26 Pitch

27 Length

2.3.2 Dialect

Dialect is linguistic varieties which are distinguishable by their

vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation while accents are distinguished from

each other by pronunciation (Holmes, 2008).Social dialects is a variety of

language that reflects social variation in language use, according to certain

factors related to the social group of the speaker such as education,

occupation, income level (upper-class English, middle-class English and

lower-class English. Standard English can be classified as a type of social

English spoken by the well-educated English speakers throughout the

32

world.Hudson in Sociolinguistics believes that we need to analyze the

boundaries between varieties. If we consider the most straightforward variety

differences based on geography, it should be possible, if the family tree model

is right, to identify regional dialects in a larger varieties as English.

Fortunately, there is a vast amount of evidence bearing on these problems,

produced by the discipline called Dialectology. According to David Britain in

Dialectology, dialectology is the study of the way sounds, words and

grammatical forms vary within a language. The term is usually used to

describe the study both of accents (the varying sounds used within a language)

and dialects (the differing grammatical structures and words used). On the

whole, dialectology has focused on the geographical distribution of different

accents and dialects, though it has begun to investigate social factors (such as

age, gender, and position in society) too.

Moreover, Hudson proposed in his book that there is a theory that is

widely accepted by most scholars about how a variety spread regionally

(regional dialects and isoglosses). The theory is Diffusion and Wavetheory.

He said that an alternative to the family tree model in a phenomenon was

developed as early as the nineteenth century to account. This is what is called

wave theory and is based on the assumption that changes in language spread

outwards from centre of influence to the surrounding areas is similar with a

wave spreads from the place where a stone is dropped into a pool.

33

2.3.3 Standard English

Standard English (SE) is that dialect of English, the

grammar,syntax,morphology, slang and vocabulary of which are most

widelyaccepted and understood. Here “widely” means both socially and

geographically,that is, the dialect that, least of all, raises critical

judgmentsabout it and is generally considered overtly prestigious. It isperhaps

worth remembering that “the chief difference between standardand non-

standard varieties is not in their „superior' or „inferior'linguistic structures, but

in the different level of social acceptabilityaccorded to them and in the fact

that non-standard varieties are notextensively codified or officially

prescribed” (Milroy & Milroy,1993: 6). In the present work, we shall refer to

the Standard AmericanEnglish, leaving out other possible standards (Standard

British English,Standard Australian English, Standard Irish English, etc.).

According to Wardhaugh (1992), Standardization refers to the process

by which a language has been codified in some way. That process usually

involves the development of such things as grammars, spelling books, and

dictionaries, and possibly a literature.If SE is a dialect, Received

Pronunciation (RP), where receivedis to be meant in its 19th century sense of

“accepted in the best society”,is the accent most generally associated with it

(other names bywhich this accent is commonly known include Oxbridge

34

English,BBC English, and Queen‟s English). It is, however, possible to

speakperfectly SE with an accent other than RP. This is the case, for

instance,limiting our attention to the United States and its continent with

many learnedIrishmen, Scotsmen and several minorities. There may be slight

differences concerning grammar, slang, vocabulary, etc., but the ones that,

even withoutswitching to a different dialect, stick out most, regard

pronunciation.Standard English is that variety of English which is usually

used in print, and which is normally taught in schools and to non-native

speakers learning the language. It is also the variety which is normally spoken

by educated people and used in news broadcasts and other similar situations.

The difference between standard and non-standard, it should be noted, has

nothing in principle to do with differences between formal and colloquial

language, or with concepts such as „bad language‟, and standard English

speakers swear as much as others.

Hudson in Sociolinguistics (1980) stated that the notion „standard

language‟ is somewhat imprecise, but a typical standard language will have

passed through the following processes.

(1) Selection – somehow or other particular variety must have been selectedas

the one to be developed into a standard language. It may be an existing

variety, such as the one used in an important political or commercial

centre, but it could be an amalgam of various varieties. The choice is a

matter of great social and political importance, as the chosen variety

35

necessarily gains prestige and so the people who already speak it share in

this prestige. However, in some cases the chosen variety has been one

with no native speaker at all – for instance, Classical Hebrew in Israel and

Bahasa Indonesia (a newly created language) in Indonesia (Bell 1976:

167).

(2) Codification – some agency such as an academy must have written

dictionaries and grammar books to „fix‟ the variety, so that everyone

agrees on what is correct. Once codification has taken place, it becomes

necessary for any ambitious citizen to learn the correct forms and not to

use in writing any „incorrect‟ forms he may have in his native variety,

which may take literally years of a child‟s school career.

(3) Elaboration of function – it must be possible to use the selected variety in

all the functions associated with central government and with writing, for

example in parliament and law courts, in bureaucratic, educational, and

scientific documents of all kinds, and of course in various forms of

literature. This may require extra linguistic items to be added to the

variety, especially technical words, but it is also necessary to develop new

conventions for using existing forms – how to formulate examination

questions, how to write formal letters, and so on.

(4) Acceptance – the variety has to be accepted by the relevant population as

the variety of the community – usually, in fact, as the national language.

Once this happened, the standard language serves as a strong unifying

36

force for the state, as a symbol of its independence of other states

(assuming that its standard is unique and not shared with others), and as a

marker of its difference from other states. It is precisely this symbolic

function that makes states go to some lengths to develop one.

This analysis of the factors typically involved in standardization has

been quite widely accepted by sociolinguists.

2.3.4 Phoneme

According to Roach (2000), there was an abstract alphabet as

the basis of our writings; therefore there was an abstract set of units as the

basis of our speech. These units were called phonemes and the complete set of

these units was called the phonemic system of the language. The phonemes

themselves were abstract, but there were many slightly different ways in

which we make the sounds that represents these phonemes, just as there were

many ways in which we may make mark on a piece of paper to represent a

particular letter of the alphabet. The abstract side of the sounds of language

was related but different subject that was called phonology. It was possible to

acquire a full understanding of the use of sounds in English speech only by

studying both the phonetics and the phonology of English

The words vowel and consonants were very familiar ones. The most

common view was that vowels were sounds in which there was no obstruction

to the flow of air as it passes from the larynx to the lips. Another problem was

37

that different languages have different ways of dividing their sounds into

vowel and consonants. The difference between vowels and consonants is in

the way they were produced.

According to Kelly (2000: 29), vowels were articulated when a voiced

airstream was shaped using the tongue and the lips to modify the overall

shape of the mouth. English speakers generally use twelve pure vowels.

(Kelly, 2000: 2)