s - Wyższa Szkoła Filologiczna we Wrocławiu

52
Gabriela Brozbă
The data provided by Mesthrie (2005) show that some features are indeed
prevalent in the speech of speakers depending on their level of proficiency
and/or second language acquisition, but they are not exclusive and should not be
treated as ultimate diagnostic features of one speaker or another across the lectal
continuum.
Leaving aside the cline of proficiency for a moment, a few more observations
on the distinction in terms of quality and quantity regarding the BSAE
monophthong system are still in order. Daan Wissing (2002) carried out a perception
study on the vowel system of BSAE.
The readings were performed by three speakers: one having as L1 English,
one of them Zulu, and the other one Southern Sotho. The listeners included 21
Zulu L1 speakers, 21 Southern Sotho L1 speakers, 41 Arabic L1 speakers and
20 Afrikaans L1 speakers. I will focus here only on the results for Bantu L1-
speaking listeners. The significant results regarding vowel length and vowel
quality are expressed in percentages in the table below:
Table 3. Perception results of vowel length and quality (adapted from Wissing 2002: 134,
whereas only relevant results have been included)
Reader(s) Correct responses Total possible cases
English
Length: 64% (293) Length: 460
Quality: 49% (159) Quality: 326
Bantu
Length: 57% (553) Length: 976
Quality: 43% (226) Quality: 522
Total 2284
The results in Table 3 point to at least two things: the speakers have greater
difficulty in dealing with and distinguishing between vowel quality than between
vowel length, and, secondly, the reading performance of a native speaker
does not seem to improve significantly the recognition rate of the correct target
words (i.e., only by 7% in terms of vowel length and by 6% in terms of vowel
quality). The second assumption indicates that the vowel system of Bantu L1
speakers of BSAE is deeply rooted so that even when exposed to a native model
they map it onto their own in most of the cases.
I will take a closer look at vowel quality in what follows by analyzing the
results of the substitution patterns for the read words. The results for the Zulu
and Southern Sotho listeners are summarized in Table 4.
The substitutes actually represent the erroneously identified words for the
word which are listed in the first column. I will conventionally assume that the
words read by the speakers illustrate the expected renditions of the DRESS and
TRAP vowels. First of all, it is worth mentioning that bird and turn are absent as
input words, which, in light of the aforementioned convention, would translate
in the absence of the NURSE vowel from the vocalic system of the Bantu speakers.