• 대한음성학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한음성학회 1996년도 10월 학술대회지
• /
• pp.247-251
• /
• 1996

This paper is intended as a preliminary study on phonetic and phonological differences between Polish and Korean languages. In this paper an attempt is made to examine the most conspicious difficulties encountered by Polish learners who begin to speak Korean (and in doing so, 1 would hope that it might be of help to future learners of both languages). Since the phoneme inventory and general phonetic rules for both languages are very different, teaching and learning accurate pronunciation is extremely difficult for both the Poles and Koreans without any previous phonetic training. In the case of Polish and Korean we can see how strong and persistent the influences of the mother-tongue are on the target language. As an example I would like to discuss the basic differences between Polish and Korean consonants. The most important consonantal opposition in Polish is voice-/voicelessness (f. ex.; 〔b〕 / 〔p〕, 〔g〕 / 〔k〕) while in Korean, opposition such as voice-/voicelessness is of secondary importance. Therefore Korean speakers do not perceive the difference between Polish voiced and voiceless consonants. On the other hand, Polish speakers can not distinguish Korean lenis / fortis / aspirated consonants (f. ex.; ㅂ 〔b〕 / ㅃ 〔p〕 / ㅍ〔ph〕, ㄱ 〔g〕 / ㄲ 〔k〕 / ㅋ 〔kh〕)) opposition. The other very important factor is palatalization which is of vital importance in Polish and, because of this, Polish speakers are extremely sensitive to it. In Korean palatalization is not important phonetically and Korean speakers do not distinguish between palatalized and non-palatalized consonants. The transcription used here is based on ' The principles of the International Phonetic Association and the Korean Phonetic Alphabet ' (1981) by Hyun Bok Lee.

• 한국어교육
• /
• 제28권1호
• /
• pp.251-268
• /
• 2017

This study is based on differences of syllable type between Korean and Chinese language pronunciation. For example, Nasal consonant ending 【n】 and 【${\eta}$】 reside in both Korean and Chinese phonetics simultaneously. However, in experiential training, Chinese learners will make errors in pronunciation of the Korean syllable nasal consonant ending like 【n】 and 【${\eta}$】. In the previous research, analysis of pronunciation errors were often based on the perspective of phonological system and combination of the phoneme rules. However, in this study, the analysis is based on the differences between Korean and Chinese syllables category to indicate the cause of pronunciation errors. The main findings of this study indicated that in the process of pronunciation of Chinese, nasal consonant syllable rime and its 【back】 tongue vowel are combined with each other. However, this rule does not apply in Korean pronunciation. Therefore, the Korean syllabic types like "앤, 응, 옹, 앵, 은, 온, 언" also exist in the Chinese language. When theChinese learners pronounce these types of syllables, the combination of the voweland nasal syllable rime rule will be taken, which will result in pronunciationerrors.

• 한국언어정보학회지:언어와정보
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2006

We can distinguish two different groups of 'fusion expressions' depending on whether the verb (-ko) ha- 'do' can be recovered from the contracted expression concerned or not: recoverable and unrecoverable fusion expressions. Many expressions belonging to the former group show alternations between the [da]-type and the [dae]-type: e.g., o-nta-nta and o-ntae-nta '...says... is coming.' On the other hand, some expressions like ka-ntae can only be realized as the [dae]-type. The main purpose of this paper is to account for these [dae]-type expressions. First, we assume that they have an inaudible/invisible quotation $verb\;{\phi}-$, which takes as its complement a verb phrase with a neutral speech-level ending. This quotation verb is derived from the quotation verb ha-. Second, we assume that the quotation $verbs\;{\phi}-$ and ha- have the [j] sound as their stem-final element, which means that these verbs are actually represented as ${\phi}-j-$ and ha-j-, respectively. In this system, the [tae]-type expressions come out naturally from the behavior of the [j] sound. We do not employ any ad hoc phonological rules to derive the [dae]-type expressions from the corresponding [da]-type expressions.

• 대한음성학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한음성학회 1996년도 10월 학술대회지
• /
• pp.574-575
• /
• 1996

The theme of the current study is to study intonation of Taiwanese(Tw.) by comparing the intonation patterns in native language (Ll), target language (L2), and interlanguage (IL). Studies on interlanguage have dealt primarily with segments. Though there were studies which addressed to the issues of interlanguage intonation, more often than not, they didn't offer evidence for the statement, and the hypotheses were mainly based on impression. Therefore, a formal description of interlanguage intonation is necessary for further development in this field. The basic assumption of this study is that native speakers of one language perceive and produce a second language in ways closely related to the patterns of their first language. Several studies on interlanguage prosody have suggested that prosodic structure and rules are more subject to transfer than certain other phonological phenomena, given their abstract structural nature and generality(Vogel 1991). Broselow(1988) also shows that interlanguage may provide evidence for particular analyses of the native language grammar, which may not be available from the study of the native language alone. Several research questions will be addressed in the current study: A. How does duration vary among native and nominative utterances\ulcorner The results shows that there is a significant difference in duration between the beginning English learners, and the native speakers of American English for all the eleven English sentences. The mean duration shows that the beginning English learners take almost twice as much time (1.70sec.), as Americans (O.97sec.) to produce English sentences. The results also show that American speakers take significant longer time to speak all ten Taiwanese utterances. The mean duration shows that Americans take almost twice as much time (2.24sec.) as adult Taiwanese (1.14sec.) to produce Taiwanese sentences. B. Does proficiency level influence the performance of interlanguage intonation\ulcorner Can native intonation patterns be achieved by a non-native speaker\ulcorner Wenk(1986) considers proficiency level might be a variable which related to the extent of Ll influence. His study showed that beginners do transfer rhythmic features of the Ll and advanced learners can and do succeed in overcoming mother-tongue influence. The current study shows that proficiency level does play a role in the acquisition of English intonation by Taiwanese speakers. The duration and pitch range of the advanced learners are much closer to those of the native American English speakers than the beginners, but even advanced learners still cannot achieve native-like intonation patterns. C. Do Taiwanese have a narrower pitch range in comparison with American English speakers\ulcorner Ross et. al.(1986) suggests that the presence of tone in a language significantly inhibits the unrestricted manipulation of three acoustical measures of prosody which are involved in producing local pitch changes in the fundamental frequency contour during affective signaling. Will the presence of tone in a language inhibit the ability of speakers to modulate intonation\ulcorner The results do show that Taiwanese have a narrower pitch range in comparison with American English speakers. Both advanced (84Hz) and beginning learners (58Hz) of English show a significant narrower FO range than that of Americans' (112Hz), and the difference is greater between the beginning learners' group and native American English speakers.