انتقال آوایی در گفتار فارسیِ فارسی‌آموزان چینی با تمرکز بر فضای واکه‌ای

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته ی کارشناسی ارشد زبان‌شناسی از دانشگاه دریانوردی و علوم دریایی چابهار

2 نویسنده‌ی مسئول، استادیارگروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه دریانوردی و علوم دریایی چابهار

3 استادیار گروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه دریانوردی و علوم دریایی چابهار

10.30479/jtpsol.2020.14062.1490

چکیده

بروز لهجة خارجی در گفتار زبان‌آموزان نمودی از انتقال آوایی تلقی می‌شود. در گفتار فارسیِ زبان‌آموزان مندرین‌ز‌بان نیز لهجة خارجی مشهود است. مسئلة اول در پژوهش حاضر این است که «آیا بخشی از لهجة خارجی می‌تواند ناشی از خطا در تولید واکه‌ها باشد؟» و مسئلة دوم این است که «آیا این فارسی‌آموزان مشخصه‌های صوت‌شناختی زبان مادری خود را به فارسی انتقال می‌دهند؟». در یک بررسی میدانی با شرکت 24 گویشور بومی زبان فارسی و 18 گویشور چینی مندرین، مشخصه‌های صوت‌شناختی واکه‌های فارسی، واکه‌های چینی مندرین متناظر با واکه‌های فارسی، و واکه‌های فارسی تولید شده توسط گویشوران چینیِ مندرین، گردآوری و با هم مقایسه شد. تحلیل داده‌ها نشان داد که: نخست، در گفتار فارسی مندرین‌زبانان، سازانة دوم واکة /e/ متفاوت از فارسی معیار تولید می‌شود؛ بنابراین، حداقل بخشی از لهجة خارجی در گفتار فارسی مندرین‌زبانان می‌تواند ناشی از اختلاف در تلفظ واکة /e/ باشد. دوم، تطبیق فضاهای واکه‌ای فارسی و چینی مندرین نشان می‌دهد جایی که واکة /e/ فارسی قرار می‌گیرد، در مندرین تجمعی از چند واکة پیشین افراشته و نیم‌افراشته وجود دارد و به نظر می‌رسد فارسی‌آموزان مندرین‌زبان واکة /e/ در گفتار فارسی خود را آن‌ قدر پیشین‌ تولید کرده‌اند که از محل تجمع واکه‌های مشابه در زبان مادری آنها دور شود؛ همین اغراق موجب اختلاف در تلفظ و بروز لهجة خارجی گردیده است. یافته‌های پژوهش حاضر نسخة تعدیل یافتة فرضیة انتقال زبانی منفی را تقویت می‌کند؛ چراکه به نظر می‌رسد خطای روی داده در تلفظ /e/ در گفتار فارسی مندرین‌زبانان نوعی تداخل غیرمستقیم الگوهای مشابه است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Phonological Transfer in Chinese Persian Language Learners: Vocalic Space in Focus

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saeedeh Zare 1
  • Mehdi Safaie-qalati 2
  • Nahid Yarahamdzehi 3
1 MA of Linguistics from Chabahar Maritime University
2 Corresponding Author, Department of English, Assistant Prof. of Linguistics, Chabahar Maritime University.
3 Assistant Prof. of Linguistics, Department of English, Chabahar Maritime University.
چکیده [English]

The so called “foreign accent” is one manifestation of phonological transfer. The current study aimed to study: first, “if a part of Chinese PFL learners’ foreign accent is caused by errors in pronouncing Persian vowels”, and second “if Chinese PFL learners transfer the acoustic features of the vowels in their mother tongue to their Persian speech”. Through a process of convenience sampling, 42 Persian and Mandarin Chinese native speakers were included in the present study. F1 and F2 of The Persian vowels, the Mandarin vowels, and the Persian vowels produced by the native Mandarin PFL speakers were extracted and compared. Data analysis showed that, firstly, F2 of the vowel /e/ in the Persian speech of the native Mandarin speakers is meaningfully more fronted than it is in Persian. Hence, this error in vowel pronunciation might be a cause of the apparent foreign accent in the Persian speech of native Mandarin PFL speakers. Secondly, a comparison of Persian and Mandarin Chinese vocalic spaces showed that in the same position where the Persian /e/ is located, Mandarin Chinese has four similar front vowels (1 phoneme and 3 allophones); it seems as if the Chinese PFL learners exceedingly front the Persian vowel /e/ to contrast it with these similar vowels in their mother tongue. These findings corroborate the “modified transfer hypothesis” since the source of error in this particular case is not direct phonological transfer but the mother tongue seems to indirectly affect the pronunciation of the foreign language. 
Extended Abstract: 
Statement of the Problem: The so called “foreign accent” is one manifestation of phonological transfer. The problems investigated in the present study are: first, “if a part of Chinese Persian as a Foreign Language (PFL) learners’ foreign accent is caused by errors in pronouncing Persian vowels”, and second “if Chinese PFL learners transfer the acoustic features of the vowels in their mother tongue to their Persian speech”. 
Theoretical Framework: Knight(2013, p. 16) classifies the status of the speech sounds of a foreign language compared with the corresponding speech sounds in the mother tongue in the three classes of “new” (as completely different), “identical” (as completely the same), and “similar” (as similar sound with slight acoustic differences). The identical speech sounds in the foreign language are mastered with ease by being put in the same class as the phonemes in the mother tongue. The pronunciation of the new speech sounds improve as new phoneme categories are made in mind of the second language (L2) learners through sufficient practice (Fromkin, Rodman, & Hyams, 2014, p. 432). Among these three classes, the similar speech sounds are the most difficult to master nativelikely by the L2 learners and the slight acoustic differences they have might be taken as a major source of foreign accent in the target language (Best & Strange, 1992, p. 105). 
Methodology: Through a process of convenience sampling, 42 Persian and Mandarin Chinese native speakers (11 female and 13 male native Persian speakers, and 8 female and 10 male native Mandarin Chinese PFL learners) were included in the present study. F1 and F2 of The Persian vowels, the Mandarin vowels, and the Persian vowels produced by the native Mandarin PFL speakers were extracted in a laboratory situation and the data was statistically compared. For calculating the mean F1 and F2, all the 24 native Persian speakers and 18 native Mandarin Chinese PFL learners were included; in the second phase 8 native Persian speakers and 2 native Mandarin Chinese PFL learners were randomly left out to conduct the statistical analyses (independent samples t-test for normally distributed data and Mann–Whitney for abnormally distributed data) on quantitatively similar data samples from both genders. 
Results and Discussion: in accord with what Knight(2013, p. 16) claims about the so called “identical” speech sound, among the 5 articulatory similar vowels in Persian and Mandarin Chinese, 4 of them turned to be acoustically “identical” without causing any meaningful pronunciation errors. Only the F2 of the Persian vowel /e/ was observed to be meaningfully different from the corresponding vowel in Mandarin Chinese. However, in contrast with the findings of Best & Strange (1992, p.105), the native Mandarin Chinese PFL learners did not put this “similar” speech sound in a corresponding category of a similar vowel from their mother tongue; instead of transferring the acoustic features of a similar vowel in their mother tongue to the pronunciation of the Persian /e/, the data revealed that the Mandarin Chinese PFL learners treated the Persian /e/ as a “new” speech sound and pronounce it differently from all the similar corresponding vowels in their mother tongue. The vowel /e/ in the Persian speech of the Mandarin Chinese PFL learners, however, was also different from the native Persian /e/; a pronunciation error which might serve as a source of their foreign Persian accent. 
A comparison of the vocalic spaces of Persian and Mandarin Chinese shows that in the area where the Persian /e/ is expected to be located, Mandarin Chinese already has 4 closely similar front vowels (phonemes /e/, /y/, and /i/ and the allophone [E]). It seems as if the Mandarin Chinese PFL learners recognize that the Persian /e/ is fronter than the three /e/-like vowels (namely /e/, /y/, and [E]) and lower than the similar vowel /i/ in their mother tongue. However, it seems that in order to both compensate for this difference in frontness and make the new vowel also different from the corresponding similar vowels in their mother tongue, they exaggerate in the frontness of their Persian /e/ and that could be the reason behind this pronunciation error causing their foreign Persian accent. 
Conclusions: the findings of the current study show that the error in pronouncing the Persian /e/ in the speech of Mandarin Chinese PFL learners cannot be taken as a manifestation of direct negative language transfer; this is in contrast with the suggestions of the strong version of language transfer in general and Chen & Wang (2011), Wang & Heuven (2006), and Knight (2013) in particular. The Mandarin Chinese PFL learners have not activated the Persian /e/ as a part of the so called innate linguistic competence, but in their Persian speech, they pronounce an /e/ which is different from both native Persian and Mandarin Chinese corresponding vowels; then, these findings do not also confirm the weak version of language transfer. However, the results of the present study seem to corroborate the modified version of the language transfer, since the observed error in the pronunciation of /e/ in the Persian speech of these PFL learners could be taken as a kind of indirect negative interference of the similar linguistic patterns of the mother tongue in L2.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Phonological Transfer
  • Vocalic Space
  • Chinese PFL learners
  • Persian Vowels
  • Mandarin
آرلاتو، آنتونی (1394). درآمدی بر زبانشناسی تاریخی. (ترجمه: ی. مدرسی) تهران: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.
بی‏جن‌خان، محمود (1392). نظام آوایی زبان فارسی. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
ثمره، یدالله (1385). آواشناسی زبان فارسی: آواها و ساخت آوایی هجا (ویراست دوم). تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
حق‌شناس، علی محمد (1380). آواشناسی (فونتیک). تهران: آگه.
دبیرمقدم، محمد (1393). رده‌شناسی زبانهای ایرانی (جلد اول). تهران: سمت.
صادقی، وحید (1394). بررسی آوایی کاهش واکهای در زبان فارسی. جستارهای زبانی، 24 (3)، 187-165.
صادقی، وحید و منصوری هرهدشت، نیلوفر (1394). کیفیت واکه در زبان فارسی: مقولهای پایدار یا تغییرپذیر؟: یک مطالعه‌ی موردی بر روی گویشوران مرد. پژوهشهای زبانی، 6 (2)، 80-61.
صالحیان، اشرف (1394). آموزش زبان چینی در 60 روز. تهران: انتشارات نسل نوین.
کامبوزیا، عالیه کرد زعفرانلو (1385). واجشناسی: رویکردهای قاعده‌بنیاد. تهران: سمت.
مدرسی‌قوامی، گلناز (1393). آواشناسی: بررسی علمی گفتار. تهران: سمت.
نوربخش،ماندانا (1392). آواشناسی فیزیکی با استفاده از رایانه. تهران: نشر علم.
وکیلی‌فرد، امیررضا (1381). واکاوی خطاهای آوایی فارسی‌زبانان در فراگیری زبان فرانسه. پژوهش‌های زبان‌های خارجی ، 13، 177-186.
یول، جورج (1385). مطالعه و بررسی زبان (ویراست سوم). (ترجمه: ع. بهرامی) تهران: رهنما.
 
Refrences:
Arlotto, A. (2015). Introduction to Historical Linguistics (Y. Modarresi, Trans.). Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. (In Persian)
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Sprouse, R. A. (2017). Negative and positive transfer. In J. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Best, C. T., & Strange, W. (1992). Effects of phonological and phonestic factors on cross-language perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics , 20 (3), 305-330.
Bhela, B. (1999). Native language interference in learning a second language: exploratory case studies of native language interference with target language usage,. 1 (1), 22-31.
Bijankhan, M. (2013). Phonetic System of the Persian Language. Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian)
Chen، H. C., & Wang, M. J. (2011). An acoustic analysis of Chinese and English vow
 
els. CALR Linguistic Journal (1), 1-19.
Dabirmoghadam, M. (2014). Typology of Iranian Languages (Vol. 1). Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian)
Duanmu, S. (2011). Chinese syllable structure. The Blackwell companion to phonology , 1-24.
Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction. Amesterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Forsyth, H. (2014). The influence of L2 transfer on L3 English written production in a bilingual German/Italian population: A study of syntactic errors. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics(03), 429-456.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2014). An introduction to language. 10th ed. California: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Goldstein, B. A., & Bunta, F. (2012). Positive and negative transfer in the phonological systems of bilingual speakers. Inernational Journal of Bilingualism , 16 (4), 388-401.
Haghshenas, A. M. (2001). Phonetics. Tehran: Agah. (In Persian)
Kambuziya, A. K. (2006). Phonology: rule based approaches. Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian)
Knight, K. J. (2013). L1 English Vocalic Transfer in L2 Japanese. Doctorate Dissertation . Athens, Geogia: Temple University.
Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Early language learning and literacy: neuroscience implications for education. Mind, Brain, and Education5(3), 128-142.
Li, Y.-c., & Thompson, S. A. (1989). Mandarin Chinese: a practical reference grammar. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.
Lin, Y.-H. (2007). The Sounds of Chinese. Cambridge University Press.
MacLoughlin, I. V. (2010). Vowel intelligibility in Chinese. IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech & Language Proc. , 18 (1), 117-125.
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals & multilinguals. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research , 50, 940-967.
Meng, Z., Chen, Y., & Li, X. (2006). Statistical survey of monophthong formants in Mandarin for sudents being trained as broadcasters., (pp. 280-286). Wuhan, China.
Modarresi-Ghavami, G. (2014). Phonetics: the scientific study of speech. Tehran: SAMT. (In Persian)
Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpinan, S. (2008). Gender agreement in adult second language learners and spanish heritage speakers: the effects of age and context of acquisition. Language Leraning , 58 (3), 503-553.
Mushangwe, H. (2013). A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and Shona Vowels. Journal of Arts & Humanities , 77-86.
Nathan, G. S. (2008). Phonology: a cognitive grammar introduction. Wayne State University: John Benjamins.
Nurbakhsh, M. (2013). Studying the Physics of Speech by the Use of Computer. Tehran: Elm. (In Persian)
Oller Jr., J. W., & Ziahosseiny, S. M. (1970). The Contrastive analysis Hypothesis and Spelling Errors. Language Learning , 183-189.
Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. (2010). Oxford University Press.
RCSSD, Holy Family & Regina Public Schools. (2001). English language arts for French immersion students. Edmonton, Canada: Alberta Learning.
Sadeghi, V. (2015). A phonetic study of vowel reduction in Persian. Language Related Research, 6(3), 165-187. (In Persian)
Sadeghi, V., Mansoory Harehdasht, N. (2015). Vowel Quality in Persian: Stable or Unstable?. Language Research, 6(2), 61-80. doi: 10.22059/jolr.2016.57500. (In Persian)
Salehian, A. (2015). Learning Chinese in 60 Days. Tehran: Nasl-e-Novin. (In Persian)
Samareh, Y. (2006). Phonetics of the Persian Language: speech sounds and syllable structure (second edition). Tehran: Academic Publication Center. (In Persian)
Silva, N. S. (2008). The impact of mother tongue on teaching English as a foreign language of begginner levels. (Bacholar's thesis) . Capetown, South Africa: Instituto Superior de Educacao.
Steinberg, D. D., & Sciarin, N. V. (2006). An Introduction to Psycholinguistics.(2nd.). UK: Pearson Education Limited.
Triskova, H. (2011). The structure of the Mandarin Chinese syllable: why, when and how to teach it. Oriental archive (79), 99-134.
Vakilifard, A. (2002). A phonetic error analysis of the Persian speaking FFL learners. Research in Contemporary World Literature, 7(13), 177-86. (In Persian)
Wang, H., & Heuven, V. J. (2006). Acoustical Analysis of English Vowels Produced by Chinese, Dutch and American speakers. Amersterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Whong, M. (2011). Language teaching: linguistic theory in practice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Wu, C.-H., & Shih, C. (2009). Mandarin Vowels Revisited: evidence from electromagnetic articulography. In Annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 35, pp. 329-340). Berkeley: University of Berkeley.
Xie, F., & Jiang, X.-m. (2007). Error analysis & the EFL classroom teaching. US-China Education Review , 4 (9), 10-14.
Yang, L., Hanneke, S., & Carbonell, J. (2013). A theory of transfer learning with applications to active learning. transfer learning .
Yuhua, K., & Siping, L. (2008). Conversational Chinese 301 (Vol. 1). Beijing, China: Beijing Language & Culture University Press.
Yule, G. (2006). The Study of Language. (A. Bahrami, Trans.). Tehran: Rahnama. (In Persian)