Speech Interference as the Result of a Two-Pronged Negative Influence

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

The article considers the problem of the interaction of languages in the process of forming a bilingual personality and society. A comparative study of the material, the mother tongue and the studied language, reveals the causes of interference in bilingual speech in a foreign language. Traditionally, the causes of speech interference are determined by the characteristics of a native language, which are not found in the language studied, therefore they negatively affect the process of mastering the second language, which generates speech errors. This is a one-sided approach to understand interference in general and its origins (causes) in particular. The article considers the problem of a two-way approach to understanding the phenomenon of speech interference. Speech interference is a result of the negative influence of both the characteristics of the native language and the characteristics of the language being studied, i.e. it is a simultaneous two-way process in dual unity. Both processes of negative influence on an individual’s mastery of a second language are defined as one action in bilinguality, giving the same result - interference in bilingual speech, which is expressed in phonetic-phonological, semantic and other types and types of speech errors. The simultaneous and inconsistent negative influence of the features of the native language and the non-native language considered on the material of consonant combinations in the initial words of the Russian and Kazakh languages, when the absence of combinations of consonants in this position of the Kazakh word and their presence in this position of the Russian word to the same extent and at the same time negatively influence on the correct - the literary pronunciation of Kazakh words and Russian words. Thus, in contrast to the traditional explanation of the phenomenon of speech interference as a result of a one-sided negative process, it is proposed and proved that this phenomenon is the result of (simultaneous) two-way influence of features, native and studied languages. Errors of an individual in speech in a foreign language are considered according to the provisions of the syntagmatic typology of interference (plus segmentation, or minus segmentation).

About the authors

Mahanbet Dzhusupov

Uzbekistan State University of World Languages

Author for correspondence.
Email: mah.dzhusupov@mail.ru

Doctor of science in philology, Professor, Honorary Professor and Honorary Head of the Department of the Russian Language

21a, Kichik halka yuli str., G9a, Tashkent, The Republic of Uzbekistan, 100138

References

  1. Ljubimova, N.A. (1988). The phonetic aspect of communication in a non-native language in the context of Finnish-Russian bilingualism. Moscow: LGU. (In Russ.).
  2. Dzhusupov, M. (1991). Sound systems of Russian and Kazakh languages. Syllable. Interference. Pronunciation training. Tashkent: «Fan». (In Russ.).
  3. Polivanov, E.D. (1933). Russian grammar in comparison with the Uzbek languages. Tashkent. (In Russ.).
  4. Polivanov, E.D. (1968). Experience of private methodology of teaching Russian to Uzbeks. Tashkent: Ukituvchi. (In Russ.).
  5. Reformatsky, A.A. (1970). Phonology at the service of teaching the pronunciation of a nonnative language In From the history of Russian phonology. Moscow: Nauka. pp. 505—515. (In Russ.).
  6. Shcherba, L.V. (1963). Phonetics of the French language. Moscow: Vysshaja shkola. (In Russ.).
  7. Karlinskij, A.E. (1972). Typology of speech interference. Foreign Linguistics and Literature, 11, 9—16. (In Russ.).
  8. Vajnrajh, U. (1972). Monolingualism and multilingualism In New in linguistics. Issue VI. Moscow: Progress. pp. 25—60. (In Russ.).
  9. Haugen, Je. (1972). Language contact In New in linguistics. Issue VI. Moscow: Progress. pp. 61—80. (In Russ.).
  10. Vereshhagin, E.M. (1969). Psychological and methodological characteristics of bilingualism (bilingualism). Moscow: MGU. (In Russ.).
  11. Rozencvejg, V.Ju. (1972). Language contacts: linguistic issues. Leningrad: Nauka. (In Russ.).
  12. Azimov, Je.G. & Shhukin, A.N. (2009). New dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching). Moscow. (In Russ.).
  13. Shhukin, A.N. (2007). Linguodidactic Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow: Astrel’: AST: Hranitel’. (In Russ.).
  14. Rozental’, D.Je. & Telenkova, M.A. (1976). Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms. Moscow: Prosveshhenie. (In Russ.).
  15. Zhukova, I.N., Lebed’ko, M.G., Proshina, Z. & Juzefovich, N.G. (2013). Glossary of terms for intercultural communication. Moscow: Flinta, Nauka. (In Russ.).
  16. Dzhusupov, M. (1995). Baitursynov’s phonemography and the phonology of singharmonism. Tashkent: «Uzbekistan». (In Russ.).
  17. Dzhusupov, M., Alibekova, K.E. & Mazhitaeva, Sh. (2013). Special vocabulary and proverbs (linguo-contrasting and methodological aspects). Tashkent: MERIYUS. (In Russ.).
  18. Dzhusupov, M. (2016). Interlanguage and intercultural contact: concept, word, psycho image, interference. Philological sciences. NDVSh. Moscow. pp. 22—34. (In Russ.).
  19. Kopylenko, M.M. & Ahmedzhanova, Z.K. (1984). Phonetic interference in the Russian speech of Kazakhs. Alma-Ata: Nauka. pp. 8—10. (In Russ.).
  20. Bel’dijan, D.M. (1980). Scientific and methodological foundations of teaching the phonetics of the modern Russian language to students of national groups: Experience in systems analysis. Tashkent: «Fan». (In Russ.).
  21. Zakir’janov, K.Z. (2015). Comparative study of languages of different structure: linguistic and methodological aspect. Russian humanitarian journal, 3, 224—233. (In Russ.).
  22. Zakharyin, B.A. (1966). Phonetic changes during linguistic contacts (on the example of vowel phonemes in English borrowings in Hindi). Peoples of Asia and Africa, 5, 110—126. (In Russ.).
  23. Jusupov, U.K. (1980). Problems of Comparative Linguistics, Tashkent: «Fan». (In Russ.).
  24. Buranov, Zh.B. (1983). Comparative typology of English and Turkic languages. Moscow: Vysshaja shkola. (In Russ.).
  25. Big encyclopedic dictionary. Linguistics. V.N. Yartseva (Ed.). Moscow: Nauchnoe izdanie «Bol’shaja sovetskaja jenciklopedija». (In Russ.)
  26. Dictionary of Linguistics. (1998). Almaty: «Gylym». (In Kazakh).
  27. The Dictionary of the literary Kazak language. (2011). Vol. 7. Almaty. (In Kazakh).
  28. Bodujen de Kurtenje, I.A. (1963). Selected Works on General Linguistics. Vol. 1—2. Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. (In Russ.).
  29. Trubeckoj, N.S. (1960). Fundamentals of Phonology. Moscow: Inostrannaja literatura. (In Russ.).
  30. Zinder, L.R. (1979). General phonetics. Moscow: Vysshaja shkola. (In Russ.).
  31. Bajtursynov, A. (1991). Linguistics (works on the Kazakh language and education). Almaty: «Ana tіlі». (In Kazakh).
  32. Dzhunisbekov, A. (1988). Problems of the Turkic verbal prosody and the harmony of the Kazakh language. Author’s abstract. dis. doct. philol. sciences. Alma-Ata. (In Russ.).
  33. Dzhusupov, M. (2001). Sociological aspect of the theory of psychological phoneme I.A. Baudouin de Courtenay. Higher School of Kazakhstan, 4(5), 62—69. (In Russ.).
  34. The linguistic picture of the world of the Teleuts. (2016). Collective monograph. L. Araeva (Ed.) Kemerovo: Kemerovskij gosudarstvennyj universitet. (In Russ.).
  35. Moradi, M. (2014). The analysis of language transfer in course of mastering Russian stress patterns in the absence of natural language environment. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 1, 149—158.

Copyright (c) 2021 Dzhusupov M.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies