【Research Article】

The Degree of Improvement of a Japanese Learnerʼs
Pronunciation of R-Colored Schwa (/ɚ/) Over a 7-Week
Period of Conversation Practice and Focused Exercise
David Truxal
Abstract
This paper describes a research study which focused on one specific aspect of English pronunciation for a Japaneselearner of English. First it will touch on modern pronunciation teaching especially as it concerns, or has conflicted
with, comprehensibility and intelligibility. Historically, emphasis has been put on pronouncing correct language
sounds whereas presently there is considerable emphasis on comprehensibility and intelligibility. Then it will give a
brief overview of spoken English and Japanese and the possible pronunciation pitfalls that a Japanese learner could
encounter. The participant and the procedures used to collect data will be described and the results of the study
will be given. The question posed by the study is will improvement of R-colored schwa (/ɚ/) of a Japanese learnerof English be achieved over a 7-week period of conversation practice and focused exercise. It was found that theaccuracy of /ɚ/ doubled from 18% to 36% between the initial and final diagnostic passages and that overall accurate
pronunciation of /ɚ/ in the free conversation sessions increased from 25% to 37%.
Keywords: pronunciation, second language (L2) learning, comprehensibility, intelligibility

Literature Review
Pronunciation, as important as it is in spoken communicative contexts, has been neglected in thesecond language (L2) classroom, often not even included in L2 learning environments, and has notbeen given nearly the same attention as other skills. This lack of pronunciation teaching “has resulted
in limited knowledge about how to integrate appropriate pronunciation instruction into second
language classrooms” (Derwing & Munro, 2005, p. 383). The neglect of pronunciation teaching isevident especially in Japan where historically, reading and writing instruction have received much
more emphasis than spoken instruction. For the Japanese learner who has mainly studied written
English in childhood and early adulthood, embarking on a more pronunciation-focused learning
program can be a daunting challenge with the fears of a heavy foreign accent and low intelligibility as
possible prohibitive factors.
In the past (before the 1960s), the achievement of native-like pronunciation was espoused
as the goal of pronunciation teaching. Recently however, many language researchers maintainthat improved intelligibility is the most important goal of pronunciation teaching. Instruction
should be focused on features that are most helpful for comprehensibility and intelligibility and“should deemphasize features that are relatively unhelpful” (Levis, 2005, p. 371). Jenkins (2001)
calls for “focusing pedagogic attention on those items which are essential in terms of intelligible
pronunciation” (p. 123). Derwing and Munro (2005) say that “improved intelligibility is generally
identified by pedagogical specialists as the most important outcome of pronunciation instruction”(p. 384). Achieving this goal, however, is complicated by the fact that there remains no clear anduniversal way of assessing increased intelligibility since there is not much agreement among
researchers on what specific aspects of pronunciation are most important for intelligibility.

1

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

While it has been shown that accurate pronunciation teaching can improve L2 learners’ spoken
pronunciation, “it seems that a certain amount of English pronunciation cannot be learnt successfullyin classrooms, no matter how much time and effort is expended on the task by teachers and theirlearners” (Jenkins, 2001, p. 133). Often times, TESOL teachers are inadequately prepared to assess
their students’ phonological backgrounds and thus are not able to determine proper pronunciation
goals for their students. Inadequately prepared teachers can contribute negatively to their students’pronunciation goals by focusing too much on prominent characteristics of the accent regardless ofthe characteristics’ influence on intelligibility. Plus, these same teachers are often using instructional
materials that are elementary at best. Levis (1999), in reference to modern language teachingespecially concerning the subject of intonation, states that “teaching materials … continue to rely on
outdated and inaccurate descriptions of intonational forms and functions” (p. 37). Wong (1985) says
there is a “need for new instructional materials” (p. 232) adding that teachers “need textbooks that candemonstrate how stress and intonation operate in functional discourse” (p. 234). It is clear that until
more accurate ways for assessing intelligibility can be established and higher quality instructional
materials are made and consequently used in the classroom, L2 learners’ pronunciation goals will not
be achieved.
Concerning the role of foreign accent on intelligibility and comprehensibility, Munro andDerwing (1999) suggest that “accent itself does not necessarily act as a communicative barrier”(p. 285), as there has not been enough “empirical investigation of how the presence of a nonnative
accent affects intelligibility” (p. 285). As comprehensibility and intelligibility have been acceptedby many researchers as the most important goals of pronunciation instruction, “then the degree towhich a particular speaker’s speech is accented should be of minor concern” (Munro & Derwing,
1999, p. 305). Derwing and Munro (2005) say that what is needed is “more research to enhance ourknowledge of the nature of foreign accents and their effects on communication” (p. 379). The factthat many L2 learners want to reduce their accent is evident when one takes into consideration the
many studies that have shown that “native speaker listeners tend to downgrade nonnative speakers
simply because of foreign accent” (Munro & Derwing, 1999, p. 287). Since accent can be tied topersonal identity and social belonging, many times a foreign accent can serve as the focal point for“negative social evaluation and discrimination” (Derwing & Munro, 2005, p. 385). Improper use of
suprasegmental features of speech, even by nonnative speakers who have daily contact with native
speakers can cause nonnatives to be “misinterpreted as rude, abrupt, or disinterested” (Celce-Murcia,
Brinton, & Goodwin, 1996, p. 210). It would seem that “an understanding of accent is needed, not only
on the part of instructors and applied linguists, but also by the general public” (Derwing & Munro,
2005, p. 380).
Setting realistic goals that are both achievable and assessable should be the main objective
for both L2 teachers and learners. Teachers should not lead learners to believe that “they will
eventually achieve native pronunciation or to encourage them to expend time and energy working
toward a goal that they are unlikely to achieve” (Derwing & Munro, 2005, p. 384). Teachers need
to be better prepared to more adequately assess their students’ pronunciation needs and desires.
More communication and collaborative research between linguists and teachers are needed tomake L2 teaching more responsive to communicative needs. Research such as this will be able “tooffer to teachers and students in terms of helping them to set learning goals, identifying appropriate
pedagogical priorities for the classroom, and determining the most effective approaches to teaching”(Derwing & Munro, 2005, p. 379). It is time to move beyond traditional teaching practices using
methods other than mechanical drills and focus on the “musical aspects of pronunciation more than2THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE

sounds” (Celce-Murcia et al., 1996, p. 290).
Although there have been very few studies done of pronunciation teaching (Saito, 2007), theyshow that explicit phonetic instruction is effective. Derwing and Munro (2005) explain that just as
students learning certain grammar points benefit from recognizing their own pronunciations withthose of native speakers, “so students learning L2 pronunciation benefit from being explicitly taught
phonological form to help them notice the difference” (p. 388). Couper (2003), in an action research
report which integrated a pronunciation sub-syllabus into an overall syllabus into a post-intermediate
ESOL course, found support for the idea that “explicit systematic teaching of pronunciation can beeffective at the post-intermediate level” (p. 66). The results showed that “clear gains were made,and that learners believed both that teachers should teach pronunciation” (p. 53). Bradlow, Pisoni,
Akabane-Yamada, and Tohkura (1997) showed that when Japanese learners of English were taught
explicitly the phonetic difference between /r/ and /l/, their pronunciation of those sounds greatly
improved. As well, in a well-known study by Derwing, Munro, and Wiebe (1998), an experimentalgroup was given explicit phonetic instruction while the control group was not. Each group was
evaluated by both trained and untrained listeners before and after the experiment. The results clearly
indicated that learners’ pronunciation of the target language was improved by explicit phonetic
instruction.
The pronunciation problems for the learner in this study have not shown themselves to be
especially detrimental to overall intelligibility. However, there are certain pronunciation issues
that figure prominently in the learner’s speech and thus this study is an attempt to correct some ofthese aspects of the learner’s spoken English. The goal for the learner in this study is to improve
pronunciation in an area that has proved troublesome.
The main pronunciation issue for the learner in this study concerns the pronunciation of /ɚ/sounds, especially when occurring in word-medial or word-final position. It should be noted that thesound /ɝ/ will be considered the same as /ɚ/ for research purposes in this study. The learner is
not aiming for native-like pronunciation as an outcome to this study (nor in further spoken English
interaction) but is aware of the pronunciation problems in her speech and would like to take somesteps to correct them and become a more accurate English speaker. The specific /ɚ/ sound, when it
occurs in word-medial or word-final position, has thus been chosen as the primary focus for this study.
The learner did not specify another sound that she wanted to improve, so /ɚ/ will be the only soundstudied and focused on. The question then is: How much improvement in pronunciation of /ɚ/, ifany, can a motivated Japanese learner make in a 7-week period of conversation practice and focused
exercises? Recalling Derwing and Munro (2005), who state that pronunciation learners can benefit
from explicitly taught phonological form and based on the previous studies cited in this paper which
point to the notion that explicit pronunciation teaching is beneficial, it is hypothesized that small
improvement for this particular learner will be observed.

Over view of Spoken Japanese and English
Japanese learners of English are presented with numerous pronunciation challenges, consistingof both segmental (consonants and vowels) and suprasegmental (stress, rhythm, and intonation)
features. In this section, I will present a brief overview of the spoken Japanese language and how it
contrasts with the spoken English language. I will also attempt to discuss the potential pronunciation
problems facing Japanese learners of English.
Japanese learners of English are confronted with some major pronunciation challenges with3

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

some very common English consonants. The consonants /s/ vs. /ʃ/, /b/ vs. /v/, and /l/ vs. /r/, allpose considerable potential pronunciation problems for Japanese learners. When /s/ precedes a highfront vowel the native English listener may here a ‘sh’ sound from the Japanese speaker. Thus ‘sip’and ‘sea’ are often pronounced ‘ship’ and ‘she.’ Though Japanese has no /v/ sound, it does have a /b/sound and learners frequently substitute the two sounds, pronouncing ‘very’ instead of ‘berry’ and viceversa.
There is only one liquid sound in Japanese (/r/) which is pronounced somewhere between
the English /l/ and /r/. Both of these consonants are notoriously difficult for Japanese learners topronounce correctly. This may be because they are “formed with more movement of the speechorgans than are most other consonant sounds” (Prator & Robinett, 1985, p. 113). Japanese learners
often substitute /l/ and /r/sounds in context and often the native English listener hears the oppositeof the Japanese speaker’s intention. So when the Japanese speaker pronounces ‘late,’ the English
listener might hear ‘rate’ and vice versa. In word-final position, /l/ and /r/ are often times deleted,
therefore, an English listener might hear /ka/ when the Japanese speaker said ‘car.’
Another feature of spoken English that can be problematic for Japanese learners has to dowith syllable types. Japanese primarily has open syllable types whereby the syllable ends in avowel. English has open syllables but also has many closed syllable types which frequently include
consonants or consonant clusters in syllable final position. When a Japanese learner is confronted
with a consonant cluster, which does not exist in Japanese, there is a tendency to break up the cluster
by inserting a vowel. A word such as ‘try’ is pronounced as /toraɪ/. This insertion of an extra vowel
also takes place in words that have a word-final consonant making a word such as ‘much’ pronounced/mʌtʃi/.
Where English vowels are concerned, there exist numerous potential pronunciation problems
for Japanese learners. English most likely has more vowel sounds than Japanese: Japanese has a fivevowel system whereas English has at least 15 vowel sounds (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992, pp. 33–34). In
addition to the number of different vowels, Japanese does not have a distinction between tense and lax
vowels, so for example the vowel ‘a’ is pronounced one way whereas in English it can be pronounced
a number of different ways. Since English has a tense and lax distinction, the Japanese speaker’s
pronunciation of the vowel does not fit categorically in either distinction and thus is pronounced
somewhere between the two. For example, the word ‘hot,’ as uttered by many Japanese speakers is
not pronounced with either a distinctive ‘/o/’ or ‘/a/’ sound but somewhere in between the two.
The vowels /i/ vs. /ɪ/, /e/ vs. /ɛ/, and /u/ vs. /ʊ/ illustrate how misunderstandings can occur
when a distinction is not made between two different vowels: ‘Sleep’ becomes ‘slip,’ ‘late’ becomes ‘let,’and ‘pool’ becomes ‘pull.’ Three other vowels are particularly problematic, /æ/, /ʌ/, and /a/. These
three vowels are all made relatively low in the mouth wherein a five-vowel system has only one low
vowel (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992, p. 99). For Japanese learners, all of these vowels can be pronounced ina similar manner and often are substituted for each other: ‘Hot’ can sound like ‘hat,’ ‘hut,’ or ‘hot.’Suprasegmental features of English, such as stress, rhythm, and intonation are also substantiallydifferent from Japanese. Not only are these features “used to communicate meaning in the context of
discourse” (Hahn, 2004, p. 202), they play a “significant role in conversational management” (Levis,
1999, p. 59). The importance of accurate suprasegmental pronunciation cannot be understated as
Jenkins (2001) says, “it has been widely argued for some years now that segmental errors have arather less serious effect on intelligibility than do suprasegmental errors” (p. 135). These aspects ofspeech have often been overlooked in pronunciation classrooms and “should be a part of any second
language curriculum that purports to teach oral communicative competence, because they influence4THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE

communication in very real ways” (Wong, 1985, p. 228). Proper stress and intonation are vital for
intelligible speech, in many ways more vital than correct pronunciation of individual sounds, as often
times learners can pronounce English sounds correctly, but their speech doesn’t sound like English.
For students to develop fluent, natural English, proper pronunciation of these aspects is essential.
English is a stress-timed language, in which syllables occur at regular intervals. In a stress-timed
language, the amount of time it takes to say a sentence depends not on the total number of syllables,
but on the number of syllables that receive either major or minor stress. Japanese is a mora-timed
language (Warner & Arai, 2001). In a mora-timed language, similarly to a syllable-timed language, theamount of time required to say a sentence depends on the total number of morae in the sentence, noton the number of stresses. To properly pronounce English-like sentence stress rhythm, it is necessary
for the speaker to reduce vowels in the unstressed syllables. Japanese does not have a short, reduced
vowel equivalent to the English schwa and thus Japanese learners of English may have difficulty
comprehending this vowel reduction process and be unable to pronounce proper English rhythm.
English L2 learners who speak a mora or syllable-timed language will often assign equal weight toeach syllable in English sentences, regardless of whether the syllable is stressed or unstressed. Thiscan result in a very “staccato-like rhythm” (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992, p. 74) that can both greatly andnegatively affect the comprehensibility of the speakers’ English.
The two languages also differ in terms of how accents and stressed elements in a sentence aremarked. Japanese is a pitch accent language whereby the primary indicator of accent or stress is
pitch. In English, stressed syllables are marked primarily by length and loudness. Since stress in the
two languages is marked in significantly different ways, Japanese speakers may have difficulty bothpronouncing and perceiving the characteristic stress patterns of English. English intonation patterns
may also pose challenges for the Japanese learner as the pitch level of the learner’s voice may not riseor fall far enough with final rising-falling or final rising intonation. As intonation carries a great deal of
information and meaning in a sentence, this pitch discrepancy often results in misinterpretations by
the listener about the intent of the learners’ utterances. For example, if a learner’s voice does not fall
far enough in making a statement, an English listener may misinterpret the statement as a questionor assume that the learner has not finished speaking. It is also possible that the native listener might
misinterpret the nonnative speaker as rude, abrupt, or disinterested on the basis of the nonnative’s
voice not following the correct pitch.
It is clear that Japanese learners of English face considerable challenges in their desire for proper
pronunciation. By no means insurmountable, accurately pronouncing the different consonant andvowel sounds of English will require new articulatory training as well as a high level of motivation. It
must be accepted that some sounds may never be pronounced to the learner’s satisfaction. Extensive
exposure to native English speech as well as providing numerous contextual exercises will be crucial
for the learner to more fully comprehend the suprasegmental aspects of stress, intonation, andrhythm and more accurately pronounce the segmental aspects of consonants and vowels.

Participant
The learner in this study is 36 years old and is a full-time homemaker and mother for her two
young children. She is from Asakusa, Tokyo, Japan and currently resides in north Tokyo with her
husband and two children. She studied English in junior high school and high school like many
children her age and got very high marks in her English classes. She was very interested in English
and hoped to continue her studies after high school. Unfortunately, she did not continue studying

5

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

English after high school as she became too busy with work. However, at the age of 21 she went tostudy English in the United States for 3 weeks. She lived with a family in the San Francisco area andenjoyed the experience immensely. This experience opened her eyes to American English culture
and motivated her to continue studying again. When she returned to Japan, she met an American ayear later, then moved to the United States and married. Before returning to Japan, she lived withher husband in the United States for a little more than 5 years and during that time was intensively
immersed in American English culture.
The learner feels that although her English has improved dramatically since she first started
studying, there have been many situations in which she would have liked to have spoken with more
confidence and have been more fully understood. She made many friends of different cultures (e.g.,
Mexican, Korean, Chinese, and Macedonian) in the United States and for the most part spoke English
solely for the majority of her time there. She enjoyed the interactions with people of different cultures
and was interested in the fact that these people had to speak English as a L2 to each other since it was
the common language. She noted the differences in the way the various nonnative speakers spoke
American English as well as the ways native speakers spoke American English. She used English
with her husband and in-laws, at work, and when going about activities in her daily life. She worked
in the restaurant industry for almost 3 years and because of the experiences in her employment, she
encountered on a daily basis a variety of situations in which her blossoming English was tested.
She is very interested in determining exactly what kinds of English pronunciation problems she
has, as well as what grammatical mistakes she often makes (though that is not within the scope of
this paper). She is aware that her pronunciation is not always as accurate as she would like, but at thesame time knows that she is comprehended with little effort in her interactions with native speakers.
She holds no lofty goals with her pronunciation improvement in this study but nevertheless is very
motivated in becoming a more intelligible English speaker and is looking forward to this project with
an open mind and a keen interest.

Procedures of Data Collection
The data collected in this study was obtained from two different sources. The first source, adiagnostic passage excerpted from Prator and Robinett (1985), was performed in the initial treatment
session to determine the learner’s pronunciation problems. This diagnostic passage was transcribedand data regarding the learner’s pronunciation problems were collected and analyzed by the author.
The passage was administered once again, in the final treatment session, to determine the learner’s
pronunciation improvement for the specific phoneme that is being investigated. The second sourcefor data collection was free conversation. Each treatment session contained free conversation
between the learner and the interviewer. The conversational dialogue in each treatment session wastranscribed and the resulting data were collected and analyzed by the author.

6

THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISEOver view and Description of Sessions
Week

What was covered

Exercises performed

Purpose1

15-min free conversation;
5-min diagnostic passage

Diagnostic passage from Prator &Robinett (1985)

To determine learner’s difficulties

2

15-min free conversation;
15-min practice

Pronunciation of vowels using mirror;
pronunciation practice of words withdifferent vowel sounds

Reassess learner difficulties;
reconfirm initial assessments

3

15-min free conversation;
15-min practice

Listen & repeat practice with /ɚ/ words;
cloze dictation with /ɚ/ words

Raise awareness of /ɚ/ sounds
especially in word final position4

15-min free conversation;
15-min practice

Practice with sentences with different
vowel sounds (Prator & Robinett,
Ch. 12, pp. 145–146); /a/ and /ə/ vs. /ɚ/minimal pairs

Assess overall competency ofvowel pronunciation; focus on
difference between /a/, /ə/, and /ɚ/sounds5

15-min free conversation;
15-min practiceReading passage excerpted from Prator& Robinett, p. 120 with questions; listen& repeat with /ɚ/ word list and sentences(Prator & Robinett, p. 142)

Listen and repeat exercise worked
on words in isolation; reading
passage worked on words incontext

6

15-min free conversation;
15-min practiceReading passage from Shepherd, 2003,
pp. 26–27; listen & repeat and spelling
test with /ɚ/ words

Assess the improvement ofcontextual /ɚ/ sounds; focus onproper pronunciation of /ɚ/ sounds

7

15-min free conversation;
5-min diagnostic passage

Initial diagnostic passage from Prator &Robinett

To determine how far the learnerhas progressed

Analysis of Diagnostic Passage and Free Conversation in Session 1
The diagnostic passage was taken from Prator and Robinett (1985, pp. x–xi). The passage
consisted of 11 relatively short sentences describing the experiences of a student abroad, specificallyof a student living in the United States. There was no vocabulary that could have been considered
too difficult for the learner, although there were numerous examples of words featuring sounds
commonly mispronounced by Japanese learners. The instructions given to the learner were the same
given by Prator and Robinett: She was to read the passage at normal speed and not to focus overly on
pronunciation. The aim for the reading was to sound as natural as possible.
The passage revealed that the learner has many pronunciation problems. However, these
problems do not largely affect intelligibility, and none are too severe as to render her speech
incomprehensible in any way. Though there were many instances of pronunciation errors, there wereno clear patterns of pronunciation errors, neither with segmental features nor with suprasegmental
features. Consonantal pronunciation problems included substitution, and deletion of final consonants.
With these problems considered, consonants do not seem to be a major problem facing the learner.
The learner exhibited many pronunciation errors involving vowels whereby many improper
vowel substitutions were made. Some of these substitutions included: /i/ and /e/ for /ɪ/; /a/ for/o/, /æ/, and /ɚ/; /o/ and /ʌ/ for /ɔ/; and /a/ and /o/ for /ʌ/. There was a tendency to delete the/r/ when it occurred after a vowel (e.g., /er/) and substitute it with a vowel. For example, first was
pronounced /fast/. This type of vocalization substitution error occurred most frequently of all the
pronunciation errors, occurring six times in the passage. Insertion of an extra schwa occurred twice;once after a final consonant in a polysyllabic word (‘United’) and once in word-medial position in a7

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

polysyllabic word (‘advantage’).
The learner did not have many suprasegmental errors and the errors that occurred did not
greatly affect intelligibility. Incorrect stress occurred but the meaning of both the word and thesentence were not affected. Intonational errors occurred but not with the frequency that would
warrant special attention in this study. The learner’s rhythm was slightly slow, as she was a bit tired,but overall it was at a normal speed and could be comprehended with little effort.
Free conversation with this learner revealed pronunciation errors that were consistent with theerrors that occurred in the diagnostic passage. There were few consonantal errors and those that
occurred had little negative impact on intelligibility. The conversation confirmed that the learner has
difficulty with accurate pronunciation of vowels and has a tendency to substitute an improper vowel,e.g., /æ/ for /a/, or replace a vowel for a consonant, e.g., /ə/ for /r/. This latter error occurred mostoften in words where /r/ follows a vowel, occurring numerous times in conversation. Though there
is not a significant effect on intelligibility with these vowel errors, the learner is concerned by thesepronunciation problems and is hopeful that in further sessions they can be corrected. One other errorthat occurred (twice) was the insertion of /ə/ at the end of a polysyllabic word and once at the end of amonosyllabic word. Two errors occurred at the end of ‘United,’ the same place that the error occurredin the diagnostic passage. Again, though not too much of a hindrance on intelligibility, the learner isaware of her mispronunciation and is eager to make improvement.
The treatment proposed for the learner in this study will consist of the improvement ofpronunciation involving /ɚ/ sounds in word-medial and word-final positions. This sound has beenchosen as it was the pronunciation error that occurred with the most frequency. Again, it should
be noted that the sound /ɝ/ will be considered the same as /ɚ/; though they differ in stress, they
are practically the same sound. From the initial assessment it has been determined that the learnerrecognizes the sound adequately, but it is with the specific pronunciation of the sound that needs
focused instruction to achieve improvement.
A variety of different exercises and activities are proposed to aid in the learner’s progress andassessment will be determined throughout the treatment sessions. Listen and repeat exercises,
minimal pairs with sentences, cloze dictation, spelling tests, contextual exercises, and reading
passages will be designed with the aim of improving the proper pronunciation of /ɚ/ sounds. The
learner is by no means unintelligible with respect to these sounds, but the desire for more accurate
pronunciation is quite strong. Free conversation in each treatment session will also be conducted toassess the ability of /ɚ/ pronunciation in natural context. Free conversation dialogues, as well as boththe initial and final diagnostic passages, will be partially transcribed and analyzed by the author todetermine the level of the student’s improvement.

Results
In order to investigate how the learner’s pronunciation of the /ɚ/ sound changed over the 7-weekperiod, a diagnostic reading passage was conducted in the initial and final session to measure thechange of accurate pronunciation of /ɚ/. The learner’s performance in free conversation was also
monitored during the 7-week treatment period.
Figure 1 shows the accuracy percentage of correct /ɚ/ pronunciation in the diagnostic reading
passages from the initial session, to the final session. A comparison of the two diagnostic passages
showed that correct pronunciation of /ɚ/ rose from 18% to 36%. While these are rather low accuracy
percentages, they do represent a significant increase in accuracy over the treatment period.

8

THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE

Accuracy percentage

40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

InitialFinal
Sessions

Figure 1. Accuracy percentage of /ɚ/ in initial and final diagnostic passages

As stated above, the learner’s performance in free conversation in each session was monitored
over the 7-week treatment period. There were six free conversation sessions during the 7-week period
and one reading passage (Session 6). The reading passage will be considered as a free conversation
session as its data were transcribed and analyzed the same as the data in the free conversation
sessions.
Figure 2 shows the accuracy percentage in free conversation for the correct pronunciation of /ɚ/during the 7-week treatment period. The chart illustrates that the learner’s accurate pronunciationof /ɚ/ is quite erratic with a big decrease in accurate pronunciation shown in Session 4 with acorresponding rise in Session 5. Overall accurate pronunciation in free conversation was 37%, slightly
higher than the 36% accurate pronunciation in the final diagnostic reading.

Accuracy percentage

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Sessions
Figure 2. Accuracy percentage for correct /ɚ/ pronunciation in free conversation sessions

Table 1 gives examples of the devices used to pronounce /ɚ/ in the two diagnostic reading
passages. Three types of devices were used: accurate pronunciation, vocalization, and final consonant
deletion.

9

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

Table 1
Devices Used to Pronounce /ɚ/ in Diagnostic Passages
ExampleDevices/ə.nə.ðɚ/

Accurate pronunciation of /ɚ//fast/

Vocalization/mæ.nə/Final consonant deletion

Table 2 illustrates the frequency of the devices used to pronounce /ɚ/ in the two diagnostic
reading passages. Vocalization occurred nine times, final consonant deletion occurred seven times,
while accurate pronunciation occurred six times.
Table 2Frequency of Devices Used to Pronounce /ɚ/ in Diagnostic Passages/ɚ/Device frequency (# of occasions)

Diagnostic passages

Accurate pronunciation

Vocalization

Final consonant deletion

Initial

2

6

3

Final

4

3

4

All

6

9

7

Table 3 shows the frequency percentage for each device used to pronounce /ɚ/ in the two
diagnostic passages. Vocalization occurred with the greatest frequency at 41% while accurate
pronunciation occurred with the least frequency at 27%. Final consonant deletion’s frequency
percentage was 32%.
Table 3
Device Frequency Percentage of /ɚ/ in Diagnostic Passages/ɚ/Device frequency percentage (%)

Diagnostic passages

Accurate pronunciation

Vocalization

Final consonant deletion

Initial

18

55

27

Final

36

27

37

All

27

41

32

Table 4 gives the examples of the devices used to pronounce /ɚ/ in free conversation. The
same types of devices used in the diagnostic passages were used in free conversation: accurate
pronunciation, vocalization, and final consonant deletion.
Table 4
Devices Used to Pronounce /ɚ/ in Free Conversation
ExampleDevices/pɪk.tʃɚz/

Accurate pronunciation of /ɚ//ən.də.stænd/Vocalization/ri.mɛm.bə/

Final consonant deletion

10THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE

Table 5 illustrates the frequency of the devices used to pronounce /ɚ/ in free conversation. The
device used to pronounce /ɚ/ with the greatest frequency was vocalization which occurred 33 times
in all sessions. Accurate pronunciation occurred 31 times and final consonant deletion occurred withthe least frequency, occurring 20 times. Vocalization did not occur in Session 6.
Table 5Frequency of Devices Used to Pronounce /ɚ/ in Free Conversation/ɚ/Sessions

Device frequency (# of occasions)
Accurate pronunciation

Vocalization

Final consonant deletion

1

4

9

3

2

4

4

2

3

4

4

1

4

2

9

4

5

9

6

2

6

6

0

6

7

2

1

2

All

31

33

20

Table 6 shows the frequency percentage for each device used to pronounce /ɚ/. Vocalization
occurred with the greatest frequency at 39% while final consonant deletion occurred with the least
frequency at 24%. Accurate pronunciation frequency was 37%. Vocalization did not occur in Session 6.
Table 6
Device Frequency Percentage of /ɚ/ in Free Conversation/ɚ/Sessions

Device frequency percentage (%)
Accurate pronunciation

Vocalization

Final consonant deletion

1

25

56

19

2

40

40

20

3

44

44

12

4

13

60

27

5

53

35

12

6

50

0

50

7

40

20

40

All

37

39

24

Figure 3 shows the frequency percentage of all devices used to pronounce / ɚ / in freeconversation. There is a gap in vocalization between Sessions 5 and 7 as it did not occur in Session
6. The patterns for the devices are all somewhat erratic as there are no consistent patterns ofpronunciation. The figure shows that the learner makes considerably more pronunciation errors due
to vocalization processes than final consonant deletion processes.

11Percentage

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Accurate pronunciation
Vocalization
Final consonant deletion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Sessions
Figure 3. Device frequency percentage of /ɚ/ in free conversation

Discussion
The initial research question, whether a motivated Japanese learner could improve her
pronunciation of / ɚ /over a 7-week period of conversation practice and focused exercise was
supported by the data. There was marked improvement with the target phoneme in the diagnostic
passages over the treatment period, the results of which can be seen in Figure 1.
The pronunciation errors and lack of pronunciation improvement in free conversation over
the treatment period suggest that the learner’s errors were due to the phonological make-up of her
native language, Japanese. R-colored schwa is a rather complex sound, a combination of two sounds,
schwa and /r/, incorporating characteristics of both. It is the /r/ sound which gave the learner themost difficulty and this is understandable as it does not exist in Japanese the same way as in North
American English; i.e., the Japanese pronunciation of /r/ is pronounced somewhere between the
North American /r/ and /l/. This difficulty in pronunciation might result from a place of articulation
error in that the tongue is not in the correct position to accurately pronounce the sound. This would
seem to indicate that more articulatory training, which would focus on correct tongue positioning, isnecessary and would be of great benefit.
The learner in this study began studying English at the onset of puberty and did not begin
speaking English with any frequency until after puberty. This could partially explain why more
improvement was not shown as this age is considered late onset (Ioup, 2008) and is right on theborder of the critical period of being able to acquire native-like L2 sounds. So important is the age at
which a L2 learner begins acquiring a L2 that Ioup (2008) says “the onset age of L2 remained the mostimportant predictor of degree of foreign accent in the assessment of child and adult onset learners” (p.
46).
The difficulty for the learner trying to master the pronunciation /ɚ/ is visible in the overall
progress of pronunciation of /ɚ/. Figure 1 shows that the learner improved her pronunciation in the
diagnostic passages, while Figure 2 shows that the learner’s improvement in free conversation was
nonconclusive. As the diagnostic passages are more controlled and thus more formal in style than freeconversation, Major’s (1987) view that learners often achieve accurate speech in more formal styles
than in running speech, was corroborated.
It should be noted that in some English dialects, British English for example, the vocalization

12

THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE(in word-medial positions) or final consonant deletion (in word-final positions) processes usedby the learner to pronounce /ɚ/, are perfectly acceptable. Therefore, ‘understand’ pronounced/əndəstænd/, and ‘number’ pronounced /nʌmbə/, are perfectly acceptable in RP. However, theresearcher’s accent does not feature these elements and the focus of this study is on the pronunciationof North American English sounds. The learner has had limited exposure to non-North American
English accents suggesting that the L1 was influencing her pronunciation in that Japanese syllables
do not end with the consonant /r/, and always (with the exception of those ending in /n/) conclude
with a vowel.
Minimal pairs listen and repeat exercises were most effective in fostering the correct
pronunciation for the target phoneme for the learner in this study. The learner concentrated on these
forms and was usually able (more than 50% of the time) to pronounce the correct sound. Vocalizationand final consonant deletion processes were still used, but not as often as in free conversation. As
the learner put these minimal pairs into sentences and spoke them more contextually, her accuracy
decreased, and vocalization and final consonant deletion processes increased. This would again
suggest that the learner is consistent with Major (1987) that learners tend to pronounce accuratesounds in more formal settings/styles than in running speech.
There are numerous limitations of this study but possible the greatest is the duration: Perhaps
in a longer study, for example 6 months or a full year, the results would have shown greater
improvement or oppositely they might have shown less gains than the gains shown in this study. The
learner in the study was motivated and a fairly fluent speaker, pronouncing often troublesome (forJapanese learners) phonetic forms (such as /b/, /v/, /sh/, and /l/) with little difficulty. For learners
who are not as motivated or as fluent in speaking, a different type of study, or different exercises,
would have to be used. Another limitation also involves time and was the time spent in each session.
Most sessions consisted of 15 min of conversation and 15 min of practice. This was mainly due to thelearner being a busy mother. Doubling the amount of time to 30 min each of conversation and practicemight have caused more or less favorable results. A further limitation of this study was my relativelack of experience in conducting a study such as this. As this was my first study of this type, there
surely are points that were overlooked and others that were not even realized.
Further studies would provide excellent opportunities for the learner to continue to improve
her pronunciation and become a more accurate speaker. The next study could focus specificallyon the consonant /r/ sound. As this study was concerned /ɚ/, it is logical to concentrate further
work specifically on /r/ as overall improvement with pronunciation of /r/ would correspond to
overall pronunciation improvement with /ɚ/. Though the learner did not show considerable trouble
accurately pronouncing /r/, it is the researcher’s opinion that the sound could be pronounced moreclearly, thus warranting special attention to it. Exercises in the next study would be similar to thoseused here, with some new exercises included as well. As the learner’s fluency is quite high andbecause she enjoys music, songs with lyrics containing the target sound would be included to enliven
some of the sessions.
In conclusion, this study was an attempt to see if pronunciation improvement could be made in a
motivated Japanese learner over a 7-week period of conversation practice and focused exercise. The
phoneme chosen for study was /ɚ/ as it proved to be the most troublesome sound after diagnostic
tests were performed and analyzed. The goal of the study was to foster more accurate and intelligible
pronunciation on the part of the learner, but by no means was an attempt to achieve a native-likeaccent. A variety of exercises and activities were performed that focused on the target phoneme andfree conversation was held in each treatment session. The results of the diagnostic tests performed13外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

showed an improvement in accuracy of /ɚ/ from 18% in the initial diagnostic to 36% in the final
diagnostic. This illustrates that a motivated learner can make pronunciation improvement during a
7-week period of conversation practice and focused exercise. The fact that improvement was madewould argue that pronunciation can and should be taught and practiced in L2 classrooms and should
be considered a skill as essential as reading or writing. By becoming more aware of the phoneme andthe processes involved in making pronunciation errors, the learner is on the right track in becoming
a more accurate and intelligible English speaker and stands to benefit even more from continued
practice and hard work.

References
Avery, P., & Ehrlich, S. (1992). Teaching American English pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bradlow, A., Pisoni, D., Akabane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to
identify English /r/ and /l/. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2299–2310.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Goodwin, J. (1996). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachersof English to speakers of other languages. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Couper, G. (2003, December). The value of an explicit pronunciation syllabus in ESOL teaching.
Prospect, 8(3), 53–70.
Derwing, T., & Munro, M. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A researchbased approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 379–397.
Derwing, T., Munro, M., & Wiebe, G. (1998). Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation
instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393–410.
Hahn, L. D. (2004). Primary stress and intelligibility: Research to motivate the teaching ofsuprasegmentals. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2), 201–223.
Ioup, G. (2008). Exploring the role of age in the acquisition of a second language phonology. In J.
H. Edwards & M. A. Zampini (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 41–57).
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Jenkins, J. (2001). The phonology of English as an international language. New York: Oxford.
Levis, J. M. (1999). Intonation in theory and practice, revisited. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 37–65.
Levis, J. M. (2005). Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in teaching pronunciation. TESOL
Quarterly, 39, 369–377.
Major, R. (1987). A model for interlanguage phonology. In G. Ioup & S. Weinberger (Eds.),
Interlanguage phonology (pp. 101–123). New York: Newbury House.
Munro, M., & Derwing, T. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speechof second language learners. In J. Leather (Ed.), Phonological issues in language learning (pp.
285–310). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Prator, C. H., & Robinett, B. W. (1985). Manual of American English pronunciation (4th ed.). New
York: CBS College Publishing.
Saito, K. (2007, December). The influence of explicit phonetic instruction on pronunciation teachingin EFL settings: The case of English vowels and Japanese learners of English. The Linguistics
Journal, 3(3), 16–40.
Shepherd, J. (2003). A Christmas story. New York: Broadway Books.
Warner, N., & Arai, T. (2001). Japanese mora-timing: A review. Phonetica, 58, 1–25.
Wong, R. (1985). Does pronunciation teaching have a place in the communicative classroom? In D.

14

THE DEGREE OF IMPROVEMENT OF A JAPANESE LEARNERʼS PRONUNCIATION OF R-COLORED SCHWA (/ɚ/)
OVER A 7-WEEK PERIOD OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE AND FOCUSED EXERCISE

Tannen & J. Alatis (Eds.), Georgetown University roundtable on language and linguistics (pp.
226–236). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.

15

外国語教育研究ジャーナル 第 1 巻（JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 1）

Appendix
Obligator y Occasion Word Lists
Table A1 contains words from each device used to pronounce /ɚ/ during free conversation in each of
the practice sessions.
Table A1
SessionAccurate pronunciation

Vocalization

1*

anotherbetteranswers
first
offered1

culturespictures (2x)culture2

accessories
picture3

culturallearns (2x)

Final consonant deletion
mannersure

power

naturesnorthernunderstand (7x)remember

were (2x)groceries
popularcurry (4x)sure (2x)Americanthrillerbetterthrillers

first
understanding

understand (2x) sure4

billiard

third

Americancurling (2x)perfect
person’s

circlefigurepersonunderstand5

curling
third
serve

figuregirl (2x)weathercurlinglearnerunderstanding

first
after (2x)understand (2x)6closerpearl
teachercornertarantula
Weather’s

after
rubberpaper (3x)silver7*

Americanweather

Beverly7

answers
culturalbetteroffered

first*Initial/final diagnostic passage

16

learns (2x)measuresure (2x)number(nothing)

rememberwereanotherpowermannersure