Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

(1)

PHONOLOGICAL PROCESS OF TWO YEAR OLD CHILD IN ACQUIRING INDONESIAN PHONEME

A THESIS

NADIA GUTARI REG. NO. 110705090

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH FACULTY OF CULTURE STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA MEDAN 2015

(2)

PHONOLOGICAL PROCESS OF TWO YEAR OLD CHILD IN ACQUIRING INDONESIAN PHONEME

A THESIS

NADIA GUTARI REG. NO. 110705090

SUPERVISOR CO-SUPERVISOR

Dr. Ridwan Hanafiah, SH. M.A Drs. Bahagia Tarigan, M.A NIP. 19560705 198903 1 002 NIP. 19581017 198601 1 001

Submitted to Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatra Utara Medan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from Department of English

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA MEDAN 2015

(3)

Approved by the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatra Utara (USU) Medan as thesis for The Sarjana Sastra Examination.

Head, Secretary,

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, MS. Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, M.A., Ph.D. NIP. 19541117 198003 1 002 NIP. 19750209 200812 1 002

(4)

Accepted by the Board of Examiners in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatra Utara, Medan.

The examination is held in Department of English Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatra Utara on October 19th, 2015.

Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatra Utara

Dr.H.Syahron Lubis, MA NIP.19511013 197603 1 001

Board of Examiners

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, MS ………..

Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D. ………..

Dr. Matius C.A. Sembiring, M.A ………..

(5)

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION

I, NADIA GUTARI DECLARE THAT I AM THE SOLE AUTHOR OF THIS THESIS EXCEPT WHERE REFERENCE IS MADE IN THE TEXT OF THIS THESIS. THIS THESIS CONTAINS NO MATERIAL PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE OR EXTRACTED IN WHOLE OR IN PART FROM A THESIS BY WHICH I HAVE QUALIFIED FOR OR AWARDED ANOTHER DEGREE. NO OTHER PERSON’S WORK HAS BEEN USED WITHOUT DUE. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN THE MAIN TEXT THE AWARD OF ANOTHER DEGREE IN ANY TERTIARY EDUCATION.

Signed :

(6)

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION

NAME : NADIA GUTARI

TITLE OF THESIS : PHONOLOGICAL PROCESS OF TWO YEAR

OLD’S CHILD IN ACQUIRING INDONESIAN PHONEME

QUALIFICATION : S-1/SARJANA SASTRA

DEPARTMENT : ENGLISH

I AM WILLING THAT MY THESIS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION AT THE DISRECTION OF THE LIBRARIAN OF DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF SUMATRA UTARA ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT USERS ARE MADE AWARE OF THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA.

Signed :

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank ALLAH SWT for the blessing, guarding, and guidance in my life, especially in accomplishing this thesis as one of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from English Department at Faculty of Culture Studies, University of Sumatera Utara.

A special thanks to my beloved family. Words cannot express how grateful I am to my father (Drg. Agus Sumantri), my mother (Drg. Sri Mulyani) and my only brother (Prajiwazhary, ST) who always give supports, advices, motivations and prayers from the time I was born until now.

I also would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Ridwan Hanafiah, SH. M.A, and Drs. Bahagia Tarigan, M.A, as my co-supervisor for the comments, encouragements, patience, motivation, and immense knowledge. Their guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis.

My next sincere gratitude goes to all my lecturers in English Literature Department who have taught and given me precious knowledge during my study. I also thank Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S, the Chief of English Department, Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, M.A. Ph.D, the Secretary, for their attention to all my academic affairs and Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A, the Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies of the University of Sumatera Utara as well as the members of administration for their valuable help throughout the academic years.

(8)

I also thank Mbak Sri and Kak Liza for allowing me to take their children (Zhafira and Dzaki) as the subjects to complete this thesis. Thank you for the time and supports.

I would also like to thank all of my friends, my special friend Mhd. Ridho Akbar, my best friends Reny, Eny, Ecak, Ges, Rena, Petra, Harni, Opi, Dyan, Novi, Bella, Ade, Gadis, Nisa, Dila, Fibie, Fika, and Ria for all support and motivation you have given and thank you for being there in every struggle, sadness and happiness I have been through. Thank for your prayer, love and care. Last but not least, thanks to all my friends in English Department 2011 whose names can’t be mentioned one by one, thank for spending our great times together in four years.

Despite my effort to produce a faultless paper, I am well aware that the readers will find numerous imperfections, for which I apologize.

Writer,

NADIA GUTARI

(9)

ABSTRACT

This research has a title Phonological Process of Two Year Old Child in Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme. It is one of psycholinguistic branch that studies phonological acquisition, specifically on phonological process in the word production made by two year old Indonesian child. This research applied descriptive qualitative method. The writer took the data from the recording of speech delivered by two children aged two years old, named Zhafira and Dzaki. In analyzing the data, the writer used the theory of phonological process by David Ingram (1989). Based on the data analysis and description, the writer found that not all of Ingram’s phonological processes occur in the subject’s word production. There are eight from twelve processes that occur in the subject’s word production, they are: stopping, fronting, gliding, vocalization, labial assimilation, cluster reduction, deletion of final consonant and deletion of unstressed syllable. In addition, the writer also found two other phonological processes which do not reflect Ingram’s theory, they are: lateralization and substitution of vowel. At the end of the research, the subjects also do some changes in pronouncing some words and there are still several sounds which can be and cannot be produced by the subjects.

Keywords: phonology, phonological process, phonological acquisition, two year old child.

(10)

ABSTRAK

Penelitian ini berjudul Proses Fonologi dari Anak Usia Dua Tahun dalam Memperoleh Fonem Bahasa Indonesia. Ini merupakan salah satu cabang psikolinguistik yang mempelajari tentang pemerolehan fonologi, khususnya pada proses fonologis dalam produksi kata yang dibuat oleh anak Indonesia berusia dua tahun. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode deskriptif kualitatif. Penulis mengambil data dari rekaman ujaran yang disampaikan oleh dua anak berusia dua tahun, bernama Zhafira dan Dzaki. Dalam menganalisis data, penulis menggunakan teori proses fonologi oleh David Ingram (1989). Berdasarkan analisis data dan penjelasan, penulis menemukan bahwa tidak semua proses fonologi Ingram terjadi dalam produksi kata subjek. Ada delapan dari dua belas proses yang terjadi dalam produksi kata subjek, yaitu: stopping, fronting, gliding, vocalization, labial assimilation, cluster reduction, deletion of final consonant dan deletion of unstressed syllable. Sebagai tambahan, penulis juga menemukan dua proses fonologi lainnya yang tidak mewakili teori Ingram, yaitu: lateralization dan substitution of vowel. Pada akhir penelitian, subjek juga melakukan beberapa perubahan dalam mengucapkan beberapa kata dan masih ada beberapa suara yang dapat dan tidak dapat dihasilkan oleh subjek.

(11)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ... v

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION ... vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vii

ABSTRACT ... ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 Problem of the Study ... 6

1.3 Objective of the Study ... 6

1.4 Scope of the Study ... 6

1.5 Significance of the Study ... 7

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ... 8

2.1 Psycholinguistics ... 8

2.2 Language Acquisition ... 10

2.3 Phonological Acquisition... 11

2.3.1 Theory of Natural Phonology ...…. 12

2.3.2 Theory of Word Simplification ………... 13

2.3.3 Theory of Phonological Process ………...… 15

2.4 Phonemes in Languages ... 19

2.4.1 Consonants ………... 19

(12)

CHAPTER III METHOD OF RESEARCH ... 23

3.1 Research Design ... 23

3.2 Sources of Data ... 23

3.3 Data Collection Procedures ... 24

3.4 Step of the Research ……… 25

3.5 Data Analysis ………...… 25

CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTION AND FINDING ... 27

4.1 Data Description ………... 27

4.2 Finding ... 42

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ... 46

5.1 Conclusion ... 46

5.2 Suggestion ... 47

(13)

ABSTRACT

Keywords: phonology, phonological process, phonological acquisition, two year old child.

(14)

ABSTRAK

(15)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

Human being is the most complicated creature compared with the others. There are a lot of systems involved or used by them. One of those systems is a language that is known as a way for human to communicate among the others. Language is also known as a medium in delivering ideas, thus it can also be stated that language is a symbolization of taught.

Dardjowidjoyo (2000) stated that children’s language develops from the age of 0 to 11 years old. Some parents have not understood about this, therefore many parents still do not know what they should do to facilitate their children in learning words. The lack of parents’ understanding about this crucial for their children in learning language, causes some delays in children phonological acquisition compared with their peers. In pronouncing some phonemes, children have difficulties, although in the end they will be able to pronounce the intended phonemes. Practically, children will have obstacle in pronouncing some words, for example in pronouncing phoneme /r/ (vibrate), that even in certain cases, there are some adults who are not be able to pronounce that phoneme. That case should not happen if parents continuously teach and train the pronunciation of vibrated phoneme to their children in their early age. While theoretically, children’s language ability is influenced by the memory in their brain which is still clear and has not been

(16)

contaminated by other problems in their life. There is a close relation between the developments of children language with their neurology and biological growth.

It can be noted that a child seems to have their own word by simplifying adult’s word, whenever they got difficulty in pronouncing the adult’s word. Though child’s word is different from adult’s word, yet they share the same meaning that an adult and a child are still able to communicate to each other. The writer is interested in investigating this phonological acquisition through the word production of a child.

The writer decides to observe and investigate two year old child since it is stated that most children begin to produce recognizable words at the same points in the second year. Before this age, children pass through a period in which speech like sounds are produced, with no obvious link to words in the adult language (Gillen, 2003). It is also believed that second years is a golden phase for a child in learning and developing their language.

In this thesis, the writer chooses two children as the subjects. Both of them are two years old (in the range of 2.0-2.10). They are Aqila Aisyah Zhafira Irvia and Dzaki Aslam Gustara Hsb. Zhafira is the third daughter in her family. She was born on 28 February 2013. Her father is a doctor and her mother is a housewife. Both of her parents are Javanese. She is a quiet girl. She lives in an environment where most of her friends are Chinese. Meanwhile, Dzaki is the only one son in his family. He was born on 4 September 2012. His father is a prosecutor and his mother is a stewardess, but spends most of her time as a housewife. Both of his parents are Bataknese. He is a cheery boy. He lives in an environment where all of his friends are Indonesian. Both of them spend most of their times with their mothers, although

(17)

Dzaki has more time with his mother as he is the one and only child in his family, while Zhafira has one brother and one sister and it makes Zhafira can interact more with other children in her house.

In analyzing and explaining the case, the writer will use First Language Acquisition and Children Language Development especially phonological acquisition. This thesis uses David Ingram’s theory (1989) to describe phonological process which occurs in a child, called phonological process theory. It is also stated that this process consists of a universal set of hierarchically ordered procedures used by children to simplify speech (Fletcher and Garman, 1986). In other book, Ingram also stated that children acquire phonological system of adult by creating their own structure, and later on change it if their knowledge about adult’s phonological system is getting better (Chaer, 2003).

According to Ingram, phonological process includes Substitution process, Assimilation process, and Syllable structure process. Through that phonological process theory, we can then understand how the process of phonological acquisition happens. Besides Ingram’s theory, the writer will also try to analyze sounds that are produced by the two years old children based on the place and manner of articulation, as referred to articulatory phonetics. Articulatory phonetics is dealing with where and how actually sounds are produced in human’s speech organs (Ladefoged, 1975).

In this study, the writer attempts to find out whether there is a chance to apply the theory of Ingram regarding the process of phonological acquisition. The writer also tries to reveal how exactly the phonological process occurs in two year old child.

(18)

Yet the interesting point the writer would like to underline here is the phonological process regarding the word formation produced by a child. The writer believes that a child’s speeches or pronunciations are different from the one produced by adult. Below are some basic data that the writer takes from both of the subjects:

1. Zhafira (2,3 years old / May 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kelinci Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung telinci [tǝlinci] nyamuk [ñamu?] capi [capi] anjin [anjin]

buwuang [buwuaŋ]

halimo [halimɔ]

tucing [tuciŋ]

atuwa [atuwa]

todok [tɔdɔ?]

buwung [buwuŋ] fronting able stopping fronting gliding lateralization fronting

deletion of unstressed syllable, fronting & gliding

fronting

(19)

2. Dzaki (2,8 years old / May 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kelinci Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung kinci [kinci] amuk [amu?] Sapi [sapi] anjin [anjin] buwuang [buwuaŋ] halimau [halimau]

kucing [kuciŋ]

akua [akua]

kodok [kɔdɔ?]

bulung [buluŋ]

vocalization

deletion of unstressed syllable

able

Fronting

gliding

lateralization

able

deletion of unstressed syllable

able

lateralization

From the data above we can see how the ability comparison of two year old child in acquiring and pronouncing some words. By analyzing and understanding the phonological process occurred in two year old child, the writer expects that people will trigger their mind be impressed about how child’s speech is formed.

(20)

1.2. Problem of the Study

Based on the background of the study above, the problems discussed in this thesis are :

1. How are the phonological processes of two year old child in acquiring Indonesian phoneme?

2. What consonants and vowels that can be and cannot be produced by two year old child?

1.3. Objective of the Study

In doing the analysis, there are objectives found in this analysis, those are :

1. To describe the phonological processes of two year old child in acquiring Indonesian phoneme.

2. To find out the consonants and vowels that can be and cannot be produced by two year old child.

1.4. Scope of the Study

The writer must limit the scope of this study. This thesis focuses on first language acquisition, especially in phonological acquisition.

(21)

This thesis will focus on how actually phonological acquisition process occurs in two year old child in producing his/her words. The writer uses two children with some different aspects as the subjects. This thesis is limited to the aim of describing the phonological process occurs in two year child and finding out the dominant process of two year old child’s phonological acquisition and it is also limited to the words which have been selected by the writer.

1.5. Significance of the Study

The writer expects the significance of the study as :

1. This thesis will give knowledge and information for parents and people around the child regarding how the words and sounds are formed in child’s language, in order to understand the child when he or she is trying to communicate with them.

2. Practically, the writer expects that this thesis will be a reference for other related studies, especially phonological acquisition, and for those who want to conduct further studies in this field.

(22)

REFERENCES

Bowen, Caroline. 1998. Typical speech development: A gradual acquisition of the

speech sound system. Retrieved from

http://speech-language-therapy.com/acquisition.html (June 2015)

Chaer, Abdul. 2003. Psikolinguistik; Kajian Teoretik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Chomsky, N; Skinner, B. F. 1959. "A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior". Language (Linguistic Society of America) 35 (1): 26–58.

Clark, Eve V. 2003. First Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Darjowidjojo, Soenjono. 2000. ECHA: Kisah Pemerolehan Bahasa Anak Indonesia. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia.

Fletcher, Paul, & Garman, Michael. (Eds). 1986. Language Acquisition: Studies in First Language Development (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Giegerich, Heinz J. (1992). English Phonology: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gillen, Julia. 2003. The Language of Children. United States of America: Routledge.

Hanks, Heidi. 2015. Mommy Speech Theraphy Thoughts on Early Speech &

Language Development. Retrieved from

(23)

Ingram, David. 1989. First Language Acquisition: Method, Description, and Explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jones, Daniel. 1956. The Pronunciation of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1

Katie. 2011.Speech Development: Phonological Processes and Phonological

Delay. Retrieved from

http://www.playingwithwords365.com/2011/09/phonological-processes-and-phonological-delay/ (July 2015)

Ladefoged, Peter. 1975. A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

Lass, Roger. (1984). Phonology: An Introduction to Basic Concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marsono. 1989. Fonetik. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.

Moeliono, Anton M. (Ed). 1992. Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Perum Balai Pustaka.

O’Grady, William. 2005. How Children Learn Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Punch, Keith F. 1998. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: SAGE Publication.

(24)

Simanjuntak, Mangantar. 1990. Psikolinguistik Perkembangan TEORI-TEORI

PEROLEHAN FONOLOGI “Theories of the Acquisition of Phonology”. Jakarta: Gaya Media Pratama.

Sudaryanto. 1993. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis. Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana.

(25)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1. Psycholinguistics

Psycholinguistics or psychology of language is the study of the psychological and neurobiological factors that enable humans to acquire, use, comprehend and produce language. Initial forays into psycholinguistics were largely philosophical or educational schools of thought, due mainly to their location in departments other than applied sciences (e.g., cohesive data on how the human brain functioned). Modern research makes use of biology, neuroscience, cognitive science, linguistics, and information science to study how the brain processes language, and less so the known processes of social sciences, human development, communication theories and infant development, among others. There are a number of sub disciplines with non-invasive techniques for studying the neurological workings of the brain; for example, neurolinguistics has become a field in its own right.

Psycholinguistics has roots in education and philosophy, and in 2013 covers the "cognitive processes" that make it possible to generate a grammatical and meaningful sentence out of vocabulary and grammatical structures, as well as the processes that make it possible to understand utterances, words, text, etc. Developmental psycholinguistics studies children's ability to learn language.

Psycholinguistics is an interdisciplinary field. Hence, it is studied by researchers from a variety of different backgrounds, such as psychology, cognitive

(26)

different topics, but these topics can generally be divided into answering the following questions:

(1) how do children acquire language? (language acquisition);

(2) how do people process and comprehend language? (language comprehension); (3) how do people produce language? (language production) and

(4) how do people acquire a new language? (second language acquisition).

Subdivisions in psycholinguistics are also made based on the different components that make up human language.

Linguistics-related areas:

 Phonetics and phonology are concerned with the study of speech sounds. Within psycholinguistics, research focuses on how the brain processes and understands these sounds.

 Morphology is the study of word structures, especially the relationships between related words (such as dog and dogs) and the formation of words based on rules (such as plural formation).

 Syntax is the study of the patterns which dictate how words are combined to form sentences.

 Semantics deals with the meaning of words and sentences. Where syntax is concerned with the formal structure of sentences, semantics deals with the actual meaning of sentences.

 Pragmatics is concerned with the role of context in the interpretation of meaning.

(27)

2.2. Language Acquisition

There are essentially two schools of thought as to how children acquire or learn language, and there is still much debate as to which theory is the correct one. The first theory states that all language must be learned by the child. The second view states that the abstract system of language cannot be learned, but that humans possess an innate language faculty, or an access to what has been called universal grammar. The view that language must be learned was especially popular before 1960 and is well represented by the mentality theories of Jean Piaget and the empiricist Rudolf Carnap. Likewise, the school of psychology known as behaviorism (Verbal Behavior (1957) by B.F. Skinner) puts forth the point of view that language is a behavior shaped by conditioned response, hence it is learned.

The innate perspective began with Noam Chomsky's highly critical review of Skinner's book in 1959. This review helped to start what has been termed "the cognitive revolution" in psychology. Chomsky posited humans possess a special, innate ability for language and that complex syntactic features, such as recursion, are "hard-wired" in the brain. These abilities are thought to be beyond the grasp of the most intelligent and social non-humans. According to Chomsky, children acquiring a language have a vast search space to explore among all possible human grammars, yet at the time there was no evidence that children receive sufficient input to learn all the rules of their language. Hence, there must be some other innate mechanism that endows language ability to human. Such a language faculty is, according to the innateness hypothesis, what defines human language and makes it different from even the most sophisticated forms of animal communication.

(28)

The field of linguistics and psycholinguistics since then has been defined by reactions to Chomsky, pro and con. The pro view still holds that the human ability to use language (specifically the ability to use recursion) is qualitatively different from any sort of animal ability. This ability may have resulted from a favorable mutation or from an adaptation of skills evolved for other purposes. The view that language can be learned has had a recent resurgence inspired by emergentism. This view challenges the "innate" view as scientifically unfalsifiable; that is to say, it can't be tested. With the amount of computer power increasing since the 1980s, researchers have been able to simulate language acquisition using neural network models. These models provide evidence that there may, in fact, be sufficient information contained in the input to learn language, even syntax. If this is true, then an innate mechanism is no longer necessary to explain language acquisition.

2.3. Phonological Acquisition

Sound is at the beginning of language learning. Children have to learn to distinguish different sounds and to segment the speech stream they are exposed into meaningful units in order to acquire words and sentences. Here is one reason that speech segmentation is challenging: When you read, there are spaces between the words. No such spaces occur between spoken words. So, if an infant hears the sound sequence “this is a cup,” it has to learn to segment this stream into the distinct units “this”, “is”, “a”, and “cup.” Once the child is able to extract the sequence “cup” from the speech stream it has to assign a meaning to this word. Furthermore, the child has to be able to distinguish the sequence “cup” from “cub” in order to learn that these

(29)

are two distinct words with different meanings. Finally, the child has to learn to produce these words. The acquisition of native language phonology begins in the womb and isn’t completely adult-like until the teenage years. Perceptual abilities (such as being able to segment “this is a cup” into four individual word units) usually precede production and thus aid the development of speech production. There are some theories related to phonological acquisition:

2.3.1. Theory of Natural Phonology

This Natural Phonology Theory was introduced by Stampe in 1972 (Ingram, 1989). Cited in Lass (1984), Stampe believes that language actually does not need to be learned since children are born with a set of linguistic devices which make them able to use language naturally without learning it before. Thus, still according to Stampe, children’s phonological acquisition actually occurred naturally within their self.

Stampe cited in (Ingram, 1989), also stated that the child’s task in acquiring adult pronunciation is to revise all aspects of the system which separate his pronunciation from the standard. Standard here refers to the adult pronunciation in which the child is trying to reach in that form. By the fact of that statement, we can also interpret that actually in reaching his pronunciation like adult’s, child usually does some efforts to make his pronunciation at least similar with the adult’s.

Therefore, according to Stampe cited in Ingram (1989), child often reduces the application of phonological process in his own ways. Later on, it is divided into three possible ways: ordering, limitation, and suppression.

(30)

Ordering refers to imposing a restriction on the natural order of application of the phonological process. For instance, it orders the process of the elimination of some sounds. Child can order for when he wants to present or absent some words in their pronunciation.

Second mechanism of change is limitation, by which the child limits the range of segment or context in which a process applies. For example, the elimination process is limited only for stop sounds, while the other sounds are not occurred.

The last kind of change is suppression of a process, or sequence of processes. For a child who has been able to control and to master all of voiced stop sounds in every context, it means that he has succeeded suppressing the elimination process that might be occurred when the sounds come up within a word.

2.3.2. Theory of Word Simplification

Children, in the early years of their life, are limited by their biological growth in producing sounds. Often they are inconsistent in how they produce their words; make it far away from adult’s speech form (Ingram in Clark, 2003). Thus, in producing the words children usually simplify it based on their phonological acquisition ability. When they cannot pronounce some sounds which occur in a word, they sometimes avoid saying the word altogether. But, they often either drop the tough sounds (omission), or replace (substitute) it by the easier one (O’Grady, 2005). Still in the same book, he also said that 90 percent of the early words produced by the children are depicting the process of omission and/or substitution.

(31)

Based on the simplification made by the children, the experts characterized it into three characters. The first is Substitution; children tend to voice consonant sounds in initial position but find it difficult to voice them in final position. As a result, they often voice voiceless initial consonants, as in a [bai] instead of [pai] for ‘pie’; and they appear to devoice final ones as in [nop] instead of [nob] for ‘knob’ (Velten in Clark, 2003). The explanation of the examples given is that [b] sound substitutes the [p] sound for the word ‘pie’, and final voiceless sound [p] substitutes final voiced sound [b] in the word ‘knob’.

The second is assimilation. It refers to the effect of sounds on those preceding or following them within a word or across word boundaries. The most common assimilation in young children’s word production is probably reduplication, where children simply repeat the syllable they are articulating, as in [dada] instead of ‘daddy’ (Ingram in Clark, 2003). Another example of assimilation is at the production of [goggi] instead of ‘doggy’, here [d] sound becomes [g] because of its nearby sound [g] which following it (O’Grady, 2005).

And the third is omission; children often omit the final consonant or even final syllable if it is unstressed, in their early words. Examples are like in the pronunciations of [ba] instead of ‘ball’, and [bu:] for ‘boot’.

In other book, O’Grady (2005) also stated that omission is also very common when two or more consonants occur in a row within the same syllable. As in the production of [banket] for ‘blanket’, the process which is occurred is the omission of [l] consonant.

(32)

Children may continue to do this process as late as the age two and a half (2,5) or three years old (Leopold in Clark, 2003). By the age of three, they make fewer than 10% such omission in word final position (Winitz & Irwin in Clark, 2003).

2.3.3. Theory of Phonological Process

The Theory of Phonological Process was introduced by Ingram in 1979 then later on was developed more in 1989 (Ingram, 1989). According to him, children acquire adults’ phonological system by creating their own structure in which later on change that structure to the adults’ one if their phonological knowledge is getting better (Ingram in Chaer, 2003). The Theory of Phonological Process is divided into three parts:

2.3.3.1. Substitution Process

Substitution process happens when a segment in a word is replaced by another segment. According to Ingram in Fletcher and Garman (1986), this is the most common characteristic of the phonological process which is found in analyzing child’s word. The substitution process consists of:

2.3.3.1.1. Stopping

It is when fricatives are replaced with a stop consonant. For instance in the production of a word ‘sea’ becomes [ti:]. The process which is occurred is the replacement of initial fricative consonant [s] becomes a stop consonant [t].

(33)

2.3.3.1.2. Fronting

It is when velar and palatal consonants tend to be replaced with alveolar ones. The process that happened in the substitution of the sound [g] instead of ‘goose’ becomes [du:s] is the example of fronting.

2.3.3.1.3. Gliding

It is when a glide [w] or [j] is substituted for a liquid sound, i.e. [l] or [r]. The pronunciation of [wedi] instead of ‘ready’ is the example of it, since a glide [w] is replacing a liquid [r].

2.3.3.1.4. Vocalization

It is when a vowel replaces a syllabic consonant. This process is particularly a characteristic of English language (Fletcher and Garman, 1986), e.g. ‘apple’ becomes [apo] and ‘bottle’ becomes [babu].

2.3.3.1.5. Vowel Neutralization

This is the last process of substitution. It happens when nasal vowels tend to be changed into oral vowels and vowels in general are often centralized, i.e. [a] or [ʌ]. ‘Back’ which is pronounced as [bat], the low vowel [æ] turn into [a], is the example of vowel neutralization.

2.3.3.2. Assimilatory Process

Another general group of processes that is found in the production of child’s word is assimilation. It is a tendency to assimilate one segment in a word to

(34)

2.3.3.2.1. Voicing

Consonants tend to be voiced when preceding a vowel, and devoiced at the end of a syllable. It is occurred in the pronunciation of [daini] instead of ‘tiny’, and the pronunciation of [bit] instead of ‘bird’. The first example shows that child tends to voice consonant when it precedes the vowel. While the second one shows that the consonant is pronounced voicelessly when it comes at the end of a syllable.

2.3.3.2.2. Consonant Harmony

Consonants tend to assimilate to each other in certain predictable ways. Below are the patterns which are commonly occurred:

(i) velar assimilation

Apical consonants tend to assimilate to a neighboring velar consonant. For example in the word ‘duck’ which is commonly pronounced as [gʌk].

(ii) labial assimilation

Apical consonants tend to assimilate to a neighboring labial consonant. It occurs in the pronunciation of [bʌb] and [beip] instead of ‘tub’ and ‘tape’.

2.3.3.2.3. Progressive Vowel Assimilation

An unstressed vowel will assimilate to a preceding (or following) stressed vowel. The pronunciation of [fa: wa] for ‘flower’ and [ha: ma] for ‘hammer’ is the example of this process, the stressed vowel [a] is assimilating the unstressed vowel [e].

(35)

2.3.3.3. Syllable Structure Process

Syllable structure process is a tendency of young children to simplify syllable structure. For most children, the pattern is toward a basic CV syllable. Syllable structure process consists of:

2.3.3.3.1. Cluster Reduction

It is when a consonant cluster is reduced to a single consonant, i.e. [kaun] and [des] instead of ‘clown’ and ‘dress’. The processes is that a consonant cluster [kl] and [dr] are reduced into a single consonant [k] and [d] only.

2.3.3.3.2. Deletion of Final Consonants

It is when a CVC syllable is reduced to CV by deleting the final consonant. The deletion of a final consonant [k] in ‘bike’ into [bai] is the example of the deletion of final consonant process.

2.3.3.3.3. Deletion of Unstressed Syllable

It is when an unstressed syllable is deleted, especially when it precedes a stressed syllable. The pronunciation of the word ‘banana’ becomes [nænʌ] is the example of this process.

2.3.3.3.4. Reduplication

In a multisyllabic word, CV syllable tends to be repeated, e.g. ‘water’ turns into [wawa]. The process which happens on that word is the reduplication of CV [wa] into [wawa].

(36)

2.4. Phonemes in Languages

Phonemes are minimal units in that they cannot be broken up into smaller successive units: each phone is a string of phones which corresponds to exactly one phoneme on the underlying level (Griegerich, 1992). Below is the classification of phonemes which occur in Indonesian:

2.4.1. Consonants

In order to form consonants, the airstream trough the vocal tract must be obtruded in some way (Ladefoged, 1975). Consonants furthermore can be classified, according to the theory of articulatory phonetics, into two classifications: the first one is the classification based on the place of articulation, and the second one is based on the manner of articulation. Both of those two classifications, then, are divided again in some sub classifications. The one which belongs to the place of articulation has nine types: bilabial [b, p, m], labiodentals [f, v], dental [ð, θ], alveolar [t, d, s, z, n, l], retroflex [r], palato-alveolar [ʃ, _], palatal [j, h], velar [k, g, ƞ], and the last one is glottal [?]. While the one which belongs to the manner of articulation has five types: stops; which consists of nasal stop [m,n, ƞ], and oral stop [p, t, k, b, d, g]; fricative [s, z, f, v, θ, ð, ʃ, _], approximant [w, r, j], lateral [l], and affricate. Yet, affricate sound does not occur in Indonesian.

Beside those two classifications, consonants in some ways also determined by the movement of vocal tract named: voiced [b, d, g, z, etc] and voiceless consonants [p, t, k, f, s, etc].

(37)

2.4.1.1. Consonants in Indonesian

Based on Moeliono (1992) in his book entitle ‘Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia’, Indonesian consonants are like shown in the table below:

Manners of Articulati

Voiced (+)/Voice

less (-)

Places of Articulation Bilabial Labio

dental

Alveolar Palatal Velar Glottal

Stop (-)

(+)

Fricative (-)

(+)

f s

ʃ x h

Approxim ant

(+) w r y

Lateral (+) l

Nasal (+) m n ñ ŋ

(Source. Moeliono, 1992)

From the table above, it can be seen clearly that Indonesian language has twenty two consonants. Meanwhile glottal, which is symbolized phonetically with [?], actually is not too important. Its existence usually is just to give a stressed within a word (Marsono, 1989). Similar opinion is also stated by Moeliono (1992), he did not characterize it as a consonant. Moeliono just considers it as an allophone of stop velar sound [k] though its existence in Indonesian language is very common.

(38)

2.4.2. Vowels

In classifying the vowels, the experts mainly divided it into two parts: the one which is based on the position of the highest point of the tongue, and the other is based on the position of the lips (Ladefoged, 1975). Based on the highest point of the tongue, it consists of three characteristics: high vowels [i, u], mid vowels [e, ɛ, ǝ, o, ɔ], and low vowels [a, ɑ]. Meanwhile based on the position of the lips, it consists of three characteristics: front vowels [i, e, ɛ, a], central vowels [ǝ], and back vowels [u, o, ɔ, ɑ].

2.4.2.1. Vowels in Indonesian

Indonesian language has ten vowels (Soebardi in Marsono, 1989). Below is the table of the classification of Indonesian vowels:

No. Vowels The highest point of the tongue

The position of the lips

Word example

1. [i:] High Front ibu, kita

2. [i] High Front kerikil,

kelingking

3. [e] Mid Front Enak

4. [ɛ] Mid Front nenek, leher

5. [a] Low Front apa, pada

6. [ǝ] Mid Central elang, iseng

7. [ɔ] Mid Back otot, tokoh

8. [o] Mid Back toko, kado

(39)

10. [u:] High Back udara, paku

(40)

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF RESEARCH

3.1. Research Design

This study is mainly focused on the phonological acquisition of two year old child, especially on the phonological process which occurred in the word production of two year old Indonesian child. The writer chooses qualitative method in the study, since it does not deal with numbers but an explanation and analysis of the case in form or words.

The writer also uses articulatory phonetic identity method; the determining tool is the organ of speech or vocal organs which form the sounds of language.

Furthermore, for the observation done, the writer uses a participative observation since the writer is also involved in the environment between the subjects and their surroundings.

3.2. Sources of Data

The sources of this study are 2 two years old children, named Zhafira and Dzaki. The writer chooses these two children as the subjects because they have some significant differences and the writer believes that there will be many comparisons between them in acquiring and pronouncing Indonesian’s words as they have some

(41)

different aspects between each other, as gender, ethnic, characteristic, environment, etc.

3.3. Data Collection Procedures

The data of this study are acquired in naturalistic observation which is taken directly from the subjects’ speech. The writer uses Apple Iphone 4 mobile phone recorder as the equipment in collecting the data. For the observation done, the writer uses participative observation in investigating the subjects. Participative observation means that in recording the data, the writer is involved within the subjects’ environment. The recording is done by the writer herself.

The observation is done two times every week for two months. Every observation lasts about two until three hours for noting and recording the data. The child will repeat the words which are given by the writer.

The collection of the data comes from two sources: the first one is from the writer’s note, and the second one is from the recorder. The writer notices all of the words which are produced by the subject then write it in the form of phonetic transcription on the writer’s note. From the recording files, the writer then transcribes phonetically the data which the writer gets.

(42)

3.4. Step of the Research

1. The writer observes all of the words which are produced by the subjects and writes it in a note while also recording their speeches with a recorder.

2. The writer lists all the words which have been collected, either from the note or the recorder and writes them in the form of phonetic transcription.

3. The writer then makes the comparison between two subjects and makes the utterances.

4. The writer separates them into 4 tables. The first part includes of the phonological processes of two subjects in acquiring language in the first month, and the second part includes of the phonological processes of two subjects in acquiring language two months after the first observation.

5. The writer divides all the words which are produced by the subjects through Ingram’s theory (substitution, assimilation, and syllable structure process) and classifies them into the appropriate process.

6. Then the writer divides the ability comparison between two subjects in producing the words.

3.5. Data Analysis

In analyzing the data, the writer first lists all of the words which are produced by the subjects. It is listed based of the month of the observation. The listing is done

(43)

in order to help the writer analyzes and interprets more clearly the words which are produced by the subjects.

Next, the word which has already been listed, are transcribed phonetically based on the two books that the writer used as the guidance in transcribing the words. Those two books are the one who is written by Ladefoged (1975), entitled ‘A Course in Phonetics’ and the other one is Indonesian book entitled ‘Fonetik’ written by Marsono (1989).

When the writer is done with those steps above, the writer then makes the comparison between two subjects in acquiring language. From that comparison, then the writer can interpret and analyze the word production done by two years old Indonesian children through the theory of phonological process delivered by Ingram. The process is divided into three categories: substitution, assimilation, and syllable structure process. Those three categories are still divided more in several sub processes. Thus the writer needs to analyze clearly one by one the word which is produced by the subject and then classifies them into an appropriate process.

The writer also makes the comparison between two subjects in producing the words and sees if there are some changes of the subjects in pronouncing the words during two months of observation.

When all of the stages in analysis above are done, the writer then proceeds to make the conclusion.

(44)

CHAPTER IV

DESCRIPTION AND FINDING

4.1. Data Description

The data description is divided into some tables and parts. The first part consists of the phonological process of two subjects in producing some words in the first month and also the descriptions about the process. The second part consists of the phonological process of two subjects in producing words in the second month after the first observation. And the last part consists of the ability and disability comparison of two subjects in pronouncing the words. It is compared based of the month of observation and they are all shown below:

1. Zhafira (2,3 years old / May 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

Kelinci

Nyamuk

Sapi

Anjing

Beruang

Harimau

Kucing

telinci [tǝlinci]

nyamuk [ñamu?]

capi [capi]

anjin [anjin]

buwuang [buwuaŋ]

halimo [halimɔ]

tucing [tuciŋ]

fronting

able

stopping

fronting

gliding

lateralization

(45)

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Kura-kura Kodok Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga Semangka Apel atuwa [atuwa] todok [tɔdɔ?]

buwung [buwuŋ]

tuputupu [tuputupu]

tambing [tambiŋ] dulian [dulian]

woltel [wɔltǝl]

tobeyi [tɔbɛyi]

pican [pican]

juluk [julu?]

manda [manda]

mangka [maŋka]

ape [apǝ]

deletion of unstressed syllable, fronting & gliding

fronting gliding fronting fronting lateralization lateralization

cluster reduction & gliding

stopping & fronting

lateralization & substitution of vowel

fronting

deletion of unstressed syllable

deletion of final consonant

In substitution process, the writer finds two stopping processes which occur in the subject’s word production. The first is the substitution of fricative sound [s] into [c] which occurs in the word ‘sapi’ and ‘pisang’. In pronouncing the word ‘sapi’, the subject replaces [s] with [c]. Instead of [sapi], she pronounces it becomes [capi]. The subject also pronounces [pican] instead of [pisaŋ].

(46)

The writer then finds eight fronting processes that occur in the subject’s word production. The first is the substitution of [k] sound with alveolar one [t] in the word ‘kelinci’, ‘kucing’, ‘kodok’, ‘kura-kura’ and ‘kupu-kupu’. The subject pronounces it becomes [tǝlinci] instead of [kǝlinci], [tuciŋ] instead of [kuciŋ], [tɔdɔ?] instead of [kɔdɔ?], [atuwa] instead of [kurakura] and [tuputupu] instead of [kupukupu]. Next is the substitution of [ŋ] sound with [n] sound. It occurs in the word ‘anjing’, ‘pisang’ and ‘mangga’. It is pronounced as [anjin] by the subject instead of [anjiŋ], [pican] instead of [pisaŋ] and [manda] instead of [maŋga].

The writer then finds four gliding processes that occur in subject’s word production. A glide sound [w] replaces the liquid sound [r] in the word ‘beruang’, ‘kura-kura’ and ‘burung’. The subject pronounces it as [buwuaŋ] instead of [bǝruaŋ], [atuwa] instead of [kurakura] and [buwuŋ] instead of [buruŋ]. Then a glide sound [y] also replaces the liquid sound [r] in the word ‘stroberi’. It is pronounced as [tɔbɛyi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

Beside those substitution processes which reflect Ingram’s theory, the writer also found four substitution processes which do not belong to Ingram’s phonological process theory. It is the substitution of approximant sound [r] with lateral [l], called lateralization. This process only happens when approximant [r] occurs in the middle of a word. It occurs in the word ‘harimau’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’ and ‘jeruk’. The subject tends to replace [r] sound with [l] sound becomes [halimɔ] instead of [harimau], [dulian] instead of [durian], [wɔltǝl] instead of [wɔrtǝl] and [julu?] instead of [jǝru?]. Yet if it occurs as a final consonant of a word, approximant [r] is no longer replaced by lateral [l].

(47)

The writer also finds the substitution of vowel in the word ‘jeruk’. The subject substitutes the vowel [ǝ] with [u] and pronounces it as [julu?] instead of [jǝlu?].

In syllable structure process, the writer finds one cluster reduction process that occurs in the subject’s word production. It occurs in the word ‘stroberi’. The subject pronounces it as [tɔbɛyi] instead of [strɔbɛri]. The subject eliminates a consonant cluster [str] becomes a single consonant [t].

The writer also finds one deletion of final consonant process which occur in the subject’s word production. It occurs in the word ‘apel’. The subject pronounces [apǝ] instead of [apǝl]. The subject deletes liquid consonant [l] which should be occurred in the end pronunciation of the word ‘apel’.

The last process is two deletion of unstressed syllable processes which the writer finds in the subject’s word production. In saying the word ‘kura-kura’, the subject deletes the first syllable [ku] which is unstressed and pronounces it becomes [atuwa] instead of [kurakura]. The second is the pronunciation of the word ‘semangka’. The subject eliminates first syllable [se] which is unstressed and pronounces it as [maŋka] instead of [semaŋka].

2. Dzaki (2,8 years old / May 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

Kelinci

Nyamuk

Sapi

kinci [kinci]

amuk [amu?]

Sapi [sapi]

vocalization

deletion of unstressed syllable

(48)

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga Semangka Apel anjin [anjin] buwuang [buwuaŋ] halimau [halimau] kucing [kuciŋ] akua [akua]

kodok [kɔdɔ?]

bulung [buluŋ] pukupu [pukupu] kambing [kambiŋ] duli’any [duli?añ] woltel [wɔltǝl] yi [yi] pisam [pisam] jeluk [jǝlu?]

mangga [maŋga]

semangka [sǝmaŋka]

ape [apǝ]

fronting

gliding

lateralization

able

deletion of unstressed syllable

able

lateralization

deletion of unstressed syllable

able

lateralization

deletion of unstressed syllable & gliding

labial assimilation

lateralization

able

(49)

In substitution process, the writer finds one fronting process in the subject word’s production. It occurs in the word ‘anjing’. The subject pronounces it becomes [anjin] instead of [anjiŋ]. The subject substitutes [ŋ] sound with [n] sound.

The writer also finds two gliding process in the word ‘beruang’ and ‘stroberi’. The liquid sound [r] is replaced by glide sound [w] and pronounces it as [bǝwuang] instead of [bǝruang]. The subject also replaces [r] with the glide sound [y] and pronounces it as [yi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

The writer then finds one vocalization process in the word ‘kelinci’. The subject replaces a syllabic consonant [ǝl] with a vowel [i] and pronounces it as [kinci] instead of [kǝlinci].

Beside Ingram’s theory the writer also finds five lateralization processes in the word ‘harimau’, ‘burung’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’ and ‘jeruk’. The subject pronounces it as [halimau] instead of [harimau], [buluŋ] instead of [buruŋ], [duli?añ] instead of [durian], [woltǝl] instead of [wortǝl] and [jǝluk] instead of [jǝruk]

.

In assimilatory process, the writer finds one labial assimilation process in the word ‘pisang’. The subject assimilates the apical consonant [ŋ] to a labial consonant [m] and pronounces it as [pisam] instead of [pisaŋ].

In syllable structure process, the writer finds one deletion of final consonant processes in the subject’s word production of ‘apel’. The subject pronounces [apǝ] instead of [apǝl]. The subject deletes liquid consonant [l] which should be occurred in the end pronunciation of the word ‘apel’.

The last process is four deletion of unstressed syllable processes which is found in the subject’s word production. The first is the word ‘nyamuk’. The subject deletes the first syllable [ña] which is unstressed and pronounces it as [amu?] instead of [ñamu?]. The second is in the word ‘kura-kura’. The subject deletes the first

(50)

syllable [ku] which is unstressed and pronounces it as [akua] instead of [kurakura]. The third word is ‘kupu-kupu’. The subject eliminates the first syllable [ku] and pronounces it as [pukupu] instead of [kupukupu]. The last is in the word ‘stroberi’. The subject deletes the first syllable [stro] and the second syllable [be] and pronounces it as [yi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

In this part, the writer analyzes the word production by the subjects two months after the first observation and it is shown below:

1. Zhafira (2,5 years old / July 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Kelinci Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok

telinci [tǝlinci]

nyamuk [ñamu?]

capi [capi]

Anjing [anjiŋ]

bewuang [bewuaŋ] halimau [halimau] kucing [kuciŋ] kulakula [kulakula] todok [tɔdɔ?] fronting able stopping able gliding lateralization able lateralization fronting

(51)

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga Semangka Apel

buwung [buwuŋ]

tuputupu [tuputupu]

tambing [tambiŋ] duliany [duliañ]

woltel [wɔltǝl]

tobeyi [tɔbɛyi]

pitang [pitaŋ] juluk [julu?] manga [manga] semanta [sǝmanta] apel [apǝl] gliding fronting fronting lateralization lateralization

cluster reduction & gliding

stopping

lateralization

fronting

able

In substitution process, the writer finds two stopping processes which occur in the subject’s word production. The first is the substitution of fricative sound [s] into [c] which occurs in the words ‘sapi’. The subject pronounces [capi] instead of [sapi]. The second is the substitution [s] into [t] which occurs in the pronunciation of the word ‘pisang’. The subject pronounces [pitaŋ] instead of [pisaŋ].

The writer then finds six fronting processes in the subject’s word production. The subject tends to use this process in producing her words. The first is the substitution of [k] sound with alveolar one [t] in the words ‘kelinci’, ‘kodok’,

(52)

‘kupu-kupu’, ‘kambing’, ‘mangga’, and ‘semangka’. The subject pronounces [tǝlinci] instead of [kǝlinci], [tɔdɔ?] instead of [kɔdɔ?], [tuputupu] instead of [kupukupu], [tambiŋ] instead of [kambiŋ] and [sǝmanta] instead of [sǝmaŋka]. Next is the substitution of [ŋ] sound with [n] sound in the words ‘mangga’ and ‘semangka’. The subject pronounces [manga] instead of [maŋga] and [sǝmanta] instead of [sǝmaŋka].

The writer then finds three gliding processes that occur in subject’s word production. A glide sound [w] replaces the liquid sound [r] in the word ‘beruang’ and ‘burung’. The subject pronounces it as [buwuaŋ] instead of [bǝruaŋ] and [buwuŋ] instead of [buruŋ]. Then a glide sound [y] also replaces the liquid sound [r] in the word ‘stroberi’. It is pronounced as [tɔbɛyi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

Beside Ingram’s theory the writer also finds five lateralization processes in the word ‘harimau’, ‘kura-kura’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’ and ‘jeruk’. The subject tends to replace [r] sound with [l] sound becomes [halimɔ] instead of [harimau], [kulakula] instead of [kurakura], [dulian] instead of [durian], [wɔltǝl] instead of [wɔrtǝl] and [julu?] instead of [jǝru?].

2. Dzaki (2,10 years old / July 2015)

No. Word Utterance Process

(53)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga amuk [amu?] sapi [sapi]

anjing [anjiŋ]

bewuang [bǝwuaŋ]

yimau [yi:mau]

kucing [kuciŋ]

kulakula [kulakula]

kodok [kɔdɔ?]

bulung [buluŋ]

kupukupu [kupukupu]

kambing [kambiŋ] duliany [duliañ]

woltel [wɔltǝl]

yi [yi]

pisam [pisam]

jeluk [jǝlu?]

mangga [maŋga]

deletion of unstressed syllable

able

gliding

deletion of unstressed syllable & gliding

able lateralization able lateralization able able lateralization lateralization

deletion of unstressed syllable & gliding

labial assimilation

lateralization

(54)

Semangka

Apel

semangka [sǝmaŋka]

apel [apǝl]

able

In substitution process, the writer finds three gliding processes in the word ‘beruang’, ‘harimau’ and ‘stroberi’. The liquid sound [r] is replaced by glide sound [w] and pronounces it as [bǝwuang] instead of [bǝruang]. The subject also replaces [r] with the glide sound [y] and pronounces it as [yi:mau] instead of [harimau] and [yi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

Beside Ingram’s theory the writer also finds five lateralization processes in the word ‘kura-kura’, ‘burung’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’ and ‘jeruk’. The subject pronounces it as [kulakula] instead of [kurakura], [halimau] instead of [harimau], [buluŋ] instead of [buruŋ], [duli?añ] instead of [durian], [woltǝl] instead of [wortǝl] and [jǝluk] instead of [jǝruk]

.

In syllable structure process, the writer finds three deletion of unstressed syllable processes which is found in the subject’s word production. The first is the word ‘nyamuk’. The subject deletes the first syllable [ña] which is unstressed and pronounces it as [amu?] instead of [ñamu?]. The second is in the word ‘harimau’. The subject eliminates the first syllable [ha] and pronounces it as [i:mau] instead of [harimau]. The last is in the word ‘stroberi’. The subject deletes the first syllable [stro] and the second syllable [be] and pronounces it as [yi] instead of [strɔbɛri].

(55)

Comparing the subjects in acquiring and producing words in two months observation, a two year old child has some changes in pronouncing some words and it is shown by the table below:

1. Zhafira (May 2015 – July 2015)

No. Word

Utterance

Able Unable 2,3 years old 2,5 years old

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Kelinci Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing

[tǝlinci]

[ñamu?]

[capi]

[anjin]

[buwuaŋ]

[halimɔ]

[tuciŋ] [atuwa] [tɔdɔ?] [buwuŋ] [tuputupu] [kambiŋ]

[tǝlinci]

[ñamu?] [capi] [anjiŋ] [bǝwuaŋ] [halimau] [kuciŋ] [kulakula] [tɔdɔ?] [buwuŋ] [tuputupu] [tambiŋ]

ǝ, l, i, n, c

ñ, a, m, u, ?

a, p, i

a, n, j, i, ŋ

b, ǝ, u, a, ŋ

h, a, i, m, u

k, u, c, i, ŋ

k, u, a

ɔ, d, ? b, u, ŋ

u, p

a, m, b, i, ŋ

k - s - r r - r k r k k

(56)

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga Semangka Apel [dulian] [wɔltǝl]

[tɔbɛyi]

[pican]

[julu?]

[manda]

[maŋka]

[apǝ]

[duliañ]

[wɔltǝl]

[tɔbɛyi]

[pitaŋ]

[julu?]

[manga]

[sǝmanta]

[apǝl]

d, u, i, a

w, ɔ, t, ǝ, l

ɔ, b, ɛ, i

p, i, a, ŋ

j, u, ?

m, a, g

s, ǝ, m, a

a, p, ǝ, l

r, n r str, r s ǝ, r ŋ ŋ, k -

2. Dzaki (May 2015 – July 2015)

No. Word

Utterance

Able Unable

2,8 years old 2,10 years old

1 2 3 4 5 Kelinci Nyamuk Sapi Anjing Beruang [kinci] [amu?] [sapi] [anjin] [buwuaŋ] [kǝlinci] [amu?] [sapi] [anjiŋ] [bǝwuaŋ]

k, ǝ, l, i, n, c

a, m, u, ?

s, a, p, i

a, n, j, i, ŋ

b, ǝ, u, a, ŋ

(57)

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Harimau Kucing Kura-kura Kodok Burung Kupu-kupu Kambing Durian Wortel Stroberi Pisang Jeruk Mangga Semangka Apel [halimau] [kuciŋ] [akuwa] [kɔdɔ?] [buluŋ] [pukupu] [kambiŋ] [duli?añ] [wɔltǝl] [yi] [pisam] [jǝlu?] [maŋga] [sǝmaŋka] [apǝ] [yi:mau] [kuciŋ] [kulakula] [kɔdɔ?] [buluŋ] [kupukupu] [kambiŋ] [duliañ] [wɔltǝl] [yi] [pisam] [jǝlu?] [maŋga] [sǝmaŋka]

[apǝl]

i, m, au

k, u, c, i, ŋ

k, u, a

k, ɔ, d, ?

b, u, ŋ

k, u, p

k, a, m, b, i, ŋ

d, u, i, a

w, ɔ, t, ǝ, l

p, i, s, a

j, ǝ, u, ?

m, a, ŋ, g

s, ǝ, m, a, ŋ, k

a, p, ǝ, l

h, a, r

- r - r - - r, n r

str, ɔ, b, ɛ, r

ŋ r

Between two months of observation, the writer also finds that two year old child has some changes in pronouncing some words. The first subject named Zhafira has a progress in producing some sounds two months after the first observation, she

(58)

is able to produce the sound [ǝ], [l], [i], [n], [c] in the word ‘kelinci’, the sound [ñ], [a], [m], [u], [?] in the word ‘nyamuk’, the sound [a], [p], [i] in the word ‘sapi’, the sound [a], [n], [j], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘anjing’, the sound [b], [ǝ], [u], [a] in the word ‘beruang’, the sound [h], [a], [i], [m], [u] in the word ‘harimau’, the sound [k], [u], [c], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘kucing’, the sound [k], [u], [a] in the word ‘kura-kura’, the sound [ɔ], [d], [?] in the word ‘kodok’, [b], [u], [ŋ] in the word ‘burung’, the sound [u] and [p] in the word ‘kupu-kupu’, the sound [a], [m], [b], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘kambing’, the sound [d], [u], [i], [a] in the word ‘durian’, the sound [w], [ɔ], [t], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘wortel’, the sound [ɔ], [b], [ɛ], [i] in the word ‘stroberi’, the sound [p], [i], [a], [ŋ] in the word ‘pisang’, the sound [j], [u], [?] in the word ‘jeruk’, the sound [s], [ǝ], [m], [a] in the word ‘semangka’, the sound [m], [a], [g] in the word ‘mangga’ and the sound [a], [p], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘apel’. But she is unable to produce the sound [k] in the word ‘kelinci’, ‘kodok’, ‘kupu-kupu’, ‘kambing’, and ‘semangka’, the sound [s] in the word ‘sapi and ‘pisang’, the sound [r] in the word ‘beruang’, ‘harimau’, ‘kura-kura’, ‘burung’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’, ‘stroberi’, and ‘jeruk’, the sound [n] in the word ‘durian’, the cluster sound [str] in the word ‘stroberi’, the sound [ǝ] in the word ‘apel’ and the sound [ŋ] in the word ‘mangga’ and ‘semangka’.

The second subject named Dzaki also has some changes in pronouncing the words. He is able to produce the sound [k], [ǝ],[ l], [i], [n], [c] in the word ‘kelinci’, the sound [a], [m], [u], [?] in the word ‘nyamuk’, the sound [s], [a], [p], [i] in the word ‘sapi’, the sound [a], [n], [j], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘anjing’, the sound [b],[ǝ], [u], [a], [ŋ] in the word ‘beruang’, the sound [i], [m], [au] in the word ‘harimau’, the sound [k], [u], [c], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘kucing’, the sound [k], [u], [a] in the word ‘kura-kura’, the sound [k], [ɔ], [d], [?] in the word ‘kodok’, the sound [b], [u], [ŋ] in

(59)

the word ‘burung’, the sound [k], [u], [p] in the word ‘kupu-kupu’, the sound [k], [a], [m], [b], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘kambing’, the sound [d], [u], [i], [a] in the word ‘durian’, the sound [w], [ɔ], [t], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘wortel’, the vowel sound [i] in the word ‘stroberi’, the sound [p], [i], [s], [a] in the word ‘pisang’, the sound [j], [ǝ], [u], [?] in the word ‘jeruk’, the sound [m], [a], [ŋ], [g] in the word ‘mangga’, the sound [s], [ǝ], [m], [a], [ŋ], [k] in the word ‘semangka’ and the sound [a], [p], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘apel’. But he is unable to produce the sound [ñ] in the word ‘nyamuk’, the sound [r] in the word ‘beruang’, ‘harimau’, ‘kura-kura’, ‘burung’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’, ‘stroberi’, and ‘jeruk’, the sound [h] and [a] in the word ‘harimau’, the sound [n] in the word ‘durian’, the sound [str], [ɔ], [b], [ɛ] in the word ‘stroberi’ and the sound [ŋ] in the word ‘pisang’.

4.2. Finding

Based on the analysis and the description above, the writer finds that some of the Ingram’s theory regarding phonological processes occurs in two year old child’s phonological acquisition and it is shown by the table below:

No. Process

Subject Zhafira Dzaki May

2015 July 2015

May 2015

July 2015 1

Substitution

Stopping 2 2 - -

Fronting 8 6 1 -

(60)

Vocalization - - 1 - Vowel Neutralization - - - - 2

Assimilatory

Voicing - - - -

Consonant Harmony

Velar Assimilation

- - - -

Labial Assimilation

- - 1 1

Progressive Vowel Assimilation

- - - -

Syllable

Structure

Cluster Reduction 1 1 - -

Deletion of Final Consonant

1 - 1 -

Deletion of Unstressed Syllable

2 - 4 3

Reduplication - - - -

And based on the description above, the writer also finds some consonants and vowels that can be and cannot be produced by two subjects and they are separated by the table shown below:

No. Consonant

Zhafira Dzaki

Able Unable Able Unable

(61)

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [c] [d] [g] [h] [j] [k] [l] [m] [n] [p] [r] [s] [t] [w] [ñ] [ŋ] [?] 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 5 2 4 - 1 1 1 1 6 3 - - - - - 5 - - 1 - 8 - 2 - - 2 - 2 2 1 - 2 7 3 5 2 4 - 3 1 1 - 7 3 - - - 1 - - - - 1 - 8 - - - 1 1 -

(62)

No. Vowel

Zhafira Dzaki

Able Unable Able Unable

[i]

[ɛ]

[a]

[ǝ]

[ɔ]

[u]

(63)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1. Conclusion

Based on the results and the description above the writer found that most of those twelve processes of Ingram’s phonological process theory do occur and applicable in the word production of two year old child. From those twelve processes, the writer found eight of them. In the substitution process, there are: stopping, fronting, gliding and vocalization. In the assimilatory process, there is: labial assimilation. In the syllable structure processes, there are: cluster reduction, deletion of final consonant and deletion of unstressed syllable. Meanwhile the processes which do not exist are: vocalization, voicing, velar assimilation, progressive vowel assimilation and reduplication.

Beside those processes, the writer also found two phonological processes that are not included in the phonological process theory of Ingram yet occur in the word production of the subject. The first process is lateralization, a process of substituting retroflex [r] with lateral [l]. The second process is substitution of vowel. The subject substitutes vowel [ǝ] with vowel [u].

In addition, the subjects had already acquired and produced some consonants and vowels well. The writer found that both subjects are able to produce the consonant sounds [b], [c], [d], [g], [j], [k], [l], [m], [n], [p], [s], [t], [w], [ŋ] and glottal [?] and also able to produce the vowel sounds [i], [a], [ǝ], [ɔ] and [u].

(64)

Meanwhile both subjects are unable to produce well consonant sound [n] in the word ‘durian’, and consonant sound [r] in all words.

5.2. Suggestion

There are several sounds which do not exist in subject’s speech. The writer assumes that the absence of those sounds is caused by the fact that the subject has not acquired them yet. The possible cause is that the subject is blocked by his or her biological growth which disables them to produce those sounds.

Yet, since this study is limited, the writer can’t give a further explanation about that case in this study. Thus, the writer suggests to other researchers who will do a study in this field to do further investigation of this case.

(1)

the word ‘burung’, the sound [k], [u], [p] in the word ‘kupu-kupu’, the sound [k], [a], [m], [b], [i], [ŋ] in the word ‘kambing’, the sound [d], [u], [i], [a] in the word ‘durian’, the sound [w], [ɔ], [t], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘wortel’, the vowel sound [i] in the word ‘stroberi’, the sound [p], [i], [s], [a] in the word ‘pisang’, the sound [j], [ǝ], [u], [?] in the word ‘jeruk’, the sound [m], [a], [ŋ], [g] in the word ‘mangga’, the sound [s], [ǝ], [m], [a], [ŋ], [k] in the word ‘semangka’ and the sound [a], [p], [ǝ], [l] in the word ‘apel’. But he is unable to produce the sound [ñ] in the word ‘nyamuk’, the sound [r] in the word ‘beruang’, ‘harimau’, ‘kura-kura’, ‘burung’, ‘durian’, ‘wortel’, ‘stroberi’, and ‘jeruk’, the sound [h] and [a] in the word ‘harimau’, the sound [n] in the word ‘durian’, the sound [str], [ɔ], [b], [ɛ] in the word ‘stroberi’ and the sound [ŋ] in the word ‘pisang’.

4.2. Finding

No. Process

Subject Zhafira Dzaki May

2015 July 2015

May 2015

July 2015 1

Substitution

Stopping 2 2 - -

Fronting 8 6 1 -

(2)

Vocalization - - 1 -

Vowel Neutralization - - - -

Assimilatory

Voicing - - - -

Consonant Harmony

Velar Assimilation

- - - -

Labial Assimilation

- - 1 1

Progressive Vowel Assimilation

- - - -

Syllable

Structure

Cluster Reduction 1 1 - -

Deletion of Final Consonant

1 - 1 -

Deletion of Unstressed Syllable

2 - 4 3

Reduplication - - - -

And based on the description above, the writer also finds some consonants and vowels that can be and cannot be produced by two subjects and they are separated by the table shown below:

No. Consonant

Zhafira Dzaki

Able Unable Able Unable

(3)

(4)

No. Vowel

Zhafira Dzaki

Able Unable Able Unable

[i]

[ɛ]

[a]

[ǝ]

[ɔ]

[u]

(5)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1. Conclusion

(6)

Meanwhile both subjects are unable to produce well consonant sound [n] in the word ‘durian’, and consonant sound [r] in all words.

5.2. Suggestion

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

1

.

.

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

FIRST LANGUAGE PHONOLOGICAL ACQUISITION OF TWO YEARS OLD INDONESIAN BOYS OF DIFFERENT MOTHER’S EDUCATION LEVEL.

THE ACQUISITION OF CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES BY A FIVE-YEAR-OLD INDONESIAN CHILD.

A Case of A 7 Year-Old Child’s Sundanese Interference on Indonesian Learning Process.

A Case Study on Language Acquisition of a Two-Year-Old Child in Yogyakarta.

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

PHONOLOGICAL ACQUISITION IN PRONOUNCING INDONESIAN CONSONANT WORDS BY TWO YEAR OLD CHILDREN SKRIPSI

Dukungan

Links

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

1

.

.

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

FIRST LANGUAGE PHONOLOGICAL ACQUISITION OF TWO YEARS OLD INDONESIAN BOYS OF DIFFERENT MOTHER’S EDUCATION LEVEL.

THE ACQUISITION OF CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES BY A FIVE-YEAR-OLD INDONESIAN CHILD.

A Case of A 7 Year-Old Child’s Sundanese Interference on Indonesian Learning Process.

A Case Study on Language Acquisition of a Two-Year-Old Child in Yogyakarta.

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

Phonological Process Of Two Year Old Child In Acquiring Indonesian Phoneme

PHONOLOGICAL ACQUISITION IN PRONOUNCING INDONESIAN CONSONANT WORDS BY TWO YEAR OLD CHILDREN SKRIPSI

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan