|
Having described in depth the stress system of English, we can now proceed to the description of Czech stress patterns. As discussed in chapter 4.4 Czech belongs among the languages with stress on a fixed syllable and thus its stress system is rather straightforward: except for certain words which do not bear stress (prepositions, conjunctions, auxiliary verbs etc.), all Czech words bear stress on their first syllable (Palková, 1994, p. 157). Thus understanding the Czech system is quite simple, as stress does not have to be learned as the property of a given new word or determined by a complex system of stress described in the previous chapter and its subchapters. Furthermore, Czech differs from English in that it is not a stress-timed language but a syllable-timed one, meaning that the intervals between two strong stresses are irregular and their length is determined by the number syllables standing in between. While English has the tendency to elongate the stressed syllables and speed up the flow of syllables in case of a large number of unstressed syllables occurring one after another, Czech syllables tend to have approximately the same duration regardless of stress placement.
These fundamental differences between the two languages make acquiring the habits of correct stress placement in English an especially daunting task for a Czech native speaker, though the acquisition of correct stress placement in Czech for an English speaker poses a similar, though not quite as serious a problem; stress in Czech does not influence the quality of vowels due to the fact that it is always in the same place, thus the incorrect stressing in a word such as saying Pardu`bice instead of `Pardubice has little effect on its pronunciation and understandability. The occurrence of the strongest stress at the beginning of a word is not a phenomenon appearing very commonly in English, thus making for only a minimal overlap between the two languages. When we analyze Kingdon’s (1958) list of possible stress patterns within words in English (p. 15) we will notice that of the nineteen stress patterns listed (monosyllabic words notwithstanding) only four carry the strongest stress on the initial syllable. Moreover, only in disyllabic and trisyllabic words are these a common occurrence; in words of four or five syllables, primary stress on the initial syllable is not very frequent when compared with the other possible stress patterns.
This leads to major problems with not only acquiring correct stress placement habits for students of English (especially those whose mother tongue is as different from English in its stress system as is for example Czech or French) but also results in major issues with understandability. Though Jennifer Jenkins (2001) in her book The Phonology of English as an International Language correctly claims that it is not necessary for a second language learner to sound as a native speaker in order to be understood (p. 126), in the same book and in her article on understandability she then makes the, in the author’s opinion, erroneous claim that word stress is not among the features of the English language that the learner needs to acquire in order to be understood (Jenkins, 2009, p. 12). Yet within the so called LFC (Lingua Franca Core), a list of features necessary for intelligibility, she lists vowel length contrasts and nuclear (or tonic) stress production/placement as two of the four main features, disregarding the fact that word stress, as explained in chapter 4.5 greatly influences vowel quality. Furthermore, it is impossible for a student of English to produce the correct nuclear or tonic stress in a word within a sentence unless the speaker has first mastered correct placement of stress within the word. Thus, if the rest of the LFC were to be taken as correct, proper production of word stress is no less than one half of the features necessary for intelligibility.
To support this statement, Hill, Kingdon, Fudge and Tibbitts all make assertions to the same effect. To name a few:
I was therefore led to the conclusion (which is contrary to opinions that have been expressed by some authorities) that a foreigners’ intelligibility may depend quite as much on correct stressing as on correct intonation. (Kingdon, 1958, xi)
Because English rhythm is stress-timed, a wrong stressing will lead to a wrong and misleading rhythm, even if the principle of stress-timing is correctly handled by the speaker. Comprehensibility depends on rhythm, and therefore the placing of stress within words can play a large part in determining how well a native English hearer will understand the foreign speaker. (Fudge, 1984, p. 4)
We gather that command of stressing and accentuation is imperative: a command of the usual habits of intonation may be desirable. People can often put up with quirks of human temperament, but both speaker and listener tend to get frustrated, impatient and out of humour if what is uttered cannot be understood. The safer course for foreigners is to concentrate on stress and accentuation patterns rather than intonation, in order to ensure as high a degree of intelligibility as possible. If the ‘rhythm’ is right, the speaker has a fair chance of using an appropriate intonation. (Tibbitts, 1967, p. 14)
An interesting point made by these authors, as well as mentioned above in relation to the LFC, is the fact that stress is inseparably linked to multiple aspects of the English language. Thus, should a student not master the correct stress placement, the resulting errors will impact not only stressing within words, but also placement of nuclear or tonic stress within a sentence, pronunciation, intonation as well as vowel quality which may result in loss of distinctions between words (e.g. peach/pitch).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
