Attending to pronunciation issues in teaching Modern Israeli Hebrew

ATTENDING TO PRONUNCIATION ISSUES IN TEACHING MODERN ISRAELI HEBREW

Rina Kreitman Emory University

1. INTRODUCTION

To have native-like pronunciation in a second language which is taught

in a classroom setting, is a challenging goal. The student must master the phonology of the language that he or she is studying. Mastering the phonol-ogy of a second language can pose a problem for students and much more so for older students. In fact, “Mastering the phonology of a second language involves segments, syllables, as well as the prosodic aspects of the language. When learning a second language for the first time as an adult, rarely if ever does an individual achieve native-like phonology in all of these aspects.” (Major 2001:28) Pronunciation issues are an integral part of every second language classroom and some cannot be resolved. Most pro-nunciation issues are not too critical for communicating in the second or foreign language and do not require any special attention, but some are severe enough to hinder communication. The question facing most second language pedagogues is: which pronunciation issues should be addressed and which are futile to try to battle? In this paper I argue that since class time is limited, pedagogues should focus only on those pronunciation issues that hinder communication. Some of the pronunciation issues that I will mention in this paper are not crucial for effective communication and there-fore will be discussed very briefly. Pedagogues must realize that an accent may be impossible or very difficult to alter and therefore battling foreign accents may be an unproductive and inefficient use of class time, not to mention redundant. Only those accentual issues which hinder communica-tion must be addressed. But how do we know which pronunciation issues really hinder communication? How can we determine which accentual errors deserve the attention of the pedagogues and which should be left alone? As a first step we must identify what poses a problem in pronuncia-tion. Does an accent qualify as a pronunciation problem? Does an accent require and justify dedicating class time to address it?

HHE 13 (2010) 46 Kreitman: Pronunciation

I must note here that although I discuss pedagogy of Modern Hebrew1 to English speakers, many of the issues discussed here are of greater theoreti-cal relevance pertaining to teaching other languages as a second language and are not limited to the pedagogy of Hebrew. Nonetheless, some of the issues may not be relevant for specific cases, and particular cases may re-quire a different approach from the one detailed here. For example, I generally treat the sound /z/ as being non-problematic for native speakers of English learning Hebrew as a second language. However, that specific sound does pose a problem for native speakers of other languages (for example German or Danish) learning English and can cause communication problems if it is pronounced incorrectly. Therefore, although a teacher of Hebrew may not need to focus on /z/ when teaching Hebrew to English speakers, English teachers teaching English to native speakers of other languages, may choose to focus on that particular sound.

With that said, it does not change the overall claim put forth in this paper that pronunciation variations that do not hinder communication need not be corrected and that the pedagogue does not need to spend valuable class time on phonological issues that do not hinder communication. Moreover, the general division into various phonological issues that may cause problems are true for languages other than Hebrew. A language pedagogue must identify the particular phonological aspects unique to his or her language of instruction and tailor them to his target audience. The breakdown of pho-nological issues presented and discussed in this paper are not specific to learners of Hebrew, but the examples for some of the phonological issues are specific to English speakers learning Hebrew.

This paper will be organized as follows: I will begin with a short discus-sion of the problematic definition of accent. I do not fully address the prob-lematic aspects of the definition of accents since those are beyond the scope of this paper. Then I will discuss how to identify accents including phono-logical layers to which the pedagogue must pay attention when identifying pronunciation issues. I will discuss each phonological layer separately. I will present examples of what constitutes a problem that is severe enough to warrant class time for correction when teaching Hebrew to English speak-ers. Lastly, I will present a conclusion which will provide an overview of the entire article. It must be noted here that there are many different accen-tual issues varying from the segmental level to the prosodic level. I do not address the large range of pronunciation variations. I briefly mention a few

1 From hereon I use the name Hebrew to refer to Modern Israeli Hebrew.


examples but only address those issues which are relevant for this paper, namely those pronunciation problems which may hinder communication.

2. ACCENTS, WHAT ARE THEY?

According to the Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics (Crystal 2008)

an accent is: The cumulative auditory effect of those features of pronunciation which iden-tify where a person is from, regionally or socially. The linguistics literature emphasizes that the term refers to pronunciation only, and is thus distinct from dialect, which refers to grammar and vocabulary as well.

The dictionary does not make a distinction between an accent that is spe-

cific to a certain social group (a geographically based group or a socio-economic based group) and a foreign accent. Although we use the same word for both types of pronunciation variation, they are distinct. We must note that when discussing a foreign accent, people refer to phonetic output that is different from that of a native speaker of a particular language or region. From the point of view of the listener, it does not make a difference what is the source of the phonetic difference, whether it is a regional accent or a foreign accent, and therefore, for the listener, all phonetic systems dif-ferent from the listener’s own speech constitute an accent. Any accent gen-erally requires some accommodation on the part of the listener. The amount of accommodation that the listener has to make depends on how different the speaker’s accent is from the listener’s own accent. The distinction is more relevant from the standpoint of the speaker. Generally, we do not claim that a person “suffers” from “an accent” if he or she uses sentences that are grammatically incorrect. That is, a peculiar sentence structure does not constitute an accent. In fact, while incorrect use of grammatical struc-tures may be a prominent cue for a person who is speaking a language which is not native to the speaker, it is entirely independent of an accent per se. It is possible to have a perfectly native-like accent and speak grammati-cally incorrectly and vice-versa; it is entirely possible to use perfectly formed syntactic structures and still have a “foreign” accent. Henry Kissinger is an example of a perfectly eloquent individual, who still speaks with a heavy German accent (example borrowed from Major 2001:19).

We must draw a distinction between an accent which is foreign and an accent which is dialectal in nature. We can exemplify this in laymen terms. One could say that most native speakers of any language can easily identify


a person with an accent. One can further classify people into those who have a “heavy” accent and those who have a “light” one. Usually one can even tell if a person is a native speaker of one’s own native language and speaks a different dialect or whether our own native language is a person’s second language. In some cases, it is even possible to identify, with close approxi-mation, the dialect of the speaker. For example, speakers of American English can easily identify speakers of British English. Americans will usually say that Brits have a different accent2 but they will still identify them as native speakers of English rather than saying that they are native speakers of a different language.3 A listener’s ability to identify speakers’ dialects does depend greatly on familiarity with the dialect. Most American speakers will easily (and mostly accurately) identify a Southern accent, but some might misidentify speakers with a South African accent as speakers of Australian or British English if they have never heard South African accents before. However, a person speaking English with an accent, whose first na-tive language is Hebrew, will be accused of having “a foreign accent” and will be identified as a non-native speaker of English. In fact, most English speakers will easily recognize most Israelis speaking English as speaking a native language other than English. In other words, an accent can be divided into two different types: an accent which stems from a different pronuncia-tion of the same language, that is, a dialectal variation of the same language, or a foreign accent which stems from the influence or interference of an underlying linguistic substratum.

When listeners hear another person speaking the listener’s N[ative] L[anguage], consciously or unconsciously they make judgment whether the person is a N[ative] S[peaker] or Non-native Speaker of their language. The overall impression concerning Native Speakers from whether or not and to what degree a person sounds native or nonnative is called global foreign accent. (Major 2001:19).

A dialect is an illusive term, and while most of us can recognize a

dialect, it is very difficult to define. The dictionary definition of a dialect is as follows:

2 I leave aside cases of Pidgin English such as Jamaican English and cases like Indian English and other Englishes, which may have been heavily influenced by language contact or a linguistic sub-stratum. 3 The same can be said for French speakers identifying speakers of Canadian French or Spanish speakers identifying speakers from Latin America.


A regionally or socially distinctive variety of language, identified by a particular set of words and grammatical structures. Spoken dialects are usually also associated with a distinctive pronunciation, or accent. Any language with a reasonably large number of speakers will develop dialects, especially if there are geographical barriers separating groups of people from each other, or if there are divisions of social class. (Crystal 2008:142)

A dialect is described as a particular regional variation of a language or a

socio-economic variation which influences speech. Dialects could vary in phonology, morphology, syntax, or vocabulary. The big question is: when do dialectal differences become so great that two dialects become mutually unintelligible and are deemed separate languages?

The terms accent and dialect are associated with a host of theoretical issues and debates which are outside the scope of this paper. In this paper, we mainly focus on accentual issues which arise from pronunciation prob-lems of adult students learning a second language. Therefore, for the pur-pose of this paper, we need not address the theoretical issues associated with the definition of accent and dialect. Furthermore, the theoretical socio-linguistic issues associated with accents and dialects are not crucial to language pedagogy and do not influence the main claim put forth in this paper: that the teacher does not need to use class time to correct insignificant pronunciation variations. Only those problems which are severe enough to hinder communication must be addressed.4

2.1 Accents: Why are They?

Usually, when we discuss accents we refer to a pronunciation of words

which is different from our own or different from the pronunciation which we share with others, who speak similarly to us; the less similar the pronun-ciation to our own pronunciation, the greater the accent. An accent can vary anywhere from being a different realization of individual segments to incor-rect stress and intonation patterns. The greatest problem or challenge that accents pose is in clarity of communication. An accent can pose a problem in communication between the speaker and the listener and can, potentially, cause misunderstandings and consequently hinder communication. There-fore, it is in the second language teacher’s interest to attend to these prob-

4 An anonymous reviewer pointed out the problem of an epenthesis of a semi-vowel by English speakers in certain forms. For example, the Hebrew word gdolim )גדולים( ‘big’ (m. s. pl.) is phonetically realized as gedowlim instead of gdolim. These forms do not hinder communication and do not pose a problem in communication and therefore, epenthesis of a semi-vowel will not be addressed in this paper.


lems in order to enable the second language learner to communicate optimally and with maximal efficacy. The teacher’s interest to address pro-nunciation problems can play a vital role in preventing frustration and lack of motivation on the part of the student. Frequent misunderstandings and miscommunications of the second language learner by native speakers can cause frustration and in extreme cases, lack of motivation to continue with language learning. In order to help the teacher focus on pronunciation problems and address the appropriate pronunciation deviations, we must first identify these differences. In order to identify pronunciation dif-ferences, we must first understand the causes of accents.

Accents which are dialectal variations can stem from several different causes. Most commonly, dialectal variations stem from geographical dif-ferences. Different regions have slightly different dialectal variations. Socio-economic hierarchies are also among the most common bases for dialectal variations.5 These types of accents are not relevant for the peda-gogue of a second language since they address pronunciation variations of the same language and not the teaching of a second language.

The second type of accent is attributed to the influence of a second language. These types of accents usually arise as a result of learning a second language past a certain age, or acquiring a second language in an environment where that language is not spoken.6 For example, being ex-posed to more than one language during childhood and acquiring more than one language simultaneously will produce a bi-lingual child; but bi-lingual children are rarely equally fluent in both languages and rarely speak both languages with the same eloquence and without an accent. Most Israelis have come across children who were born in Russia but came to Israel when they were infants. Many grew up with Russian spoken at home and Hebrew spoken outside the home. The outcome is children who are native speakers

5 Other causes for dialectal variations can be work environment, military affiliations, religious affiliations, etc., all of which are recognized sociolects. 6 The Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) was first suggested by Lenneberg in 1967 for first language acquisition. Since then, it has been adopted for second language acquisition. The CPH hypothesizes that a person must be exposed to a language until a certain age. Otherwise, without exposure to the language by the critical age, a person will never be able to achieve native-like competence in the second language. The CPH has been altered to what is known as a sensitive period. The sensitive period is less restrictive than the critical period and claims that it is not the case that people are unable to acquire a second language, but rather, that they will acquire a second language to a lesser degree of proficiency. The debate over the existence of such a period for second language acquisition is not yet resolved. Evidence has been offered in both directions supporting the sensitive period hypothesis and also refuting it (for more readings on second language acquisition and the CPH see: Birdsong 1999; Doughty and Long 2003; Flege, Yeni-Komshian, and Liu 1999; Flege, Schirru, and MacKay 2003; Kim et al. 1997; Perani et al. 1996; Weber-Fox and Neville 1999). However, the debate is outside the scope of this paper.


of Hebrew but speak Russian with a heavy accent. This stems, among other reasons, from the fact that they have a limited exposure to Russian, and they do not live in a Russian speaking environment. In this case, the child’s ac-cent stems from the fact that the child has acquired a language in a foreign setting (as opposed to acquiring the language in Russia, where it is spoken both at home and outside the home).

The type of accent which is caused by language interference, that is, the type of accent that a person has due to interference from a second underly-ing language, and not as a result of a different dialect, is generally caused by phonological interference and is known as global foreign accent (Major, 2001:19). The phonology of a person’s first or dominant language can inter-fere with the phonology of the second or less dominant language. This inter-ference can potentially influence the phonology of the learned language. The adult learner’s “mistakes” in the second or learned language often stem from a substitution of elements of the foreign language with linguistic ma-terial from his or her native language. But these substitutions are not ran-dom. They are usually influenced by the learner’s native phonological system. Thus, the adult learner’s mistakes are influenced by underlying linguistic factors.

In this paper, I claim that there is no need to address any of the accentual problems that stem from underlying interference unless they interfere with communication, in which case the specific cause which hinders communi-cation must be identified and addressed. Those phonological attributes which are contrastive, must remain contrastive and those cases where a contrast is not maintained by the language learner must be addressed. In the next section, I discuss types of pronunciation problems that the teacher must identify and isolate in order to address each of these issues properly.

3. PRONUNCIATION ISSUES

3.1 Types of Pronunciation Issues

Major (2001) claims that in order to truly master the phonology of a

language the learner must master all three phonological levels: 1. Individual segments, that is, problems at this level mean problems in

pronouncing particular sounds. For example, problems producing the consonants: x (ח), r (ר) and l (ל) or certain vowels like o or u (usually not problematic for English learners of Hebrew).


2. Combinations of segments or the syllabic level. Problems at this level arise when non-native speakers try to produce the wide range of word initial consonantal clusters in Hebrew, some of which are quite rare cross-linguistically (Kreitman 2008).

3. The prosodic level, which includes stress, tone, accent, and intona-tion. Problems in realizing proper stress patterns, especially when they are necessary for distinctions. For example in words like: r'atsa ‘she is running’ (ר'צה) vs. rats'a ‘he wanted’ (רצ'ה) or d'oda ‘aunt’ ,And problems in intonation .(דוד'ּה) ’vs. dod'a ‘her uncle (ד'ודה)which is sometimes not realized properly.

The wide range and variety of problems beg the question: should a

teacher attempt to correct these pronunciations or just attempt to modify a subset of these issues? This begs the question which ones should the teacher address and which should the teacher simply leave and not bother to cor-rect? Which problems are feasible to address in a classroom setting and within the time frame of a class period? In the next section, we will address these problems and try to provide an answer to at least some of these questions.

3.2 Addressing Pronunciation Issues: How? 3.2.1 Segmental level 3.2.1.1 Consonants

We begin by addressing the first type of pronunciation issue, difficulty in producing individual segments. These problems can be roughly divided into two categories, consonants and vowels. The biggest challenge is always to teach second language learners how to produce segments that are not present in the phonemic inventory of their own native language.

For English speakers studying Hebrew as a second language, the conso-nants /x/ (denoted in the Hebrew script by ח or כ), /r/ (ר) and /l/ (ל) pose the greatest challenge, probably because the segment /x/7 does not exist in English and because the Hebrew /r/8 and /l/ are different in nature from the segments /r/ and /l/ in English. 7 In Modern Israeli Hebrew (ח or כ) is phonetically realized as a uvular fricative. The official International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) symbol for this sound is [χ] but for convenience I use the symbol /x/. 8 The Hebrew /r/ (ר) is a uvular approximant (Kreitman and Bolozky 2007) for which there is no phonetic symbol in the IPA chart as of yet. The symbol of the uvular fricative [] is used for the uvular approximate instead. For convenience I will use the symbol /r/ to denote the underlying rhotic in Hebrew.


In fact, the segment /r/ poses a problem not just for English speakers learning Hebrew but for most second language learners of Hebrew in general. On the other hand, the English /r/ often poses a challenge for Hebrew speakers learning English. Often native speakers can identify a person with a foreign accent based solely on a person’s realization of the segment /r/. This is true not just for English and Hebrew but for many languages. The segment /r/ seems to be unique cross-linguistically (for more about the nature of rhotics, and more specifically /r/, see Wiese 2001). De-spite the different pronunciations, generally the listener knows that the speaker meant to say /r/ no matter how the speaker actually realizes the segment /r/. It appears that generally the pronunciation of /r/ does not im-pede understanding and does not hinder communication. Therefore, it appears unnecessary to attend to the problem of the pronunciation of /r/ during class time. Although, given a sufficient amount of time, it is likely that the teacher will be able to teach the speaker to produce /r/ properly, the student will most likely slip back into his or her original pronunciation of /r/ in casual speech. The time required of the teacher to devote to changing the student’s pronunciation of /r/ is not justified considering the duration of a regular class session and the small inconvenience caused by a mispronun-ciation of /r/.

The issues with pronunciation of /l/ are similar to those with the pronun-ciation of /r/ and therefore should be treated similarly. English has two varieties of /l/, a light l (in words like lick) and dark l (in words like call). Hebrew /l/ is considerably “lighter” than that found in English, and there-fore, when English speakers speak Hebrew, their pronunciation of /l/, more often than not, sounds “odd” to the Hebrew listener. This can be attributed to the fact that English speakers produce an /l/ which is “darker” than the Hebrew /l/. However, this variation does not hinder communication and does not influence the understanding of English speakers by Hebrew listen-ers. Once again, considering the limited class time and the amount of ma-terial that must be covered during class, the teacher should not spend time trying to alter the pronunciation of /l/.

One of the more problematic or challenging sounds for many learners of Hebrew is /x/. The problem with /x/ requires special attention since the mis-pronunciation of this segment is more significant. The uvular fricative /x/9 is often realized as the glottal fricative /h/ by English speakers learning

9 There is debate on the place of articulation of /x/ in Modern Hebrew. It has been claimed to be a velar fricative (Rosen, 1957) but recent data (Kreitman and Bolozky 2007) show that it is a uvular fricative.


Hebrew. The problem arises when the two phonemes are confused. In Hebrew, /h/ and /x/ are distinct phonemes and distinguish between words like haze (הזה) ‘this one’ and xaze ( זהח ) ‘chest’. Realizing /x/ as /h/ could potentially neutralize the distinction between the two words. Therefore, it is important to take the time to explain to the students how to produce the segment properly and how to distinguish the two segments from one another. One possible tool that a teacher may choose to use is words that are familiar to the students containing the designated segment like Channuka or loch, Scottish for ‘body of water’, a word with (a Jewish holiday) (חנוכה)which many are familiar from the Loch Ness Monster stories. This begs the question, how is it possible for the teacher to teach the students how to articulate consonants correctly?

In fact, speech sounds are tangible, and their place of articulation is physically concrete. The teacher can guide the students to the proper place of articulation by describing the production of speech segments physically. At first, the teacher must familiarize the students with the vocal tract. This can be achieved by either using a diagram or by teaching the students to systematically explore their own vocal tract by instructing them on where to place their tongue. It is a good idea for all language teachers to become familiar with their own vocal tract and to spend some class time familiariz-ing the students with their own vocal tract. Once the students are more familiar with their own vocal tract, the teacher can then teach the students the main places of articulation of Hebrew phonemes. This exercise will usually result in the students becoming more familiar with their own language and their own phonemic system, not to mention that most students enjoy discovering what they know sub-consciously about their own language and the newly learned language. In Table 1, I list the various places of articulation of Hebrew consonants. I list manners of articulation relevant for Hebrew in Table 2. The various places and manners of articula-tion are further illustrated in Appendix 1.


Table 1 Place of Articulation Speech Sound Modern Hebrew Alphabet Letter

Labial p, b, f, v, m מ, ּב, ּפ, ב, פ

Alveolar t, d, s, z, n, l ל, נ, ז, ׂש/ ס , ד, ט/ ת

Post alveolar š, (ž) ז(ׁש'(

Palatal y י

Velar k, g ג, ּכ/ ק

Uvular x, r ר, ח

Guttural h, ה, א

It is also important to familiarize the students with the various manners of articulation, which are essentially how sounds are produced. Table 2

Manner of Articulation Speech Sound Alphabet Letter

Stop p, b, t, d, k, g א, ג, ּכ/ ק , ד, ט/ ת , ּב, ּפ

Fricative f, v, s, z, š, (ž) ה, כ/ ח , )'ז(, ׁש, ז, ׂש/ ס , ב, פ

Nasal n, m מ, נ

Lateral l ל

Approximant y, r, ר, י If the instructor needs a guide to familiarize him or herself with the vocal

tract and various places and manners of articulation, I recommend using either: A Course in Phonetics (Ladefoged 2006) or A Practical Introduction to Phonetics (Catford 1988). In order to familiarize the students with their vocal tract and the various places and manners of articulation, the instructor should begin by working with the students on a speech sound which is familiar to all the students from their own native language. For example, one might begin by describing the place and manner of articulation of a familiar and relatively simple sound, /t/. This speech sound is produced by creating an occlusion in the alveolar ridge. The student will raise the tongue towards the area known as the alveolar ridge, the area in the mouth which is


located immediately behind and above the teeth (see diagram in Appendix 1 for a complete overview of the vocal tract), and will let air flow from the lungs stopping at the place of occlusion, the alveolar ridge.10 Once an appropriate pressure is built up, the student will release the occlusion. The release of the occlusion will result in a burst which will sounds like a /t/. By doing small exercises such as those detailed above, the students become familiar with the various places of articulation (in the case of /t/ the place of articulation is the alveolar ridge) and various manners of articulation (in the case of /t/ the manner of articulation is stop). It is advisable to persist with a few more exercises to better acquaint the students with their own vocal tract.

Another good exercise is to approximate the tip of the tongue towards the alveolar ridge without creating a full occlusion but keeping the air flowing consistently. The students will produce the voiceless alveolar frica-tive /s/. An addition of vocal fold vibration will result in the production of a /z/.

The speech sound /x/ (ח) is produced in the uvula and is a fricative (Kreitman and Bolozky 2007). Hebrew possesses two uvular speech sounds /x/ and /r/, which are the two sounds second language learners find most challenging. These sounds are rare cross-linguistically and therefore pose a challenge for most learners of Hebrew. In fact, according to Mielke (2004), only 22 languages out of 548 (4%) contain the same /r/ segment found in Hebrew. Some of these languages include Armenian and Inuktitut (West Greenlandic). The Hebrew uvular fricative /x/, on the other hand, can be found in 35 out of 548 languages (6.38%). The difficulty with uvular seg-ments is that it is difficult to illustrate their place of articulation. The uvula is an area which is not easily tangible and is more difficult to demonstrate and reach (see appendix for a complete and elaborate diagram). Therefore, these sounds always pose a problem for second language learners and a challenge for the instructor. However, as discussed earlier, while it is not crucial to take the time to teach the students the proper pronunciation of /r/, it is essential to take the time to teach the students the proper production of /x/ or at least ascertain that their production of /x/ is sufficiently different from their pronunciation of /h/ to distinguish the two. Even a close ap-proximation of /x/ will be sufficient as long as it can be distinguished from a /h/.

10 A similar experiment can be performed by creating an occlusion at another place of articulation, for example, the lips.


Although it is not always crucial to correct all pronunciation problems, the instructor must be aware of the phonetics and the phonology of the language taught even if not all knowledge is actively implemented during instruction. Therefore, I will note another pronunciation challenge, although this challenge may require a deeper and more comprehensive handling, and it may be the case that this problem will not get resolved within a classroom setting.

In English, the consonants p, t, and k are produced with considerable as-piration when they appear in the beginning of a word or in the beginning of an open stressed syllable, as in the examples of the words two and pita. English speakers learning Hebrew tend to produce the Hebrew consonants p, t, and k with a similar aspiration, although all these consonants contain very little aspiration in Hebrew (Laufer 1994, 1995). Aspiration has become one of the most salient characteristics of English speakers speaking Hebrew as a second language. Application of the English aspiration rule in Hebrew is subconscious and automatic and clearly stems from substratal inter-ference. To eliminate the production of aspiration by English speakers learning Hebrew would require considerable and sometimes more complex work. However, since aspiration is not distinctive in Hebrew, its presence or absence does not hinder communication or understanding. Therefore, it is not necessary to invest class time in correcting aspiration in Hebrew. Although aspiration is not a severe problem, the instructor should be aware of its presence.

3.2.1.2 Vowels

The number of phonemic vowels in Hebrew is significantly smaller than that of English; Hebrew has only five phonemic vowels: /i/, /e/, /a/, /o/ and /u/. Thus, it is much easier for speakers of English to learn the Hebrew vowels than it is vice versa. That is, it is easier for English speakers to learn the vowels of Hebrew than it is for Hebrew speakers to learn the distinctions of all the vowels of English. Generally vowels do not pose a problem for English speakers learning Hebrew. The vowels of English are sufficiently close to prevent miscommunications and do not pose a problem for coherent interaction. The same is not true for Hebrew speakers learning English. Certain English vowels such as the lax vowel /I/ (found in words like dip and ship) pose a challenge for Hebrew speakers learning English and Hebrew speakers do find it difficult to distinguish the vowels /I/ from /i/. These two vowels are contrastive in English and are responsible for the contrast between words like dip and deep, ship and sheep. Hebrew speakers


find it difficult to realize the phonetic distinction between the two words. An English teacher teaching Hebrew speakers to speak English will need to dedicate class time to teach the students the difference between /I/ and /i/. In reality, English speakers tend to disambiguate the two words, dip and deep, produced by Hebrew speakers based on context and not always because there is a distinction in the phonetic realization of these two words. There-fore, the small differences in pronunciation of Hebrew vowels by English speakers do not justify the amount of time necessary to adjust their pronun-ciation. Because English distinguishes between tense and lax vowels in words like deep and dip and fool and full, it is important to note that in Hebrew both vowels collapse into a single vowel. The vowel /i/ is closer to the vowel in the word deep and the vowel /u/ is closer to the vowel in the word fool.

3.2.1.3 Using Phonetic Transcription in the Classroom

An additional tool which many second language teachers may find useful to facilitate teaching proper pronunciation of Hebrew words is the use of phonetic transcription. In the initial stages of second language teaching, particularly when teaching a language which uses a non-Latin based ortho-graphic system, students find transcription of words very helpful. In the case of Hebrew, vowels pose an additional complication to learning the Hebrew writing system. Although Hebrew has a vowel system, generally, vowels are not notated in written texts. When Hebrew teachers teach Hebrew as a second language, usually they teach the vowel system in the first few les-sons but after a few weeks the vowels are no longer marked in the text. Stu-dents find the transition from a text which has full vowel specification to a text with no vowel specification, confusing. They find it challenging to de-cipher which vowel should appear in a word. As an aiding tool, I suggest transliteration of Hebrew words, especially initially, before the students are able to read fluently. The question is: how to transliterate those sounds which do not exist in English? The teachers may choose to use the Interna-tional Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) to facilitate the task. Initially, the pedagogue would need to familiarize him or herself with the IPA but this will happen naturally if, as suggested in section 3.2.1.1, the instructor becomes familiar with the various places and manners of articulations of Hebrew sounds. Fortunately, many sounds are similar enough to English and may be transli-terated using the English alphabet, but additional sounds such as /x/, may be presented using their assigned phonetic symbol [χ].


An additional merit of using the IPA in the classroom is that it may make the students more phonetically aware and as a result, improve their pronun-ciation in the second language, which they are learning. Moreover, use of phonetic transcription and transliteration in the classroom, can help the teacher disambiguate words that are orthographically identical but sound differently. For example, the words et and at are spelled the same in Hebrew is followed by the vowel a then the word (א) but when the letter aleph ,’את‘is read as at (את) ‘you’ (fem.). When the first letter is followed by the vowel e the word is then et (את) ‘an object marker’. Eventually, as students be-come more fluent in the language, they learn that these two forms may be disambiguated syntactically, but in the beginning, transliteration may help them.

A further benefit of using IPA in class is disambiguation of vowels. The vowel schwa marked below a consonant with two vertical dots: ְס, exempli-fied below the letter samech, has two realizations. It may be pronounced as no vowel or it may be realized as the vowel e in certain contexts. For exam-ple: in the word shamart ( ָשַמְרְּת) ‘you (fem.) guarded’ both schwas (under the ר and under the ת) indicate no vowel. But in the word mesaper (ְמַסֵּפר) ‘tell’ (present, mas.), the schwa in the beginning of the word is realized as the vowel e. With the use of transliteration and the IPA, the instructor will be able to easily disambiguate between these two forms.

The discussion of the use of phonetic transcription in the classroom while teaching a second language is a theoretical issue which is still up for debate. This issue requires further investigation and it is beyond the scope of this paper to present definitive conclusions. However, some teachers may find the use of IPA a beneficial tool.

3.2.2 The Syllabic Level

Hebrew syllables generally do not pose a severe problem for most English speakers. Both languages allow complex onsets and complex codas, and therefore, the presence of these complex syllable margins is not gener-ally problematic for either Hebrew speakers learning English or English speakers learning Hebrew. English syllables can have both complex onsets with consonantal clusters up to three consonants as in the word street, /strit/, and complex codas with consonantal clusters of up to four consonants as in the word texts /teksts/. Hebrew also allows complex onsets and complex codas but it is the type of complex onsets which Hebrew allows that poses a challenge for English speakers. While English allows more consonantal clusters in syllable final position, Hebrew is much more restrictive with


clusters in word final position. However, Hebrew is much more lenient with clusters in word initial position and allows many more combinations of onset clusters than does English.

The problematic issue for speakers of English learning Hebrew as a second language is consonantal clusters which are not permitted in English. This problem is not unique to speakers of English and is common to speak-ers of languages which place more restrictions on the occurrence of conso-nant clusters word initially than Hebrew. Speakers of languages which have elaborate systems of clusters tend to have an easier time acquiring the multitude of clusters which Hebrew is famous for.

Students whose first language is English find it difficult to produce clusters that are composed of two stop consonants such as ptakim ( יםקפת ) ‘notes’. Generally students tend to produce consonantal clusters with an in-tervening epenthetic vowel. Thus, the word ptakim ‘notes’ may be realized as petakim by the students. Similarly, the word bgadim (בגדים) ‘clothes’ and šxorim11 (שחורים) ‘black’ (plural), will be pronounced as begadim and šexorim respectively. Since the epenthesis, or insertion, of a vowel in all the clusters in the examples above and in other similar clusters does not hinder the communicative abilities or communication itself, and since clusters are very difficult to demonstrate or explain, particularly articulatorily, it is not recommended to spend class time on correcting these types of pronunciation errors or inaccuracies. Moreover, in Hebrew, vowel insertion for the pur-pose of cluster break up occurs in various clusters. Note that kelev (כלב) ‘dog’ → klavim (כלבים) ‘dogs’ but xeder (חדר) ‘room’ → xadarim (חדרים) ‘rooms’ not *xdarim. The vowel is epenthesized for the purpose of cluster break up when illicit clusters arise (for a list of illicit clusters and cluster breakup see Bolozky 2007; Kreitman 2003). Thus, Israelis are familiar with the process of cluster break up and therefore can easily accommodate it in various contexts, even those in which they themselves do not use epenthesis.

In the next section I will discuss how to treat pronunciation problems which are above the segmental level and do not stem from individual sounds but rather from prosodic problems such as stress.

11 A sequence of two fricatives, not stops as in the case of pt and bg.


3.2.3 Suprasegmentals: Stress

3.2.3.1 Stress In the beginning of the article, we noted that stress mis-pronunciations

can be a source for communication failures. Stress, however, constitutes a problem for the instructor because stress is complicated to explain. It is im-possible to tangibly illustrate the phonetic correlates of stress. Stress is usually placed on a syllable, and the vowel of the syllable carries the stress. The stressed syllable is emphasized relatively to other syllables in the word by means of vowel lengthening, pitch change, or amplitude change. A com-bination of two of the three phonetic correlates will result in a perception of a stressed syllable. That is, the vowel which carries the stress will generally be greater in duration, pitch, or amplitude in comparison to the same vowel which is not in a stressed position. It will also be greater in duration, pitch, or amplitude in comparison to other vowels in the same word. In Hebrew, it is usually vowel lengthening and increased amplitude that signal a stressed syllable. Stress is not a distinctive property in all languages but in Hebrew, like in English, stress is a distinctive property. That is, in a given bi-syllabic word, stressing one of the syllables and then the other syllable can cause a difference in meaning between two words. In other words, in Hebrew, two words can be differentiated solely by stress. There are many examples in Hebrew, as illustrated in Table 3, of words that are distinguished by stress placement alone. But if the differences are so crucial, how can the instructor convey those differences to the students?

Table 3

1st Syllable Stressed

Meaning 2nd Syllable Stressed

Meaning Transliteration

Capital city bira ה'ביר Beer ירה'ב

צה'רIs running

(fem.) Wanted (mas.) ratsa ה'רצ

Heard (mas.) šama ע'שמ Over there 12מה'ש

ה'חו Eve – name וה'חExperienced

(mas.) xava

12 This form is used colloquially.


The problem with prosodic segments like syllables and prosodic features like stress is that they are entirely abstract. Moreover, syllables have no physical phonetic correlate. The instructor cannot illustrate the pronuncia-tion of a syllable or stress the way he or she can illustrate the realization of individual segments by demonstrating their place and manner of articula-tion. Although most native speakers can segment words and find syllable boundaries for words, they do so intuitively. The ability to syllabify a word is an intuitive capability of a native speaker of any language. But for speak-ers or learners of a second language, it is much more difficult and less intui-tive and natural to do so. The second language learner has the added complication of interference from his or her own native language, which further complicates the syllabification process.

Fortunately, stress is a distinctive property in English as well and there-fore, generally, English speakers have little trouble actually perceiving and realizing stress in Hebrew, even if it does take some training and adjusting. Therefore, it is important to take the time and correct mis-pronunciations of stress in words. Generally it is enough to explain and demonstrate the dif-ferences between two words to illustrate the differences in stress. It is advis-able to begin with bi-syllabic words where stress alternates between the two syllables. The students should try to stress the first syllable initially and then attempt to move the stress to the second syllable. Exercises in varying the stress between two words is a good point of departure for demonstrating the importance of stress and the differences in stress between words. In order to demonstrate stress, the instructor can exemplify stress distinctions in English words. For example, the differences between the words pr'esent (noun) and pres'ent (verb) is in stress placement. The same difference is re-sponsible for the distinction between s'egment (noun) and segm'ent (verb). By using these English words as examples, it is possible to demonstrate to the student the differences between stressed and unstressed syllables. Next, the teacher can use words from Hebrew like b'ira (בירה) ‘beer’, in which the first syllable is stressed and bir'a (בירה) ‘capital’, in which the second syl-lable is stressed, to demonstrate proper stress placement. Additionally to demonstrating the different stress patterns to the students in the classroom, there are exercises that the teacher can assign as homework in those cases where additional training is necessary.

An alternative method to demonstrate stress to the students is by using audio material. Letting the students listen to native speakers’ speech and asking them to repeat the words they hear is a useful method to teach stress. The students may choose to record themselves producing the target word


which enables the students to compare their own production of words with that of the native speaker. Considerable problems with stress production may merit additional individual work, which may be outside available class time. In this case, the instructor is encouraged to ask the students to submit recordings of themselves producing pairs of words which are distinguished by stress alone. The recording exercise will improve production even with-out teacher comments. The practice itself will prove useful. Some word pairs which the teacher can use to demonstrate stress distinctions are pro-vided in Table 3. Word level stress is not the only prosodic mechanism to make distinctions in Hebrew. In the next section, we will discuss a higher prosodic level, the sentence level and sentence intonation in Hebrew.

3.2.3.2 Sentence Level and Intonation

The last phonological level I will discuss in this paper is the sentence level and the production of proper sentence intonation. Usually English speakers have little problem with regular declarative sentences, and once they realize how to form questions, there is little problem with question in-tonation as well. In Hebrew, unlike in English, the only difference between declarative sentences and questions is in rising intonation. Questions are formed by using the same syntactic word order as declarative sentences with the distinction of intonation, which rises toward the end of the sentence in questions. In English, there are several ways to form questions. The first is word movement within the sentence. For example, turning the declarative sentence he has gone to school into a question requires moving the auxiliary verb has to the beginning of the sentence. The question is thus, has he gone to school? The difference between the declarative he has gone to school and the question has he gone to school, in addition to intonation, is the location of the auxiliary verb; after the subject in declarative sentences and the front of the sentence in questions. Another strategy for forming questions in English is by using a mechanism of do-insertion, whereby the auxiliary verb do is inserted in the front of the sentence. For example, to turn the sentence you like soup into a question, the word do is inserted in the beginning of the sentence to signal a question form. The proper question is thus, do you like soup? Hebrew does not have any such similar mechanisms.13 In Hebrew, the

13 Hebrew does have a constituent question form in which the object does appear in the beginning of the sentence, for example, et mi ata ohev? (?את מי אתה אוהב) ‘Whom do you (mas.) love?’ However, I do not discuss the various syntactic structures and the individual intonation of question forms. Of relevance to this article are those intonational properties which are distinctive and therefore, must be differentiated. In the examples presented in section 3.2.3.2, intonation distinguishes between a declarative sentence and a


difference between the declarative sentence you like soup and the question form is formed by rising intonation.14 This pattern is easy to explain using the Brooklyn dialect of English. In this dialect, questions without do-insertion can often be heard as in you want soup? These kinds of question forms can be heard on popular television shows mocking the New York dialect. Since rising intonation in questions occurs in English as well, most English speakers have little trouble forming questions in Hebrew and usually have the correct intonation.

Given that intonation is a distinctive property, that is, the meaning of two sentences can change by changing intonation alone, the instructor must in-sist on its proper production, and therefore, if the instructor feels the neces-sity to spend class time to explain proper intonation, he or she may do so. The best way to demonstrate proper intonation is to simply allow the stu-dents to repeat declarative sentences and questions in sequences using in-clining intonation for questions to create the distinction between the sentences. However, I do not recommend spending more than one single class at most on intonation. Typically as the student’s linguistic knowledge increases with advancement in the material and as sentence structures get more complex, issues that arise during the simple sentence stage tend to resolve themselves.

3.3 The Issue of the Returning Student: Idioms and Slang Usage

Another pronunciation issue familiar to many Hebrew instructors is what

I deem as the issue of the returning student. Students that travel abroad on various semester abroad opportunities, return full of zeal with linguistic skills they pick up from their peers in Israel. These problems are much more prominent in slang idioms since the students use slang idioms, sometimes with the wrong intonation or in the wrong contexts. For example, the Hebrew slang sentence lama mi ata ( ?למה מי אתה ) ‘why, who are you’ (roughly equal to who do you think you are?) requires a condescending tone. The superior condescending tone is very difficult to achieve, and therefore, the use of this sentence in the wrong context or with the wrong intonation can create potentially embarrassing situations. Intonation of idiomatic slang expressions is something that is culturally determined and

question. In the case of constituent questions, the only intonation possible is a rising intonation and, therefore, is not pertinent to the discussion. 14 I leave aside all discussions of the intonational effects of focus since they are beyond the scope of this paper.


depends on social relations and interactions between people. A native speaker always knows the proper context for such expressions, but these social conventions elude speakers who are not at the advanced or superior level.

One of the most popular slang words in the past several years is sababa -cool’.15 It is often mis-pronounced and mis-used. The mis‘ (סבבה)pronunciation of this word makes the learner stand out and marks him or her as a foreigner. This gives rise to many jokes among native speakers at the expense of the learner as well as may cause inappropriate situations for the learner of a second language. This word cannot be used in the context of a student-professor meeting or a professor-dean meeting. That is, this word can be used among colleagues in a peer group but cannot be used in the context of inferior-superior interaction. The word carries a certain connotation and assumes a certain egalitarian relationship between the two communicators. However, if the two communicators are not on par, it should not be used. It is important to explain to the students that there are social and contextual conditions for the use of such words. The knowledge of these socio-linguistic sensitive words and expressions is usually acquired during long periods of exposure to native speakers’ social interactions or emersion in the native language, but the instructor should forewarn the students about the use of expressions and particularly slang expressions.

Generally, when teachers come across such cases of incorrect use of a phrase or slang word, the teacher will have to handle each case individually. The teacher may choose to explain and teach a certain expression, or may choose to advise students against using it. Since the use of an individual word or phrase may hinder communication, the decision whether to incorporate a phrase in the students’ vocabulary depends on the teacher, and those decisions must be made on individual bases. An incorrect use of an idiom or a common colloquial saying can cause social embarrassment or misunderstandings, and therefore, it is up to the teacher to either teach the students the proper usage or warn them against using a particular idiom in the future.

15 This is a rough translation since the word may mean different things, and its contextual conditions are not identical to those of the word cool in English.


4. CONCLUSION In this paper I argued that despite the existence of accents and despite

the variety of pronunciation issues which the second language learner may face, not all pronunciation issues are critical and need to be addressed, especially in a classroom setting. However, some pronunciation issues are severe enough to hinder communication and those issues must be addressed. Classroom time is limited, and to be used efficiently, it should be dedicated only to those pronunciation issues which are severe enough to interrupt efficient communication.

I divided phonological issues into three main categories: the individual segment, syllable level, which included clusters in Hebrew, and finally the suprasegmental level, which included stress and intonation. I also discussed the use of slang and context sensitive words. I identified problems specific to English speakers learning Hebrew and presented methods which may help the language pedagogue identify pronunciation issues. These methods can be applied to second language teaching of any language but the specific problems discussed here are suitable for teachers of Hebrew as a second language.


Appendix 1 (alveolar – מכתשיים) (t, d, l, n, s, ts) צ, ס, נ, ל, ד, ת, ט

(velar – וילוניים) (k, g) ג, ק, ּכ (uvular – ענבליים) (x, r) ר, כ, ח

(post alveolar – ( כתשיבתר מ(š) ש

(labials – שפתיים) (p, b, f, v, m)

מ, ב, פ, ּב, ּפ

(glottal – סדקיים) (, h) ה, א


Bibliography Birdsong, David, ed. (1999). Second Language Acquisition and the Critical

Period Hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bolozky, Shmuel (2007). Haschwa ve hasegol beIvrit HaIsraelit. NAPH

conference meeting, Sydney: Australia. (oral presentation) Catford, John C. (1994). A Practical Introduction to Phonetics. Oxford:

Clarendon Press. Crystal, David (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden,

MA. Blackwell Publishing. Doughty, Catherine and Michael H. Long, eds. (2003). The Handbook of

Second Language Acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Flege, James E., Grace H. Yeni-Komshian, and Serena Liu (1999). Age

Constraints on Second-Language Acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41:78–104.

Flege, James E., Carlo Schirru, and Ian R.A. MacKay (2003). Interaction

between the Native and Second Language Phonetic Subsystems. Speech Communication. 40:467–491.

Kim, Karl H., Norman R. Relkin, Kyoung-Min Lee, and Joy Hirsch (1997).

Distinct Cortical Areas Associated with Native and Second Languages. Nature, 388:171–174.

Kreitman, Rina (2003). Diminutive Reduplication in Modern Hebrew.

Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 15. Kreitman, Rina (2008). The Phonetics and Phonology of Onset Clusters:

The Case of Modern Hebrew. Ph.D. dissertation. Cornell University. (unpublished).

Kreitman, Rina and Bolozky Shmuel (2007). Uvular Segments in Modern

Hebrew: Their Phonetic and Phonological Status. NAPH conference meeting, Sydney: Australia. (oral presentation).


Ladefoged, Peter (2006). A Course in Phonetics. Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Laufer, Asher (1994). Voicing in Contemporary Hebrew. Leshonenu,

57(4):299–342 (in Hebrew). Laufer, Asher (1995). Voice/Voiceless against Lenis/Fortis. Hebrew

Linguistics, 39:41–65 (in Hebrew). Lenneberg, Eric (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York:

Wiley. Mielke, Jeff (2005). The Emergence of Distinctive Features. Ph.D.

dissertation. Ohio State University. Major, Roy C. (2001). Foreign accent: The Ontogeny and Phylogeny of

Second Language Phonology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Perani, Daniela, Stanislas Dehaene, Franco Grassi, Laurent Cohen, Stefano

F. Cappa, Emmanuel Dupoux, Ferruccio Fazio, and Jacques Mehler (1996). Brain Processing of Native and Foreign Languages. Neuroreport, 7:2439–2444.

Rosen, Haim (1957). Ivrit tova: lyunim btaħbir halašon ha”nxona”.

Jerusalem: Kiryat Hasefer. Wiese, Richard (2001). The Phonology of /r/. Pages 335–368 in Distinctive

Feature Theory. Edited by Tracy Alan Hall. Berlin: de Gruyter. Weber-Fox, Christine M. and Helen J. Neville (1999). Functional Neural

Subsystems are Differentially Affected by Delays in Second Language Immersion: ERP and Behavioral Evidence in Bilinguals. Pages 23–38 in Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. Edited by D. Birdsong. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Attending to pronunciation issues in teaching Modern Israeli Hebrew

Documents

Transcript of Attending to pronunciation issues in teaching Modern Israeli Hebrew