15 irregular spelling of the English wo
rd itself or is due to students’ first language interference p. 1. The language interference that is being discussed is the
difference in vowels, diphthongs, and consonants. The phonemes that are problematic for Indonesian learners are i:, u:, æ,
ʌ, and ɔ: because these phonemes are a bit different from Indonesian a, i, u, e and o Syafei, 1988;
Dardjowidjojo, 2009. To help students overcome phonological constraints, an English teacher
needs to introduce English sounds and morphology to the students so that they understand how to pronounce morphologically related words. Although Kenworthy
1987 argues that a native-like pronunciation is not something a language learner should aim, h
e states that “word and sentence stress, rhythm, and intonation are very important in highlighting the important bits of message” pp. 13-14. He also
notes that learners need to have awareness of being able to stress properly since they will have a hard time recognizing the word said by a native speaker if they do
not store it in their mental dictionary pp. 27-28.
c. The Nature of Stress
There are several rules that govern the stress placement in English word such as the word origin, the number of syllables, the lexical category, and even the
affixation Dardjowidjojo, 2009, pp. 164 –166. Not all English words follow the
same rules. Thus, when affixation affects the construction of a new word that changes the lexical category of the affixed word, the stress placement may differ.
Disyllabic and trisyllabic English words are stressed differently, depending on the
16 existing vowels, the final consonant, and the diphthongs Roach, 1998, pp. 89-90.
These diverse treatments are not affected only by vowels, consonants or diphthongs, but also by the word origin. However, Burzio 1996 argues that stress cannot be
predicted by simply applying the transformational cycle theory proposed by Chomsky and Halle 1968 and thus, must not be presumed as having the
phonological effect pp. 10-13. The transformational cycle theory, or commonly known as the
‘cyclic theory’, is the phonological consideration in determining the stress Chomsky
Halle, 1968: 15. The cyclic theory assumes that stress placement must be based on the surface structure containing strings and on phonological rules applied to the
strings until it reaches phonological phrase Chomksy Halle, 1968: 60. Burzio 1996 rejects this because he believes that there is a relation between
morphologically related words to the stress preservation Burzio, 1996; Kager, 1995. It is also agreed that phonological features are not the only things that
constitute the rule of stress placement. Gussenhoven Jacobs 2011 argue that there is also another consideration in assigning stress rules called foot. Earlier, in
The Sound Pattern of English or SPE, it was claimed that stress was constituted by phonetic implementation rules, resulting in transformational cycle theory but it was
argued that the structural position or the foot, played a more relevant part Gussenhoven Jacobs, 2011: 214.
A foot is the constituent by which a syllable is divided into strong and weak Gussenhoven Jacobs, 2011: 214. Morphology also plays an essential part in
generating the rules that govern stress placement, as can be observed in the metrical
17 theory. The way words are constructed by morphological features called
morphemes, notably affixes and roots, vitally contribute to the stress placement in English Giegerich, 1992: 190. Thus, the analysis of stress placement in English
cannot be based phonetically or phonologically because additionally, morphology contributes more.
McMahon 2002 summarizes the heaviness of a syllable is what attracts stress generally p. 120. Katamba 1996 and McMahon 2002 share equivalent
notion about a heavy syllable, stating that a syllable is heavy if it consists of a long vowel with or without a coda, or a short vowel with a coda Katamba, 1996;
McMahon, 2002. Likewise, Hayes 2009 proposes that it is more precise to claim stress as the appendage of syllable, not vowel or diphthong p. 272. The reasoning
behind this claim is that there is no contrast of stress within the syllable. For example, if a diphthong in a syllable is primarily stressed, it is awkward to decide
which part of the diphthong that really bears the stress Hayes, 2009: 272. Vowels or diphthongs of a stressed syllable are subject to increasing length, while the ones
in an unstressed syllable are more likely to shorten Kager, 2007: 195. Stress stays within the frame of syllable weight and is commonly attracted to the syllable having
the highest sonority Kager, 2007: 198. In many examples of monosyllabic words, however, the stress is realized on the only syllable there is Katamba, 1996: 234.
Although most English stresses fall on the heaviest syllable, there are exceptions that allow the stress to fall on a lighter syllable. This happens when there
is a [ ə] nuclei on the syllable or because the stress is on the final syllable by default
Yavas, 2011: 158. In this regard, English has been known to shorten vowels in
18 unstressed syllables and thus they become
ə, ɪ, ɪə or ʊ Poldauf, 1984: 15. However, this tendency is not without its exception. The exception that Poldauf
shows is about maintaining the vowel quality in unstressed syllables due to the influence of related words as in representation [
ˌreprɪzenˈteɪʃn] that comes from represent [
ˌreprɪˈzent] Poldauf, 1984: 15. Roach 1998, states that a vowel that is of different place of articulation than the rest of other vowels in a word can
preserve stress and that syllable length can potentially affect prominence p. 86. He also mentions that affixes can determine the position of the stress, whether it
falls on the affix itself, or remains on the stem but is shifted to another syllable Roach, 1998: 96. Thus, if the stress moves from its original position because the
word has been affixed, the vowel quality differs since the stress stays on a heavy syllable. That is why, according to Crosswhite 2004, the unstressed syllable
undergoes a vowel reduction p. 191. This view confirms the significance of a suffix in assigning stress. The suffix
-ion is a verb-attracting suffix that changes the stress of a word because it always gives the stress in the penult second syllable from the last Plag, 2003: 91.
Furthermore, Plag states that when -ion suffix is attracted to -ify and -ate verbs, the variants are -ification and -ation respectively although -ation can be attracted to
nouns without -ate suffix Plag, 2003, pp. 90-91. This is why -ion words, which are nouns, have different primary stress from their roots. Miller 2006 adds, the
original -ion suffix does not nominalize like -ation does because the -ion suffix is authentic p. 76. The similarities, however, are obvious. The suffix -tion, for
19 example, attracts verbs ending in -ify and -ate as seen in purify
→ purification and duplicate
→ duplication. As what has been discussed previously, other stress-shifting suffixes besides
-ion are -eous, -ic, and -ity. When -ity meets some coinages having Latinate suffixes such as those that end in -al i.e. marginal
→ marginality, -able drinkable → drinkability and -ous in some cases as in generous
→ generosity, it denotes the state of being something Miller, 2006, pp. 27-28. This principle holds true because
the majority of -ity derivatives are those of adjectives ending in -ic, -able, -al and of phonetic string [
ɪd] like in readability and solidity Plag, 2003: 91. The -ic suffix, even though it is sometimes indistinguishable from -ical in meaning like in
diabolic and diabolical, only attracts foreign bases and changes the stress placement into a penultimate stress as found in
ˈhero → heˈroic Plag, 2003: 96. It is obvious that -ic makes for adjectives. That is to say, it is a non-deverbal suffix. A non-
deverbal suffix is a suffix that attracts non-verbal bases such as nouns and then constitutes adjectives; hence, it is also known as a relational suffix.
According to Plag 2003 and Miller 2006, -ous suffix attaches itself to Latinate bases and functions as a denominal suffix Plag, 2003: 97; Miller, 2006:
166. Its variant, -eous, maintains that principle and affects the stress placement of the base, moving it either to penult or antepenult third syllable from the last.
Burzio 1996 argues that the null vowel at the end of the eous-suffixed words is preserved because “it affects the quality of preceding consonant, including
spiranization or palatalization, as a form of preservation of the relevant context.”
pp. 288-289. This means that the final syllable of words ending in a palatalized
20 vowel semi-vowel, as in advantage and courage, can attract stress if combined
with -eous i.e. adˈvantage → advanˈtageous, ˈcourage → couˈrageous.
2. English Suffixes
