Theoretical Framework REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
55 However, considering the nature of the problems, the objectives of the
research, and as well as the descriptive nature of the research findings, the writer suggested that the proper method required by this research is a qualitative one.
There are two reasons to explain why this research is categorized as a qualitative research. The first reason is that it is due to the detail of the data provided in this
research. Concerning this reason, Harwell 2011 conveys that qualitative research has to do with “a detailed exploration of a topic interest in which information is
collected by a writer ” through various qualitative-based methods p. 148.
The second reason is because of the inductive-approach nature that emerged in this research. Patton 1983, in his review on qualitative research methodology
explains that “qualitative measurement has to do with the kinds of data and information that are collected,” and he further implied that a group of data can be
included as qualitative data if it contains detail and depth descriptions of the studied issue. In this research, the writer emphasizes the detail of the analyzed
data. As the writer thoroughly compares Cantonese and English consonant speech-sounds, he describes how each of the studied sound is being articulated
throughout the organs of speech, and how it is being processed acoustically in the tract.
Patton 1983 also mentions that “qualitative design begins with specific observations and builds
toward general pattern”. This nature of inductive
approach can be found in the manner that this research was indeed conducted with this very way of conduction. The discussion on the inductive steps taken in this
research will be discussed in the research procedure section.
56 Among various available qualitative methods, the writer used the library
research method as the most proper method to answer the research problems. The steps within the main framework of the research are to read, to observe, to collect
data from various references related to the topic of the research, and to use the supportive and relevant collected data to help the writer in finding the answers to
the formulated problems. The references of this research include books, academic journals and articles, theses, graphics, audio, or video files consisting theories of
English and Cantonese speech-sounds, as well as discussions on the basic theories of English and Cantonese phonetics.
The writer used the method because he intended to compare only the standard way of pronunciation of both the specific RP English and Guangzhou-styled
Cantonese‟s studied consonants. And the standard version of pronunciation, which is free of any local-accent contamination, as well as the other regional
dialects of Cantonese, can only be found in the official or scientific sources, like some educational books, scientific journals and articles, and audio-visual files that
were written or made by experts. Therefore, the writer did not conduct any interviews since the local-accent contamination potentials are inevitable.
The library research method also matches the obligatory prerequisite of the conduct of
a study on contrastive phonetics, which is “by taking as the criterion for comparison the articulatory grid employed
in the IPA chart” James, 1980, p. 72. It should be noted that this kind of data can be found in such sources as mentioned
previously.
57 Another consideration of why the writer did not conduct any interviews is due
to the really limited member of the expected interviewees. According to the
observation previously done by the writer in his search for the right interviewee February 2 until February 25, 2012, the writer found out that, Guangzhou
Cantonese native speakers in Yogyakarta were at that time, rare to be found. The observation proved that not even four interviewees were available. Hence, the
conduct of qualitative interviews in the moment this research was written was infeasible.