A

18

E l i s a b e t h G a re i sU N I T E D S T A T E S

WIDE VARIETY OF PRONUNCIATION TEXTBOOKS ON AMERICAN ENGLISH ARE ON

the market today, allowing teachers to select the most suitable materials for their

ESOL students. This abundance of texts would be ideal, were it not for some

inconsistencies in the presentation of pronunciation features. Thus, textbooks

often differ in the use of pronunciation symbols, the description of individual

vowels and consonants, the number of sounds characterized as diphthongs, and

the delineation of pitch and stress patterns. Given the fact that many ESOL stu-

dents move through several texts in the course of their studies, these discrepan-

cies are confusing and can create insecurity among students as well as teachers.

This article provides discussion of the most common discrepancies, exempli-

fied in five popular pronunciation texts: Accurate English, Pronunciation Pairs,

Phrase by Phrase, Sound Advantage, Speechcraft, and the Manual of American Eng-

lish Pronunciation. The texts were selected for their range from beginning to

PronunciationTextbookDiscrepancies

V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5 � E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 18

advanced level and for their diversity in nota-tion and content. (Note: No criticism of theselected texts is intended. All of the listedbooks are internally consistent and representexcellent guides for pronunciation instruc-tion.) Before discussion of the pronunciationtexts, we’ll take a brief look at related discrep-ancies in monolingual dictionaries.

While this article focuses on U.S. English,similar discrepancies exist in publications onother varieties of English. Teachers are encour-aged to compare the findings in this article withtheir teaching materials and to explore incon-sistencies in their own linguistic environment.

Monolingual dictionaries

The idiosyncratic use of pronunciation sym-bols in monolingual American English dictio-naries has been a long-standing source of frus-tration for language students and teachersalike. Sound transcriptions differ from dictio-nary to dictionary and bear little or no resem-blance to the international pronunciationalphabet (IPA), which is standard in most bilin-gual dictionaries and pronunciation textbooks.The vowel sound in the word tap, for example,is consistently transcribed as /Q/ in bilingualdictionaries and pronunciation texts. In mono-lingual U.S. dictionaries, however, transcrip-tions usually involve a variation of the letter aas the preferred symbol. The American HeritageDictionary, for instance, uses /a(/ and Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (Webster’s) uses/a/—a symbol which in many bilingual dictio-naries and pronunciation textbooks stands forthe vowel sound in top, rather than tap. Similarconfusion reigns for /i/ which in most bilingualdictionaries and pronunciation texts stands forthe vowel in teen but in Webster’s is used for thevowel in tin. Likewise, /j/ stands for the begin-ning of the word year in many foreign languageeducation materials but is used in Webster’s forthe beginning of the word jeer. These are justa few examples. Discrepancies also exist withrespect to other sounds.

Students often ask why monolingual Amer-ican dictionaries don’t use the IPA. The answerprobably lies in the same U.S. insularity thathas resulted in so many other deviations frominternational standards (including standardsof measurement, weight, and temperature). Inaddition, the relatively minor importance offoreign language education in the United

States may have reduced the perceived needfor an all-enveloping sound description sys-tem, like the IPA.

Pronunciation textbooks

If discrepancies were limited to monolingualversus bilingual language materials, the relevanceof this issue for ESOL students—especially atthe beginning and intermediate level, where stu-dents seldom use monolingual dictionaries—would be minor. Unfortunately, discrepanciescan also be found within the realm of foreignand second language materials. Since deviationsare probably more confusing with respect topronunciation texts than bilingual dictionar-ies—with students going through several text-books as their proficiency increases—the fol-lowing discussion uses pronunciation texts asexamples. Discrepancies with respect to vowelsounds will be discussed first, followed by con-sonants and prosodics.

VowelsIn general, ESOL pronunciation textbooks

adhere to IPA standards to a great extent.Among the vowels, for instance, the followingsound symbols enjoy widespread agreement andare used consistently, without much variation:/I/, /E/, /Q/, /´/, /ç/, and /U/. There are a fewsounds and intonation features, however, thatseem to incite such strong passions as to war-rant idiosyncratic notations. When these devia-tions occur, they often represent not only devi-ations from IPA notation but also diversity inopinion over the specific nature of the soundsand features.

Table 1 (next page) shows a selection of vowelsounds as they are treated in various pronunci-ation texts. Also included are two monolingualdictionaries to illustrate the additional dichoto-my between the ESOL and monolingual realm.

Naturally, textbook authors have reasonsfor their choices. Sometimes the various choicesand their reasons are provided in the text; othertimes they are not. It is when no explanation isgiven that students may become confused. Thefollowing is an attempt to explain the discrep-ancies in the vowel section of Table 1.

/i/ and /u/The sound /i/ is transcribed /iy/ or /iy/ in somepronunciation texts to indicate that, especiallyin the Eastern United States, there is a tonguemovement at the end of the sound, renderingit a glide rather than a pure vowel. For the

19E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M � V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 19

same reason, /u/ is sometimes transcribed /uw/or /uw/ (Ladefoged 1982).

One reason for pronunciation textbook au-thors (or editors) to eschew the glide notationand use /i/ and /u/ instead is that they may befrom a part of the United States other than theEast and therefore prefer the pure vowel tran-scription. In addition, there is the argumentthat /iy/ and /uw/ are based on phonemic (notphonetic) analysis and that glide transcriptionsmix vowel and consonant (or semi-vowel) sym-bols, therefore making them undesirable.

The reason for the transcription discrepan-cies is therefore a combination of regional pre-disposition, linguistic philosophy, and ulti-mately personal choice.

/ɑɑ/Moving down the vowel chart from /i/, the

next controversial sound is the /A/, as in palm.The IPA differentiates between three low, albeitsimilar vowels and recommends three differentsymbols: /a/, /A/, and /Å/. At least the first two

of these symbols are often used interchange-ably in language texts.

The difference between /a/, /A/, and /Å/ isthat the sounds constitute a progression fromfront to back vowel. Specifically, /a/, which isfarthest in the front, is used at the beginningof diphthongs; the low, tense /A/ is the soundmost Americans use for the vowel in balm; andthe low, lax /Å/, which is farthest back and morerounded, is accompanied with a slight round-ing of the lips and found mostly in New Eng-land and British speakers, as in bomb (Eison-son 1992; Ladefoged 1982).

In the case of the three a-sounds, the rea-son for the discrepancies seems to be one ofdesired simplification. The symbol /a/ or /A/ isoften used as a stand-in for all variations, sothat students are spared from, perhaps unnec-essary, confusion.

/əə/The issue of the schwa may be the most

vexing of all discrepancies. ESOL students are

20 V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5 � E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

SOUND TYPES COMPARISON OF PRONUNCIATION SYMBOLSAND SAMPLE WORDS IN SELECTED PRONUNCIATION TEXTS AND MONOLINGUAL DICTIONARIES

AE MP PP PBP SA SC VD AH W

Vowelsbee i iy iy iy iy iy i e# e#

palm A a A A a A A/Å a� a�custom ´ ´ √ √ ´ √ √ u( ´custom ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ ´

boot u uw uw uw uw uw u oo— ü

Diphthongspie aI ay ay Ai ay ay aI "‹ "‹out aU aw aw Au aw aw aU/AU ou o#

boy çI çy çy çi oy oy çI oi o. ipay eI ey ey ey ey ey e a# a#

boat oU ow ow ow ow ow o/oU o# o#

Consonantsyear y y y y y y j y y

curler ´’’ ´r Œr ´’’ ´r Œr Œ’’ u^r ´r

curler ´’’ ´r Œr ´’’ ´r ´r ´’’ ´r ´r

Pronunciation TextsAE = Accurate English • MP = Manual of American English Pronunciation • PP =Pronunciation Pairs • PbP = Phrase by Phrase • SA = Sound Advantage • SC =Speechcraft • VD = Voice and Diction

Monolingual DictionariesAH = The American Heritage Dictionary • W = Webster’sTable 1

Pronunciation textbookdiscrepancies

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 20

often told that the schwa (or /´/) is the mostcommon sound in English, used for the major-ity of unstressed vowel sounds. However, sometextbooks differentiate between the unstressedschwa and the stressed, slightly lower and moreback sound /√/, while others use the symbol /´/for both. In other words, some textbooks main-tain that the vowel sounds in the words aboveand custom are different (i.e., that the stressedsyllable is pronounced /√/ and the unstressedone /´/), while other textbooks recommendpronouncing them identically as schwas for allsyllables. Proponents of the latter pronuncia-tion argue that it is mostly British speakers whouse the /√/. While the difference between /√/and /´/ may be small, one reason to retain thedistinction is that it forces students to focus onthe important features of stress and vowel re-duction in American English (Edwards 1992).

In a related matter, a more minor deviationcan also be found concerning final -ed and -es(as in rented and houses). Some texts recom-mend a pronunciation of /Id/ and /Iz/, others of/´d/ and /´z/. Yet others give a choice betweenthe two versions, stressing that both /´/ and /I/are common as reduced vowels. No specificreasons for the discrepancy is apparent; thematter seems to be one of personal choice.

DiphthongsThe last vowel discrepancy is the question

of how many diphthongs exist in AmericanEnglish. Some textbooks count five maindiphthongs (/aI/, /aU/, /çI/, /eI/, /oU/); otherscount only three (/aI/, /aU/, /çI/) and consider/ey/ and /ow/ glides, similar to /iy/ and /uw/.In other words, /eI/ and /oU/ are consideredfull diphthongs by some, while others maintainthat the second vowel sound is not fully devel-oped and the whole sound is therefore more ofa glide. The book Voice and Diction goes evenfarther and transcribes the two sounds as /e/and /o/—with the rationale that they are non-phonemic diphthongs; i.e., there are no mini-mal pairs differentiating diphthong and purevowel sound.

Disagreement also abounds on the startingand ending vowel of these sounds. For the be-ginning of /aI/, for example, symbols vary from/a/ to /A/; for the end of /aI/, the transcriptions/I/, /i/, and /y/ are used. Sometimes, the choiceis influenced by regional differences. Thediphthong /oU/, for example, has a relativelylimited range in the Midwest (making a tran-

scription of /o/ more logical) and a wider rangein other regions of the United States (givingmore support for the use of the symbol /oU/)(Ladefoged 1992). Other times, it is not clearwhether variations indicate personal convic-tions of the authors or whether choices aremade to simplify sound descriptions and limittext-internal symbol variety for the sake oflow- or intermediate-proficiency students.

ConsonantsPronunciation textbooks exhibit fewer dis-

crepancies with respect to consonants than vow-els. If there are problem areas, they seem to beof relatively minor relevance as well.

The r-soundESOL students who are familiar with the

markedly different r-sounds in other languagesmight find the use of the symbol /r/ for theAmerican r-sound slightly confusing. In IPAnotation, the symbol /r/ actually indicates atrill, as in Spanish perro (dog), for example. TheAmerican r-sound (variably described as a glide,liquid, semi-vowel, or approximant) would bemore accurately transcribed as /®/ (Edwards1992; Ladefoged 1982). Simplification seemsto be the reason for the substitution.

/j/Maybe the most confusing IPA deviation canbe noticed in the frequent use of /y/ for thefirst sound in year. According to the IPA, /y/ isthe rounded vowel sound found in the Frenchune or German über. For the beginning soundin year—which is variably described as a con-sonantal or nonconsonantal sound (Edwards1992)—the symbol /j/ should be used. Pre-sumably, the reason for using /y/ instead is thesimilarity of this symbol with the letter y, as inyear. This connection is supposed to allow stu-dents a more intuitive approach to the pro-nunciation of this sound.

The er-soundPronunciation texts vary in their transcrip-

tion of the r-colored (or rhoticized) vowelsfound in words such as curler. In different texts/Œr/, /´r/, /Œ’’/, and /´’’/ are used to transcribethe sound. The first issue here concerns thenumber of symbols in the transcription. Pro-ponents of a single symbol for the sound com-bination (/Œ’’/ and /´’’/)—which is also recom-mended by the IPA—maintain that the soundis a phonetic reality and should therefore berepresented as such (Edwards 1992).

21E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M � V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 21

The second discrepancy concerns the issueof stress. Some texts differentiate betweenstressed (/Œr/ or /Œ’’/) and unstressed er-sounds(/´r/ or /´’’/). The symbols /Œr/ and /Œ’’/ there-by indicate a higher tongue position and areused for stressed sounds, whereas /´r/ and /´’’/have a lower tongue position and are used forunstressed sounds. The word curler wouldthus be transcribed /�kŒrl´r/ or /�kŒ’’l´’’/.

Other texts don’t differentiate betweenstressed and unstressed er and use one of thefour alternatives as a stand-in for all occurrences.Since the difference between stressed and un-stressed er is minor, this widespread simplifi-cation is perhaps understandable.

/w/The allophonic difference between /w/ for

the first sound in weather and /hw/ or /„/ forthe first sound in whether is minor as well. It istherefore only occasionally noted in pronunci-ation texts. The rationale is that the differenti-ation seems to be disappearing in most formsof English, especially in frequently usedwords, such as what and when (Eisonson1992; Ladefoged 1982).

Final stopsOf slightly more relevance are discrepancies

in the description of final stops: /t/, /p/, /k/.While some texts recommend releasing finalstops, others describe them as unreleased. Yetothers give the speaker an option of releasing ornot releasing them. At play are issues of formal-ity and careful articulation, as well as soundenvironment. Most people, for example, don’trelease final stops when the next word beginswith a nasal, as in cat nap or with another stop,as in the cat pushed (Ladefoged 1982).

ProsodicsApart from discrepancies among vowel and

consonant transcriptions, differences also existin the treatment of prosodic features, such asstress and intonation. Many of the issues areoutside the purview of the IPA and thereforelack a standardizing force.

TerminologyDiscrepancies in the realm of prosodics

start with confusing terminology. The nomen-clature used for the stress on a syllable (e.g.,the third syllable in the word informátion), forexample, includes the terms syllable stress andword stress; whereas terms used for the mainstress in a thought group or sentence range fromsentence stress, to phrase stress, information focus,and—again—word stress (e.g., Eisonson 1992).The term word stress can therefore indicateeither type of stress, depending on the pronun-ciation text, which is indeed very confusing.

Apparently, no prescription exists. Onehopes that, in the course of time, a single com-mon usage would manifest itself and becomethe standard.

Stress and intonation featuresDifferences in diacritics for primary and sec-

ondary stress are also common (e.g., «infor'ma-tion, ínformàtion). In addition, textbooks differin whether they indicate secondary stress or limitthemselves to primary stress notations only.

Similarly, the number of pitch levels inAmerican English is either not mentioned atall or differs between texts. Ranges from threeto four or more levels are common.

There are also two different descriptions ofthe rising sentence intonation used for yes/noquestions, such as Do you want coffee? In sometexts, the pitch is described as level until it riseson the last syllable (see Illustration 1 belowleft); in others, it is depicted as level followedby a fall-rise; i.e., a dip to a lower pitch levelprior to the rise (see Illustration 2 below right).The latter was previously considered Britishbut is now often used in American English aswell. Interestingly, while some pronunciationtexts describe the yes/no question intonation asa simple rise (as in Illustration 1), taped speechsamples accompanying the books may featurefall-rise patterns and thus contradict thetextual description (e.g., Hagen and Grogran1992). It’s possible that such internal discrep-ancies are simply based on a difference between

22 V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5 � E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

Do you want coffee? Do you want coffee?

(left) Illustration 1Rise

(right) Illustration 2Fall-rise

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 22

author and taped speaker; or they may be asign of changes in language use overtakingestablished transcription habits. In either case,teachers and students should be aware of thetwo alternatives.

Conclusion

Many more sound and prosodic discrepan-cies exist than have been discussed in this arti-cle. The reasons for discrepancies vary. Whatfollows are the most common explanationsand one example for each.

• Regional differences. For example, manyspeakers in the Eastern United States dif-ferentiate between the vowels in Don andDawn; not so in the Western United States.

• Level of simplicity or detail desired in apublication. For example, the number ofcontent word categories—which are im-portant for the stress-timed rhythm ofEnglish—range from the basic list ofnouns, adjectives, adverbs, and full verbsto expanded, more comprehensive inven-tories that include demonstratives, pos-sessive and reflexive pronouns, negatives,questions words, and adverbial particles,such as off in take off.

• Levels of careful articulation, often com-bined with British versus American ten-dencies. For example, the medial t pre-ceding an unstressed syllable, as in city,can be pronounced vigorously as a /t/ oras the quick, less vigorous intervocalictongue flap or tap /R/.

• Speed of articulation. For example, /t/after /n/, as in twenty, may be articulatedin slow but not articulated in fast speech.

Many of these discrepancies are minor in rel-evance or may constitute levels of detail ratherthan true differences. Others are more confus-ing but are explained sufficiently for the read-er to make educated choices.

It is when controversial features are unex-plained in the textbook and are not discussed inthe classroom that an already difficult subjectcan become unnecessarily taxing. Instructorsshould therefore be aware of the major discrep-ancies found in pronunciation texts and dictio-naries and be prepared to address them in class.This can be done in a variety of ways. Teachersmay opt for a case-by-case explanation whenstudents question a discrepancy (e.g., they per-

ceive the vowel sounds in the word custom tobe different even though they are transcribed asthe same sound in their textbook). Alternative-ly, instructors may preempt questions by teach-ing a whole unit on the more controversialissues. Such a unit could be as basic or com-plex as the students’ proficiency level allows.

Since regional differences and personal pref-erences (e.g., desired level of detail, formality,and speed) seem to be major influences in thephenomenon of discrepancies, it may be help-ful for teachers to diagnose their own speechpatterns and choose the transcriptions thatbest match their pronunciation. If an instruc-tor pronounces the controversial vowel in teenwithout a glide, for example, /i/ would be thesymbol of choice instead of the other alterna-tives /iy/ or /iy/. Such a personalized transcrip-tion system can provide consistency in the faceof textbook variations and even a level of sup-port for the instructor.

Instructors often teach two or more differ-ent levels of students, with different textbooks,in the same term. Rather than having to re-member how each book deals with the contro-versial features and risk losing track of which ofthe controversial symbols to use in which class,the teacher can thus adhere to his or her ownsystem. Not only does this method relieve theinstructor of having to recollect the countlessvariant combinations in the assigned textbooks,it also ensures that the teacher’s transcriptionsymbols match his or her specific speech pat-terns, making lessons on the controversial fea-tures more authentic and coherent.

Thus, a personalized transcription systemwill allow instructors to navigate between text-books more easily and ensure cohesion be-tween their modeling and transcriptions. Inaddition, the teacher’s use of his or her ownchoices can become a catalyst for addressingthe question of variation. When teachers intro-duce the issue of textbook discrepancies to theirstudents, explain the points of contention, andmodel their own and the alternative speech pat-terns, they make students familiar with impor-tant and interesting issues in pronunciationtheory and practice, as well as raise awarenessabout the range of acceptable patterns (Levis1999). A teacher may use a fall-rise pitch pat-tern, for example, when discussing yes/noquestion intonation but point out that the text-book features the alternative level-rise pattern.

➪ 31

23E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M � V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5

05-0002 ETF_18_23 4/28/05 11:54 AM Page 23

Second language learning as co-operative learn-er education. In Collaborative language learningand teaching, ed. D. Nunan 37–56. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Lewis, M., 1994. The lexical approach. Hove: LTP.McDonough, S. H. 1995. Strategy and skill in

learning a foreign language. London: Arnold.Nation, I. S. P. 2001. Learning vocabulary in anoth-

er language. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Nunan, D., ed. 1992. Collaborative language learn-ing and teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

O’Malley, J. M., R. P. Russo, A. U. Chamot, andG. Stewner-Manzanares. 1988. Applications oflearning strategies by students learning Englishas a second language. In Learning and studystrategies: Issues in assessment instruction andevaluation, ed. C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz,and P. A. Alexander, 215-31. San Diego, CA:Academic Press.

Oxford, R. 1990. Language learning strategies: Whatevery teacher should know. New York: NewburyHouse.

Oxford, R. L. and R. C. Scarcella. 1994. Secondlanguage vocabulary learning among adults:State of the art in vocabulary instruction. System22 (2): 231–43.

Rees-Miller, J. 1993. A critical appraisal of learnertraining: Theoretical bases and teaching impli-cations. TESOL Quarterly 27 (4): 679–89.

Schmitt, N. and D. Schmitt. 1995. Vocabularynotebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and prac-tical suggestions. ELT Journal 49 (2): 133–43.

Schmitt, N. 1997. Vocabulary learning strategies:Current trends in teaching second languagevocabulary. In Vocabulary: Description, acquisi-tion and pedagogy, ed. N. Schmitt and M.McCarthy, 199-227. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Thornbury, S. 2002. How to teach vocabulary. Har-low: Longman.

Victori, M. and W. Lockhart. 1995. Enhancingmetacognition in self-directed language learn-ing. System 23 (2): 223–34.

Wenden, A. L. 1986. Incorporating learner trainingin the classroom. System 14 (3): 315–25.

Zimmerman, B. J. 2000. Self-efficacy: An essentialmotive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psy-chology 25: 82–91.

SARAH MERCER has an MA in TEFL from theUniversity of Reading and currently teachesEnglish at the University of Graz, Austria.She is working on a Ph.D. at the Universityof Lancaster, England.

31E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M � V O L U M E 4 3 N U M B E R 2 2 0 0 5

Pronunciat ion Textbook Discrepancies | Gareiscontinued from page 23

Students may then experiment with both pat-terns and decide which one suits them better.

Such experimentation can heighten a stu-dent’s sense of linguistic self-awareness and pro-mote a spirit of adventure in the classroom. Italso helps empower the students to become re-sponsible for their own learning. In the end,this level of insight and the realization thatthere are choices may well capture at least somestudents’ imagination and lead them on a pathof continued fascination with language andlanguage learning.

References

Baker, A. and S. Goldstein. 1990. Pronunciationpairs: An introductory course for students of Eng-lish. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chan, M. 1987. Phrase by phrase: Pronunciationand listening in American English. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Dauer, R. M. 1993. Accurate English: A completecourse in pronunciation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall Regents.

Edwards, H. T. 1992. Applied phonetics: The soundsof American English. San Diego: Singular.

Eisonson, J. 1992. Voice and diction: A program forimprovement (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Hagen, S. A and P.E. Grogran. 1992. Sound advan-tage: A pronunciation book. Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Hahn, L. D and W. B. Dickerson. 1999. Speech-craft: Discourse pronunciation for advanced learn-ers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Ladefoged, P. 1982. A course in phonetics (2nd ed.).New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Levis, J. M. 1999. Variations in pronunciation andESL teacher training. TESOL Matters, 9 (3):16.

Merriam-Webster. 1998. Merriam-Webster’s collegiatedictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.

Prator, C. H. Jr. and B. W. Robinett. 1985. Manu-al of American English pronunciation (4th ed.).Chicago: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

The American heritage dictionary of the English lan-guage (4th ed.). 2000. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

ELISABETH GAREIS is an associate professorat Baruch College (City University of NewYork), where she coordinates ESOL servicesfor international graduate students and fac-ulty members.

05-0002 ETF_24_35 4/28/05 11:55 AM Page 31