Contents introduction 1

The structure of the research. It consists of the following parts: Introduction, two chapters, Conclusion and List of used literature

Chapter I. Introduction to the course of theoretical phonetics

1.1. Phonetics as a Branch of Linguistics

Phonetics is a branch of linguistics that studies how humans produce and perceive sounds, or in the case of sign languages, the equivalent aspects of sign. Phoneticians linguists who specialize in phonetics study the physical properties of speech. The field of phonetics is traditionally divided into three sub-disciplines based on the research questions involved such as how humans plan and execute movements to produce speech (articulatory phonetics), how various movements affect the properties of the resulting sound (acoustic phonetics), or how humans convert sound waves to linguistic information (auditory phonetics). Traditionally, the minimal linguistic unit of phonetics is the phone a speech sound in a language which differs from the phonological unit of phoneme; the phoneme is an abstract categorization of phones [1,20].
Phonetics broadly deals with two aspects of human speech: production the ways humans make sounds and perception the way speech is understood. The communicative modality of a language describes the method by which a language produces and perceives languages. Languages with oral-aural modalities such as English produce speech orally (using the mouth) and perceive speech aurally (using the ears). Sign languages, such as Australian Sign Language (Auslan) and American Sign Language (ASL), have a manual-visual modality, producing speech manually (using the hands) and perceiving speech visually (using the eyes). ASL and some other sign languages have in addition a manual-manual dialect for use in tactile signing by deafblind speakers where signs are produced with the hands and perceived with the hands as well.
Language production consists of several interdependent processes which transform a non-linguistic message into a spoken or signed linguistic signal. After identifying a message to be linguistically encoded, a speaker must select the individual words known as lexical items to represent that message in a process called lexical selection. During phonological encoding, the mental representation of the words are assigned their phonological content as a sequence of phonemes to be produced. The phonemes are specified for articulatory features which denote particular goals such as closed lips or the tongue in a particular location. These phonemes are then coordinated into a sequence of muscle commands that can be sent to the muscles, and when these commands are executed properly the intended sounds are produced [2,13].
These movements disrupt and modify an airstream which results in a sound wave. The modification is done by the articulators, with different places and manners of articulation producing different acoustic results. For example, the words tack and sack both begin with alveolar sounds in English, but differ in how far the tongue is from the alveolar ridge. This difference has large effects on the air stream and thus the sound that is produced. Similarly, the direction and source of the airstream can affect the sound. The most common airstream mechanism is pulmonic using the lungs but the glottis and tongue can also be used to produce airstreams [5].
Language perception is the process by which a linguistic signal is decoded and understood by a listener. In order to perceive speech the continuous acoustic signal must be converted into discrete linguistic units such as phonemes, morphemes, and words. In order to correctly identify and categorize sounds, listeners prioritize certain aspects of the signal that can reliably distinguish between linguistic categories. While certain cues are prioritized over others, many aspects of the signal can contribute to perception. For example, though oral languages prioritize acoustic information, the McGurk effect shows that visual information is used to distinguish ambiguous information when the acoustic cues are unreliable.
It’s not just between American and British English that there are variations in the pronunciation of sounds within a word. In fact, there are many variations between different regions in Britain, let alone from country to country. Even people who seemingly speak the same variety of English will often have slight differences in the way they pronounce sounds [6].
When I look in the dictionary, I’m almost always given one phonemic transcription as though there is only one way to say a particular word. If I’m lucky, I’ll be given two – RP and Standard American. Not only is this a very false picture, but it is even a simplification within that particular model. Here are just a couple of examples: At the moment I live in Nottingham in central England. People here will talk about /græs/ (grass) whereas in Oxford they would talk about /grɑːs/, which is what my dictionary shows. In Nottingham, people take the /bʊs/ (bus) whereas the dictionary tells me it should be /bʌs/. We’re talking about a distance of around 175 kilometres between Nottingham and Oxford and yet they seem to speak a different language!
These differences don’t arise because the words are part of connected speech. They arise simply because people have a different accent, a different standard, a different model. It appears that the further north you travel in the UK, the shorter the vowel sounds get in words (although this is a broad generalization).
Jokes often rely on word play, homonyms, homophones, etc. Here’s one that uses pronunciation to create the joke:
A man walks into a bar with a giraffe and they both have a drink of beer. Afterwards, the giraffe falls over and goes to sleep. The man leaves the bar without the giraffe. The barman then runs after the man and says, “Hey! You can’t leave that lying there.” “It’s not a lion, it’s a giraffe,” says the man.
Now, how does this work? Well, if you say the sentences at normal speed then the word lying in the sentence the barman says comes out as /laɪn/ which sounds closer to /ˈlaɪən/ (lion) than /ˈlaɪɪŋ/ (lying).
Of course, what’s happening here is a feature of connected speech. But, this is precisely why prescriptive rules as to how words should be pronounced are pretty much unworkable. What we need to be doing is exposing our students to a variety of accents and ways of pronouncing words and making them aware that there are differences [21]. 
Etymologically speaking, the term identity means sameness. It entails membership in one or more categories such as nation, ethnicity, race, religion, class, profession, or gender. Being a white American 10 B. Kumaravadivelu Christian woman, for instance, connects one with aspects of whiteness, Americanness, Christianness, and womanhood whichever way they are defined. Although sameness is a salient feature of identity, it is difference that most often stands out in marking one’s identity. Each of us can justifiably say “I am who I am because I am not you” or, in the words of Amin Maalouf (2000, p. 10), “my identity is what prevents me from being identical to anybody else.” We can best understand the concept of identity by understanding the concept of Self. An individual’s sense of Self is broadly defined by the relationship between the individual and the community, and how the individual navigates the complex terrain of Self and society. Although there is no single, overriding concept of identity, there are two sociological narratives that have well-articulated positions on it modernism and postmodernism (for a detailed discussion on self and identity, see Ferguson, 2009).
Identity and Modernism To put it in a nutshell, during the days of modernity (a period ranging from mid-17th to mid-20th century), the individual was largely expected to constitute his/her identity in tune with pre-existent and relatively unchanging societal norms. More than anything else, the individual’s identity was tied almost inextricably to affiliation to family and community. Everybody had a neatly designated, hierarchically-coded place under the sun. And, they were expected to remain there. While some maneuvering was indeed possible, individuals encountered an essentialized and totalized concept of identity within which they had to find personal meaning. With socially accepted boundaries of an objectified external world imposed on them, individuals had very little meaningful choice outside of clearly delineated characteristics of birth and ethnic origin. In other words, the “modern” Self was more externally imposed than self-constructed. Identity and Postmodernism Unlike modernism, the currently prevailing narrative of postmodernism (a period ranging from the mid-20th century onwards) treats individual identity as something that is actively constructed on an on-going basis. It sees identity as fragmented, not unified; multiple, not singular; expansive, not bounded. It bestows a modicum of agency on the individual in determining a sense of Self. In this view, identity formation is conditioned not merely by inherited traditions such as culture, or by external exigencies such as history, or by ideological constructs such as power, but also on the individual’s ability and willingness to exercise agency [5,6].
Individual Identity 11 The catchword for postmodern identity is fragmentation. It captures the epitome of postmodern life. The fragment, according to sociologist Harvie Ferguson, is not like a splinter of wood or a shard of glass; a piece broken off from an intact and uniform whole. The fragment is a detached portion that takes on a life of its own and may even gain the appearance of self-sufficiency as something unlike its parent body. (2009, p. 154, emphasis as in original) The fragmented identity takes on a life of its own through a process of becoming a process that is continuous, non-linear, and unstable. It is less preoccupied with the formation of a durable identity. Instead, it embraces the idea that identity is fluid and amorphous, one that is constantly and endlessly invented and reinvented.
It is because of this dynamic and incomplete nature of identity formation that Ferguson characterizes it as “the continuous creation of the fragment; a bricolage of the disjointed” (Ferguson, 2009, p. 184, emphasis as in original). Identity and Globalism As my brief account of the two narratives suggests, postmodernism has a much greater explanatory power than modernism in helping us understand and analyze the problematic nature of the concept of Self. However, it is my contention that we need even a broader perspective in order to fully understand the construction of self-identity in this globalized and globalizing world. I believe yet another narrative, globalism, is fast emerging as a crucial factor in identity formation. This is necessitated by fast-evolving global, national, social, and individual realities of the 21st century [8,11].
A brief discussion follows; for details, see Kumaravadivelu (2008). Globally, our world is marked by a near-collapsing of space, time, and borders, resulting in a run away flow of peoples, goods, and ideas across the world. This phenomenon is aided and accelerated by information revolution, or Internetization. Cultural images from far off lands are flashed across small screens in our living rooms in real time, enabling closer cultural contact than ever before. People now have a greater chance of knowing about others’ cultural way of life the good, the bad, and the ugly. The impact of globalization on the national psyche is telling. While people around the world see unparalleled opportunities for cultural growth, they also see unparalleled threats to their national and cultural identity. Islamic terrorism can in part be seen as one, extreme, response to the threat to local identity. In fact, globalization has only accentuated tribalization. As a result, people are simultaneously coming together and 12 B.
Kumaravadivelu pulling apart. Giddens (2000) was right when he asserted that globalization is indeed the reason for the revival of local cultural identities in different parts of the world. With the revival of local cultural identities, social life has come under severe stress. Ethnic, religious, or linguistic affiliations and affinities within a nation get played up. Each community strives to protect and preserve its own identity. Whenever there is a real or perceived threat to this identity, social unrest erupts. This undeniable social reality has a huge effect on the formation of individual identity, so much so that Richard Jenkins (2004, p. 4) claims that “all human identities are by definition social identities” (emphasis as in original). In spite of the pulls and pressures from global, national, and social realities, the individual still retains a considerable degree of agency in determining a sense of Self. After all, self-identity is “a matter of choosing, producing, expressing, and forming identities adequate to reflect the self that chooses and forms them” (Ferguson, 2009, p. 65). In choosing and forming identities in this complex world, individuals require critical knowledge that can help them tell the difference between information and disinformation, between ideas and ideologies, between the trivial and the consequential.
The Internetization of information systems makes such critical knowledge available to those individuals who seek it. Using the easily accessible knowledge-base and engaging in critical self-reflection, individuals now have the opportunity to evaluate their and others’ cultural value systems and develop a global cultural consciousness that has the potential to enrich their lives. Identity and the Teaching of EIL So, what has all the above to do with language learners and language teachers? Simply put, learners and teachers are individuals too. They too are engaged in the task of forming and reforming their identities in this globalized world. Because of the intricate connection between language and culture, language classes offer a unique opportunity for them to try to wrestle with, and articulate their anxieties about, the complexities of identity formation. EIL learners and teachers, in particular, have an added burden thrust upon them because of the globality and coloniality of the language they are dealing with. The interconnectedness between cultural globalization, identity formation, and English language education has started getting the attention it truly deserves from EIL educators (for recent book-length works, see Higgins, 2009; Kubota & Lin, 2009; Kumaravadivelu, 2008; Lin, 2008). Recent explorations in EIL learning, teaching, and teacher education have brought to the surface certain creative tensions that characterize the Individual Identity 13 formation of individual identities, compelling us to rethink some of the taken-for-granted theoretical and pedagogical assumptions about EIL. For instance, the role of integrative motivation for EIL learning has come under serious scrutiny in the context of contemporary realities of self and identity. Finding the notion of integrative motivation antithetical to identity formation, Coetzee-Van Rooy (2006) declares it untenable for EIL learners.
Following her, Ushioda and Dörnyei (2009, pp. 2–3) convincingly ask: “Does it make sense to talk about integrative attitudes when ownership of English does not necessarily rest with a specific community of speakers, whether native speakers of British, or American English varieties or speakers of World English varieties?” In a similar vein, language teachers have started critically analyzing and questioning their own readiness to deal with learner/teacher identities in their cross-cultural classrooms. In one such study, Connelly (2008) investigates how she, with her dominant constructed subject position as an Australian white woman, can address all the subjectivities that she encounters in her class full of students from various indigenous communities. She concludes: Mindful of the knowledge created through this narrative analysis, an educational implication is to ask what now must be done, and how can this knowledge about performance tensions inside subjectivities generate different pedagogical understandings and possibilities for the education of Australian indigenous students? (p. 100) Consequent to still unfolding learner/teacher demands and expectations in this globalized environment, language teacher educators are faced with the task of helping student-teachers become aware of how they are positioned in various historical and institutional contexts, and also become aware of the possibilities and strategies for transgression and transformation. Several expatriate teachers teaching EIL around the world as well as teachers who hail from local cultural communities are slowly realizing that the kind of personal and professional identities they bring with them to the classroom are becoming increasingly inadequate (Clarke, 2008; Widin, 2010). They are faced with the challenge of moving beyond well-entrenched discourses found in the professional literature that they have heavily relied upon. How participants’ subjectivities shape classroom climate, and how might potential tensions be negotiated have become an important issue in EIL teacher education. In light of the global and local developments both in the society at large and in our professional community, it is only legitimate to ask whether the teaching of EIL as a profession has been sensitive to 14 B [9].
Kumaravadivelu these developments and has come out with a sensible response that is commensurate with the challenges and opportunities. My reading of the prevailing situation leads me to answer the question with a resounding “no.” What I see is a profession that continues to get entangled in terminological knots and one that easily gets distracted by superficial solutions instead of confronting the underlying causes that call for a radical re-conceptualization.
It seems to me that, in order for our profession to meet the challenges of globalism in a deeply meaningful way, what is required is no less than an epistemic break from its dependency on the current West-oriented, Center-based knowledge systems that carry an indelible colonial coloration.

1.2. The Importance of Phonetics as a Theoretical Discipline

Pronunciation is the act or manner of pronouncing words, utterance of speech, a way of speaking a word, especially a way that is accepted or generally understood, and a graphic representation of the way a word spoken, using phonetic symbols. Pronunciation is a foundation to gain full communicative competence in communication. According to Kenworthy, teaching English pronunciation correctly is unavoidably a crucial thing in EFL teaching because correct pronunciation is needed for someone to communicate and understand the meaning correctly. It is related to Gilbert that good pronunciation will make a good communication. We can take assumption from that statement if the mispronunciation can create a bad communication between listener and the speaker. Mispronunciation in English word pronunciation can create misunderstanding and miscommunication. It is often found among learners who learn English as a foreign language. Mispronunciation can be very frustrating for the learner who may have a good command of grammar but have difficulty in understanding and being understood by another language community. That is why EFL learners need a guidance to differentiate the spelling of the word. The guidance will guide EFL to pronounce word correctly. It means, phonetic notation as guidance for EFL learners in pronouncing word is really important to avoid mispronunciation. There are two aspects which are usually known in English pronunciation, including speech and language. Focusing in language, language has three major components including phonology, vocabulary, and grammar. In this relation, phonology take an important role. According to Ramelan, phonology is the study of phones or speech sounds. There are two studies of phonology, phonetics and phonemics. Phonemics is the study of speech sounds with a view to finding out the significant units of sounds in a given language. Phonetics is the study of speech sounds as sounds without regard to their function as signaling units of language. Phonetics is divided into two kinds, namely Articulatory Phonetics and Acoustic phonetics. Articulatory phonetics studies speech sounds from the point of view of their ways of production by the speech organ. Focus on phonetic, phonetic teaching is needed to improve student’s pronunciation. According to Mompean, phonetic instruction has demonstrated positive benefits in pronunciation. Phonetic teaching provide material which guide the student to improve their pronunciation. Phonetic notation or sometimes called as phonetic transcription or phonetic symbols in phonetic teaching will guide the student to pronounce word correctly. Phonetic notation is symbols, which represent the pronunciation of the word. The student will know how is the pronunciation of the word by using phonetic notation, which is provided in the dictionary. It can be inferred that phonetics be a factor that influence student pronunciation. It means phonetic teaching is a guidance for the student to gain a good pronunciation. Based on the statement above phonetic notation in phonetic teaching is a factor that influence pronunciation ability. In a deal condition, student could pronounce vocabularies well by the phonetic notation that represent how is the pronunciation. The reality in IAIN Curup is the student still confused when pronounce word by using phonetic notation. Based on the observation and interview , student were easier to pronounce a word by teacher correction and electronic dictionary than the phonetic notation of the word in the dictionary. The real phenomena is the student in fifth and seventh semester have learned about pronunciation practice and also phonology especially phonetic. Unfortunately, they rare used phonetic notation in the dictionary and prefer to use electric dictionary to know how is the word’s pronunciation although they have learned how to read phonetic symbols in phonology and also learned about phonetic symbols in pronunciation practice include how to pronounce the phonetic symbols. Theoretically, student have better pronunciation if they have been taught explicit phonetic instruction. The student also can improve their pronunciation by themselves by using phonetic notation. The phenomena above shows that student rarely use phonetic notation to improve their pronunciation although they have learned pronunciation practice and phonology. Thus, the researcher interested in investigate the students’ perception toward phonetic notation in Learning English because student rarely use phonetic notation in the dictionary to improve their pronunciation. Perception is psychological process. According to George, perception refers how to the brain organizes and interprets sensory information. Until fairly recently, perception is consider by the school psychology called behaviorism to be largely a passive and inevitable response to stimuli. Then, Hornby argues that perception is the way you notice things, especially with the senses. According to Elliot, perception is the giving of meaning to the discrete, meaningless stimuli that initially arouse awareness. The meaning that an individual gives to any stimulus depends upon the manner in which that person patterns it. On the other word, perception is the process by which we receive and interpret information from the world around us. The world around us consists of various kinds and levels of physical energy. Our knowledge of the world corpus through our sense organs, which react to the energies. Certain wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation stimulate our eyes [11,14].
Our ears sense certain kinds of mechanical vibrations in the air. Our noses and our tongues are sensitive to certain chemical stimuli. Sense organs in our skin respond to pressure, temperature changes, and various stimuli related to pain. Sense organs in our joints, tendons and muscles are sensitive to body movement and position. 2. Pronunciation Learning According to Harmer, pronunciation is the way a word or a language is usually spoken, the manner in which someone utters a word. In line with the definitions above, Hornby says that pronunciation is the way in which a language is spoken, the way in which a word is pronounced, the way a person speaks the words of a language. From the definitions above, it shows conclusion that pronunciation is the way person utters a word or a language. Meanwhile, Goodwin as cited in CelceMurcia states that pronunciation is the language feature that most readily identifies speakers as non-native. The importance of pronunciation in English Foreign Language learning is to communicate appropriately and fluently. According to Kenworthy, it is important to pay attention in pronunciation because it results in whether or not someone’s message can be passed by the people. Moreover, gilbert stated that if someone cannot listen English well, she or he will cut off from the conversation. It can be conclude from the statements above that pronunciation give significant effect to the meaning of someone says. In pronunciation learning, phonetic instruction is needed to increase student pronunciation ability. According to Neufled, phonetic instruction has been shown to improve pronunciation. Phonetic instruction give significan effect for EFL learners to increase their ability in pronunciation. In other word, phonetic notation is needed in pronunciation learning as a tool to increase student ability in pronunci ation. Phonetics instruction in the FL classroom typically emphasizes the differences between learners’ and phonological systems with regards to phonetic inventories, articulation of analogous phones, grapheme–phoneme correspondences, and phonological processes. In addition to this explicit phonetics instruction component, pronunciation instruction usually includes perception practice in the form of phoneme discrimination and identification exercises often with feedback. 3. Phonetic Notation In English Foreign Language Learning Phonetics is a science concerned with finding acoustic, articulatory, and perceptual regularities in human speech. Phonetics has a broad reach, ranging from concrete phenomenological descriptions of the sound systems of various languages to abstract theoretical accounts. The key products of phonetics consist of knowledge dissemination and applications for speech and hearing diagnosis and remediation, second language teaching, and several other important contributions, but phoneticians typically do not construct software systems. Phonetic notation is the use of special written symbols to refer to the sounds or sound features of one or several languages. Related to this, phonetic Notation refers to recording words and utterances using phonetic symbols. For example: /ˈhæn.səm/ as the symbols which represent the pronunciation of handsome and /ˈprɪt.i/ as the symbols which represent the pronunciation of pretty. The need for phonetic notation in phonetics research and teaching and learning is unquestioned by phoneticians, linguists and speech researchers in general, who find it very convenient to have an unambiguous notation system to refer to sounds. Phonetic notation is really usefull for EFL learners, according to Mompean, phonetic notation are often used in learner dictionaries and activities included in second or foreign language () teaching materials. Even materials writers provide information on phonetic symbols in teacheroriented materials some authors consider that