Loanword Phonology versus Second Language Phonology:

Evidence from Brazilian Portuguese

Deborah Araujo

Stony Brook University

1. Introduction

Language contact and language transfer have been largely researched in the field of

linguistics because when a language encounters a phonological structure that is not part of its

phonology, speakers of that language will find ways to replace or fix the structure so it can be

pronounceable. Lexical borrowings as well as second language acquisition, pidgins and creoles

offered some of the data that fueled such research. In the last decades, second language

acquisition has incited a wave of new discussion about the interaction of language transfer with

other factors related to language development in the process of phonological change.

In the midst of understanding and describing the linguistic systems of language contact

situations, the literature on second language phonology and loanword phonology has not

explicitly distinguished loanword phonology from second language phonology and fails to offer

a clear comparison between the two linguistic systems and the phonological processes involved

in producing each system. Are they different or are they fundamentally the same? How do they

differ? Are the phonotactics used in adapting loanwords the same used by learners of second

language? These are valid questions that need to be addressed in order for linguists to have a

better understanding of how language works in the mind of the speaker.

2

The following study offers a contrastive analysis of the adaptations caused by

monolingual Brazilian speakers to English loanwords against those done by Brazilian speakers of

English as a second language. This study will first discuss in section 2 what the literature says

about second language phonology and loanword phonology. Then section 3 will describe the

experiment. Section 4 will compare the phonotactics employed by the participants when they

were not able to pronounce the word-final coda in the same way an American would pronounce

it. Finally, section 5 will offer a discussion of the findings, connecting them to the pertinent

question of how loanword phonology differs from second language phonology.

2. Literature on second language phonology and loanword phonology

2.1. Second language phonology

The field of second language acquisition has attracted growing attention in the last few

decades as researchers try to understand the sound patterns that characterize the speech of a

person learning a foreign language. Some speakers achieve complete fluency in the second

language, to the point of passing as a native speaker. Others, however, will always have a

nonnative pronunciation or an accent. The nonnative accent is the expression of the speaker’s

interlanguage, or the intermediate place between his native language and the target pronunciation

(Major 2001). This is due to cross-linguistic influences or language transfer, where phonological

structures of the speaker’s native language exert influence upon the pronunciation of the second

language (Odlin 1989). These nonnative utterances can often give clues into the language

3

background of the speaker. Members of a speech community have strong intuitions about what

sounds native and what does not.

In a discussion of second language phonology, Major (2001) says that errors are likely to

occur when the speaker’s first language and second language have different linguistic

phenomena. These errors are due to transfer of the native language phonology onto the second

language. The English language has the phoneme [θ] in the beginning of ‘think' but neither

Brazilian Portuguese speakers nor German speakers have this sound in their phonology. Thus,

when a speaker of either language tries to speak English without having mastered the

pronunciation of this sound, they will interpret the sound through their native phonological and

will substitute it for a familiar sound. Since German and Brazilian Portuguese have different

phonologies, each speaker will make a different change to the English word. Brazilian

Portuguese speakers will usually substitute [t] for [θ], pronouncing ‘tink’ instead of ‘think’,

while German speakers will usually substitue [s], as in ‘sink’. This exemplifies the influence of

transfer in second language acquisition. In Brazilian Portuguese, speakers focus on place of

articulation, and sin [t] is a dental consonant, it is preferred to [s], an alveolar, as a substitute for

[θ] since [θ] is interdental. In German, however, speakers will focus on the mode of articulation,

and [s] is a fricative just like [θ], thus its preferred as a replacement because [t] is a plosive.

Transfer can occur in phonology as well as in syntax, morphology, discourse and any

other component of language. Van Coetsem (1988) describes the concept of transfer in second

language phonology as “imposition”. The speaker will impose his articulatory habits and his

native phonology when learning a second language because he has not acquired the phonology of

the second language yet. As a result, he will adapt the second language sound by substituting it

for a more familiar one to compensate for incomplete acquisition of the foreign phonology.

4

Past research on second language phonology has focused on contrastive analysis of

languages, which compares the similarities and differences between languages in order to

understand and predict what kind of transfer errors speakers will make throughout the language

acquisition process as well as to build an understanding about the difficulty and order of

acquisition of sounds. The tenets of contrastive analysis relied on the claim that nonnative

accents, or second language phonology, originated solely from the interaction of the native

phonology with the phonology of the target language (Major 2001). Several critics of contrastive

analysis pointed out errors in second language acquisition that could not be explained by the

speaker’s native phonology or by the target phonology, thus weakening the predictive power of

Contrastive Analysis. Other researchers pointed out that some of the adaptations present in

second language phonology were similar to those made by children when learning a first

language, which produced the idea that second language acquisition might be similar to first

language acquisition. For example, adult learners of a second language, as well as children

learning a first language, usually acquire voicing contrast of consonants in syllable-initial

position more easily than in syllable-final position. These errors are called developmental errors

and are governed by language Universals, which determine the parameters or core principles that

govern all languages. One universal characteristic of all languages is the presence of syllables

formed by a consonant followed by a vowel. Consequently, speakers might add vowels or delete

extra consonants in complex syllables of a second language. Van Coetsem (1988) makes

reference to the existence of other factors in second language phonology when he discusses

strategies used by speakers, besides imposition, to adapt or change foreign sounds. He calls these

strategies “internally induced changes” and claims they are expressions of universals and not of

language transfer, which is the case of “imposition”. He states that such strategies are used

5

regularly in second language acquisition, such as devoicing of final consonants and

generalization of a rule.

Current research focuses on these new factors that might influence interlanguage as well

as transfer. Major (2001) proposes that second language phonology is affected by three

processes: transfer of the native language phonology, acquisition of target phonology (nativelike

pronunciation), and universals. The interaction of these components in all the different levels of

acquisition is still unclear, but Major (2001) points out that transfer is more likely to occur in

similar phenomena and at the initial stages of the acquisition process, since the speaker will

likely use his native phonology as a building block to acquiring the foreign phonology.

Situations of dissimilar phenomena, on the other hand, are dominated by universals, where

developmental processes and substitutions are likely to occur. Major (2001) proposes a

descriptive model of the interaction of these three components that he calls the Ontogeny

Phylogeny Model, where at the initial stages of acquisition, transfer exerts the largest influence,

and as acquisition of the target phonology increases, the effect of transfer decreases while the

role of universals first increases and then decreases. Current research continues to focus on

transfer and cross-linguistics influence, but now with attention to how it interacts with other

factors.

2.2. Loanword phonology

Transfer is also a topic of much interest in language contact research. One of the areas of

study of language contact is loan phonology. Loan words are lexical items borrowed from a

foreign language into a recipient language. The literature pertaining to loan words and language

6

contact describes loan phonology as the result of phonotactics and strategies used by speakers to

adapt the foreign phonological system to their native language. In language contact situations,

lexical items are by far the main target of borrowings. These loan words might have sounds that

are not present in the phonology of the recipient language, thus they will likely undergo

adaptations or substitutions to cause the lexical item to sound more native and less foreign

(Major, 2001). Odlin (1989) supports the view that borrowing relates largely to lexical items,

especially words in the fields of technology, government, education, and commerce. He says that

even when a language engages in massive lexical borrowing, cross-linguistic influence might

introduce changes to the syntax of the recipient language, but will probably not affect the

phonetics and phonology of the recipient language. Major (2001) argues that this happens

because native language transfer dominates loan phonology. The speaker will try to fit the

borrowed word into his native phonological system. For example, Japanese speakers might

borrow English words that have complex syllables but they will insert vowels as needed to break

up illegal consonant clusters and to conform to the preference Japanese phonology gives to CV

syllables.

Data of borrowed words shows that these lexical items do not always conform to the

phonology of the recipient language. Major (2001) explains that sometimes the speaker will

maintain some elements of the foreign phonology intact or partially adapted and eventually these

elements might be incorporated into the phonology of the recipient language. One example of

such case is the existence of the phoneme [ʒ] in word initial position in English, such as in the

name Gigi. This phoneme entered the English phonology through language contact and

borrowings of foreign words and is now allowed as a legal word-initial onset, although

occurrences of such phoneme are restricted to loan words. In addition the influence of native

7

language transfer and foreign language acquisition, universals may also be present in loan

phonology, but to a lesser extent (Major 2001). They determine to what extent universal plays a

role in loan word adaptation when the adaptation made to the word cannot be explained by the

phonology of the speaker’s native language or the phonology of the foreign language.

In a discussion of transfer in language contact, Van Coetsem (1988) presents a slightly

different perspective on loan phonology. He indicates that not all lexical borrowing implies

phonological borrowing. When a foreign word is borrowed but undergoes adaptation to fit the

recipient language phonology, then lexical loan has occurred. Phonological loan, on the other

hand, occurs when the speaker consciously imitates the foreign pronunciation of the borrowed

lexical item. He adds that speakers will try to preserve their phonology and articulatory habits

because these are the more stable domains of a language, thus engaging more often in lexical

borrowing that in phonological borrowing. From the perspective of van Coetsem (1988), loan

phonology is not about the changes that the native/recipient language will cause on the

pronunciation of the loan word. Rather loan phonology is formed from the influence that the

foreign sounds might have upon the recipient language.

2.3. Comparing the two phonological systems

The description of loan phonology offered by Major (2001), in which the direction of

transfer is from the recipient language towards the target language, is included in van Coetsem's

(1988) description of second language phonology. Most literature on transfer acknowledges the

influence that transfer has on both second language phonology and loan phonology, but without

a clear differentiation of how transfer affects each phonological system. Van Coetsem (1988)

8

argues that there are two different transfer types. One he defines as imposition or source

language agentivity and the other as borrowing or recipient language agentivity. Imposition

occurs in second language phonology, while borrowing occurs in loan phonology.

The main differences are in the direction of transfer, the elements that be transferred, and

the structural changes that result. In second language phonology the more stable domains of the

recipient language will be transferred to the target language, in other words, the phonology. The

speaker will impose his phonology and native articulatory habits upon the target language, thus

causing changes in the target language (e.g. errors in pronunciation) that are due to transfer as

well as the emergence of universals. Eventually the speaker will acquire the phonology of the

target language as learning takes place but traces of his native phonology will probably remain.

In loan phonology the less stable domains of the target language will be transferred into

the recipient language, in other words, lexical items. In the process of borrowing words from a

foreign language, the speaker will try to imitate the foreign pronunciation but adaptation will

eventually take place since the tendency to preserve his native phonology is stronger. In adapting

the loan phonology, constraints of perception or production of the foreign sound will filter out

the borrowed phonological structures leading to partial or total adaption.

While van Coetsem (1988) states that different factors are involved in the production of

second language phonology (language transfer and universals) versus that of loan phonology

(perception and production of sounds), Major (2001) argues that the same factors that cause the

emergence of second language phonology also cause loan phonology, but at different rates. He

states that transfer dominates loan phonology and target phonology or universals have a marginal

influence. In second language phonology, while language transfer will initially exert the largest

9

influence, its importance will diminish with the gradual acquisition of the target phonology and

the emergence of universals.

Even though the literature on language contact and second language acquisition

acknowledge to some extent that there is a difference between loan phonology and second

language phonology, it fails to describe how the lexicon that is borrowed differs from the

utterances produced during second language acquisition. This study will thus offer a description

of the two phonological systems by looking at how word-final consonants are adapted in English

loanwords used in Brazil and in the speech of Brazilian speakers of English. Brazilian

Portuguese does not allow word final codas with the exception of [s], [r], [n] and [l]. And even

then, [n] might not be pronounced if the segment preceding it is a vowel and it assimilates the

nasality of the consonant. The coda [l] will likely be velarized in word-final position resembling

the glide [w]. English, on the other hand, allows words to end in a variety of consonants. This

clear contrast between the two languages in relation to word final codas will likely cause

Brazilian speakers to make adaptations to English words.

3. Description of experiment

3.1. Subjects

In order to compare the phonotactics – strategies – of second language phonology to

those of loanword phonology, four speakers of Brazilian Portuguese were recorded during a

reading task. Two speakers live in Brazil and do not speak English, although they have had

contact with English through some formal education of English as a second language. They will

10

be referred to as the BR speakers from here onward. The other two speakers have been living on

Long Island, New York, for approximately five years and speak English proficiently. They will

be referred to as the US speakers. To avoid pronunciation differences due to a gap in generation,

all four speakers are closely related in age, ranging from 24 to 29 years old. The speakers are

from the same region in Brazil, Sao Paulo, and so have the same accent and pronunciation style

of Brazilian Portuguese.

A fifth American speaker within the age group of the Brazilian speakers and who lives on

Long Island, New York, also took the reading task. Her pronunciation was representative of the

target English pronunciation.

3.2. Method

A list of 184 English loanwords that are used daily in Brazil was presented to the

participants. The BR speakers had to read them as they are pronounced in Brazil, thus the

Portuguese pronunciation of these loanwords. The US speakers had to read them in English. The

fifth speaker, the American, also read them in English. The participants were recorded during the

reading task and later the recordings were transcribed to the International Phonetic Alphabet.

The pronunciation errors the US and BR speakers made in words that ended in a

consonant were noted and recorded for analysis. For the sake of focus, all other pronunciation

errors, such as vowel reduction, adaptation of word initial and word medial consonants, or error

with stress placement, were ignored during data analysis even though these errors can shed some

light into the differences and similarities between loanword phonology and second language

phonology.

11

3.3 Limitations

The method used for the collection of data had several limitations. The fact that the

participants had to read a list of words might have allowed influence of spelling on the

pronunciation. Such possibility will be discussed in section 4.5 and 4.6. Another limitation of

giving a word list is that it elicits a more formal pronunciation style, where native phonology

transfer is less likely to influence mispronunciation and, thus, second language learners are more

likely to achieve target pronunciation (Major 2001).

The level of English acquisition of the speakers should also be taken into consideration.

Different levels of English knowledge might raise different adaptations than the ones done by the

speakers that live in the United States. It would be interesting to compare the speech of several

speakers, from beginners to advanced students of English, in order to see if the phonology of

those speakers is different/ similar from loanword phonology at all levels or if the

differences/similarities are accentuated as the speaker acquires more English skills.

The number of people that participated in the study is too small to be used as a

representative of the population of Brazilian speakers. The influence of gender in pronunciation

styles, for example, can not be clearly analyzed because some of the curiosities seen in the

following section 4 could be due to gender but could also be due to the individual’s phonology.

Nevertheless, the following data analysis will provide a small sample from which to raise

generalizations that can be further explored in future researches.

12

4. Data analysis

Of the total 184 words given to the participants, 156 had word-final coda. The BR

speakers adapted the majority of final codas while the US speakers pronounced the majority of

the words faithfully. The data elicited a variety of strategies in adapting problematic words

ending in consonant and the speakers utilized more than one strategy throughout the reading

task. In order to more easily interpret the data, first I grouped the words that ended in the same

codas and then I grouped the codas that underwent the same adaptations. The following sections

describe the adaptations implemented in each grouping, while appendixes A through G list the

grouped data discussed bellow.

4.1. Words ending in [f], [v], [g], [k], [p], or [b]

Appendix A shows a table with all 40 words that ended in [f], [v], [g], [k], [p], or [b].

Brazilian speakers:

If we first look at the reading task performed by the BR speakers, we see that the main

strategy used to adapt the above cited codas was vowel epenthesis, since approximately 1/3 of

the words with the above cited final coda underwent epenthesis. Vowel epenthesis occurs when a

language inserts a vowel where there was none. Vowel epenthesis is a common strategy used in

Brazilian Portuguese to deal with illegal codas because when a vowel is inserted after the coda,

the consonant becomes the onset of a new syllable. For example, data (5) of appendix A shows

that the English pen drive [pɛndraɪv] was pronounced [pɛndraɪvi] by the BR speakers. The high

13

front vowel [i] is usually the epenthesized vowel in Brazilian Portuguese (Perini 2002). The

words in Appendix A that underwent epenthesis are highlighted in yellow or green.

The female and male BR speakers epenthesized 32 out of the 40 words that ended in the

above cited codas. The female speaker pronounced five words faithfully, without any

adaptations, while the male was not faithful in any of the examples.

A large number of the epenthetic vowels underwent vowel devoicing. The words

highlighted in green in Appendix A show epenthetic vowels that were devoiced. Some words

from appendix B also underwent vowel devoicing, but these will be discussed in section 4.2.

Devoiced vowels occur when air (like whispering) comes out of the mouth without the vibration

of the vocal cords and the articulators move to the position of a vowel, thus affecting the sound

of surrounding phonemes. Vowel devoicing is a common strategy in Brazilian Portuguese when

the final vowel is unstressed (Perini 2002).

To the unaware listener, voiceless vowels can be mistaken for aspiration or lengthening

of final consonant. I used a computer program called Praat that creates a spectrogram of the

recorded word. The spectrogram shows the sound waves of speech. In order to identify voiceless

vowels in the spectrogram, I looked for irregular striations (vocal cord pulses) following the final

consonant that resembled formants (a column that’s formed of dark horizontal bands). However,

my recordings were not good and exterior noise interfered in producing clear spectrograms.

Nevertheless, the amount of definite occurrences of voiceless vowels leads the supporting

evidence that vowel devoicing was employed by the participants as a strategy to fix final codas.

Curiously, vowel devoicing was used almost exclusively with epenthetic vowels. There

were only two cases of devoicing of an original vowel. In appendix A those are data (41) and

14

(42). Another interesting fact of vowel devoicing in this experiment is that it occurred mainly in

the speech of the male BR speaker and was predominant in words ending in [k], [p], and [ʧ].

In the few cases where epenthesis was not employed, other strategies were used to fix the

illegal coda. Some words underwent aspiration, even though it is not a phonotactics of

Portuguese phonology. This happens when a puff of air is released after the articulation of a

voiceless stop, such as in data (19), where the English word 'picnic' [pɪknɪk] was pronounced

[piknikʰ] by the female BR speaker. There were two cases of aspiration in the BR female’s

speech (data (19) and (26) and six in the BR male’s speech – data (15), (21), (25), (38), (40), and

(41).

The male BR speaker also applied consonant lengthening in three occasions, data (1),

(3), and (6). This strategy produces a longer final consonant, such as in data (3), where the

English surf [sɝf] becomes [sɝff] in the speech of the male BR speaker. This is not a common

strategy of Brazilian Portuguese phonology.

Note that both aspiration and consonant lengthening could be residues of a devoiced

vowel. However, Praat’s spectrogram of these words shows no signs of a voiceless vowel.

Consonant devoicing was employed once by the female BR speaker – data (6) – and

twice by the male BR speaker – data (6) and (40). In these cases a final voiced consonant looses

its voicing contrast, thus in data (6) the English making of [meɪkɪŋʌv] was pronounced [meɪkĩɔf]

by the female BR speaker. Consonant devoicing is rare in Brazilian Portuguese, but will occur in

very fast speech when the antepenultimate syllable is stressed and the lat vowel is devoiced. For

example, the word rápido [hapidu] ‘rapid’ will be pronounced [hapitu], with the bold-face here

representing the devoiced sounds (Perini 2002).

15

US speakers:

Now, let’s change focus from the BR speakers to the US speakers. As mentioned above,

epenthesis was the main strategy used by BR speakers. It was not present at all in any of the

utterances produced by US speakers. As seen in appendix A, instead of epenthesizing, the US

speakers opted for aspiration of final coda [k], lengthening of [f], or consonant devoicing of

[v] and [g] codas. The female US speaker did most of the adaptations present in this data. In her

speech there were eleven cases of aspiration, while the male US speaker had one aspiration in

data (24). The female US speaker devoiced four final consonants – data (4), (6), (9), and (10) –

and the male US speaker utilized it once in data (8). Finally, the female US speaker had two

lengthening in data (2) and (3) and the male US speaker had one in data (2).

4.2. Words ending in [t] and [d]

Appendix B provides the table with all the [t] and [d] final codas, the coronal plosives.

BR speakers:

Looking first at the BR speakers, it seems that affrication was almost exclusively the

only strategy BR speakers used to adapt word-final coronal plosives. The words that were

affricated are highlighted in yellow in appendix B.

Affrication consists of adding a fricative to the plosive consonant, such as in data (76) of

BR speakers the English flat [flæt] becoming [flɛʧ]. Of the 31 words present in the data that

ended in coronal plosives, the females BR speaker affricated 26 of them and the male BR

speaker 29 of them. Words that were not affricated were pronounced faithfully with the

exception of data (97), since the female speaker deleted the final consonant.

16

Affrication of [t] and [d] is a common allophonic process in most dialects of Brazil when

the alveolar stop is followed by a high front vowe [i] (Bettoni-Techio 2006). The consonant will

be pronounced normally in all other contexts. The process of affrication of alveolar stops

following a high front vowel is common in many languages of the world. Perini (2002) says that

Brazilian Portuguese can delete a devoiced vowel altogether in rapid speech. In this case, an

affricated [t] or [d] might surface word-finally. The verb pode [pɔʤi] ‘(you) can’ in fast speech

becomes [pɔʤ], and the verb conte [kõʧi] ‘(you) tell (imperative)’ becomes [kõʧ] in fast speech.

In the speech of the BR speakers interviewed for this study, a few of the affricated codas

also underwent vowel epenthesis. The male BR speaker applied vowel devoicing to all of his

epenthetic vowels, and the female BR speaker voiced all but one vowel. It is possible that there

are more voiceless vowels in this data than I was able to identify, due to the difficulties in

identifying voiceless vowel discussed in section 4.1. Since in the reading task of BR speakers we

find affrication with voiced vowels, affrication with voiceless vowels, and affrication alone, this

can be evidence that epenthesis was actually the main strategy used for [t] and [d] codas and that

the epenthetic vowel drove affrication. The vowel is then devoiced and eventually disappears,

which is corroborated by the existence of this process in the native phonology of Portuguese.

US speakers:

Bettoni-Techio et al (2002) found that in second language phonology affrication occurred

more often by itself than followed by an epenthetic vowel, which is reinforced by the results of

the BR speakers. The US speakers also support Bettoni-Techio’s findings since they didn’t

epenthesize at all. The US speakers only adapted a few of the words. The female did most of the

adaptations, with nine instances total. The male only adapted one word. Affrication was one of

17

the strategies used by the US speakers but not the only one. The female affricated five words –

data (70), (74), (91), (92), and (97). The male affricated one, data (70).

As for the other words mispronounced by the female, three final consonants underwent

aspiration – data (82), (84), and (87) – and two codas underwent consonant devoicing – data

(94) and (97). Note that aspiration only occurred with [t] codas and consonant devoicing with

[d].

4.3. Words ending in nasal consonants

Appendix C contains the data for this section.

BR speakers:

The BR speakers employed only two strategies to deal with nasals. One of them was

vowel epenthesis, which was also applied to other final codas as discussed in the previous two

sections. The other strategy, the prevalent one, was vowel nasalization. The words that were

nasalized are highlighted in yellow in the appendix. This is a common strategy in Brazilian

Portuguese (Cardoso 2005). Nasalization occurs when the vowel preceding a nasal is realized

through the nasal cavity instead of the oral one. In the case of Brazilian Portuguese, nasalization

of the vowel means that the final consonant is not produced (perini 2002).

Of the 26 words ending in a nasal consonant, the BR speakers nasalized two thirds of

them. Both the female and the male produced one word faithfully. The female had one case, data

(100), where she dropped the nasal but did not nasalize the preceding vowel.

18

The other one third of the words that were not nasalized, data (119) through (123),

underwent vowel epenthesis, as mentioned previously. In these cases, the nasal was preceded by

a diphthong [aɪ], [oʊ] or [eɪ].

US speakers:

The US speakers did not epenthesize, as has been the pattern so far. They did apply

nasalization to a few of the words. In this context the male US speaker adapted more words than

the female speaker did. He adapted four words – data (98), (99), (101) and (103) – while she

only had two cases of nasalization – data (98) and (103).

4.4. Words ending in [l]

Appendix D shows all the words ending in [l].

BR speakers:

Epenthesis was not the preferred strategy for dealing with laterals word finally. The data

provided by the BR speakers show that words ending in [l] tend to undergo further velarization,

when the consonant is produced with the tongue closer to the velum of the mouth. Velarized

words are highlighted in yellow in the appendix. The English final [l] is already velarized into

the dark lateral [ɫ]. When produced by the BR speakers, this English allophone became even

more velarized, approximating to the glide [w]. (Cardoso 2005). Data (128) shows the English

Google [gugǝɫ] being pronounced [gugoʊ] by the BR speakers. This process is common in the

phonology of Brazilians (Perini 2002). Words ending in [l] are always velarized, such as natal

[nataw] ‘Christmas.’

19

Every word ending in [l], with the exception of data (135), was velarized by the BR

speakers. In the casa of data (135), the word style [staɪɫ] was epenthesized into [staɪle] or

[istaɪli]. The [l] had been preceded by the diphthong [aɪ]. This was probably the reason for

epenthesis; just as the same diphthong drove epenthesis with nasal consonants (see section 4.3).

US speakers:

The US speakers also velarized some of the words. The female velarized a quarter of

final codas – data (124), (125), (130), and (135) – and the male adapted only two codas – data

(130) and (132). Neither of them epenthesized the lateral that followed a diphthong. On the

contrary, the female US speakers preferred to velarize (135) style rather than epenthesize.

4.5. Words ending in [z]

Appendix E provides the words that end in coda [z].

BR speakers:

Even though vowel epenthesis is also present in this data, as it has been in all the other

sections, it was not the primary strategy used. The primary strategy used was consonant

devoicing. The words that underwent devoicing are highlighted in yellow in the appendix.

Section 4.1 describes the process of consonant devoicing in more details. Appendix E shows that

four of the six words ending in [z] were devoiced to [s] by both BR speakers – see data (136)

through (139).

This is probably due to the influence of spelling during the reading tasks, for most of the

words listed in appendix E are spelled with an <s> in the end. It seems that this reasoning would

20

not explain jazz in data (136), but actually it does, because words spelled with final <z> in

Portuguese are pronounced with an [s] (Perini 2002).

Consonant devoicing is not a common phonotactics of Portuguese, except for the case of

following a devoiced final vowel (see section 4.1). It was rarely applied by the BR speakers in

the contexts described so far. There were only three cases all together, two in appendix A – data

(6) and (40) – and one in appendix B – data (92). It was more prominent among the US speakers,

who devoiced seven final consonants, five in appendix A – data (4), (6), (8), (9), and (10) – and

two in appendix B – data (94) and (97).

There were two words in appendix E that were not devoiced, data (140) and (141). In

those cases, the female BR speaker maintained a voiced [z] but epenthesized a high front vowel,

while the male BR speaker pronounced both words faithfully. This pronunciation error is likely

the influence of spelling as well. The pronunciation error made by the female BR speaker could

be due to spelling, since <s> between two vowels is pronounced as a [z] in Portuguese (Perini

2002). For example, the word dose ‘shot’ is pronounced [dɔzi].

US speakers:

The US speakers adapted about half of the words through consonant devoicing of the

final [z]. This can not be related to spelling because the contexts for devoicing are varied, even

including data (140) which was voiced and epenthesized by the female BR speakers. The other

words were pronounced faithfully. Vowel epenthesis was not an option for these speakers.

21

4.6. Words ending in [s] and [r]

Appendix F contains the words that ended in [s] or [r].

BR speakers:

These words were grouped together because unlike all codas so far, the majority of these

words did not undergo adaptation. [s] and [r] were usually pronounced faithfully. This was

expected since the only consonants that surface as word-final codas in Brazil as [s] and [r] (perini

2002), even though they may be deleted in casual speech in Brazil (Cardoso 1999).

There were five [s] final words, out of the twelve, that underwent adaption by the female

BR female speaker. She inserted a vowel after the [s] in four words – data (149) thought (152).

In another case she applied consonant voicing, pronouncing the [s] as [z], and then inserted a

vowel – data (153). Note that in section 4.5 the female BR speaker also inserted vowels after [z]

when the coda was not devoiced. The male BR speaker only epenthesized one word ending in

[s] – data (149) – but he also voiced the [s] in data (153) and inserted a vowel. These adaptations

could be the influence of spelling, as discussed in 3.5. Final ‘-ce’ in Brazilian Portuguese is

pronounced [si]. Compare for example the word doce [dosi] ‘sweet’ with the word presented in

section 4.5 dose [dɔzi] ‘shot’. With this comparison in mind, it is easy to see how some of the

data in appendix E and F might have been mispronounced because of spelling.

US speakers:

All words were pronounced faithfully with the exception of data (153), which was voiced

by the male speaker. It could be that he was influence by the Brazilian pronunciation of this

word, which also voices the final consonant, but he might have refrained from epenthesizing due

to acquisition of word-final coda pronunciation.

22

4.7. Other contexts – words ending in [ʧ], [ɵ] and [ʃ]

In appendix G, words ending in [ʧ], [ɵ] and [ʃ] were grouped together not because of

similarities in the strategies used to adapt these coda, like the other groupings. They were

grouped together because there were not enough examples of each show the speaker’s tendency

when dealing with these codas. See appendix G for the examples.

US speakers:

The US speakers pronounced all of them faithfully.

BR speakers:

The BR speakers had only one mispronunciation. The female speaker pronounced the

affricate [ʧ] as a fricative [ʃ] and inserted a vowel after.

4.8. Generalizations

The contrastive analysis between the strategies the US speakers used and those the BR

speakers used, as well as the frequency of occurrences, shows evidence of the difference between

loanword phonology and second language phonology in the speech of Brazilian Portuguese. The

two BR speakers adapted the majority of the words, while the US speakers were able to

pronounce most of them faithfully. This result is expected because the BR speakers have not

acquired the phonology of English, but the US speakers have clearly acquired some of it and

have consequently learned to pronounce words more faithfully.

The large number of adaptations the BR speakers made to the English word list confirms

the well known fact that Brazilian Portuguese prefers not to have word-final codas (Perini 2002,

23

Major 2005, Bettoni-Techio 2006). The only codas that were pronounced faithfully, without

adaptation, were [s] and [r] because they may occur in coda position in Brazilian phonology.

Even the voiced alveolar fricative [z] was pronounced as its voiceless counterpart, [s], with

exception of where spelling would interfere.

The two BR speakers had a clear preference for vowel epenthesis as a strategy to deal

with illegal final codas, especially if we take into consideration the possibility of epenthesis and

later vowel deletion in the affrication process of coronal plosives.

The US speakers avoided epenthesis completely. Where epenthesis would occur, they

used aspiration for voiceless coronal and velar stops or consonant devoicing for voiced stops and

fricatives. These strategies also appeared in the speech of BR speakers, but in a small frequency

in comparison to vowel epenthesis.

The contexts where US and BR speakers coincide in the choice of strategy used was

when the final consonant was a nasal or a lateral. Nasals were realized mostly through nasalized

final vowels and laterals were velarized into glides. Here the difference is that US speakers only

adapted a few of the words, while the BR speakers adapted the large majority of them.

One curiosity of the data that has not been mentioned yet was the possible influence of

gender in the choice of strategy as well as frequency of adaptation. Among the BR speakers,

gender seemed to influence the choice of strategy, since the male BR speaker was responsible for

most of the vowel devoicing that occurred. Among the US speakers, gender seemed to influence

the frequency of adaption, since the female speaker adapted words more often than the male did.

This is an interesting aspect to explore in future research.

24

5. Discussion

This study shows that one of the differences between loanword phonology and second

language phonology is in the nature of the errors made by the speakers. In the loanword

phonology of the BR speakers, most errors were due to transfer of the speaker’s native

phonology. Epenthesis, affrication, nasalization and velarization were all expected strategies in

dealing with illegal codas because they are present in the phonology of Portuguese. As for the

other words that underwent different adaptations, a small fraction of them were pronounced

faithfully, which could be due to previous contact with the English language and some

acquisition of the phonology. Another small fraction of the words undergo aspiration,

lengthening, and consonant devoicing, which could not be caused by transfer, since these

strategies are not present in Brazilian Portuguese. These strategies reflect the influence of

universals in the grammar of these speakers.

In the second language phonology of the US speakers, faithful pronunciation was

achieved for the majority of the words, which is due to acquisition of the English phonology.

Native strategies were minimized in the second language phonology of the US speakers,

sometimes to the point of non-existence, such as vowel epenthesis. The native strategies that did

emerge in second language phonology occurred in a much smaller frequency than it did in the

loanword phonology. Other strategies that were neither native nor from the foreign language

surfaced in the results of the US speakers, showing that they had incomplete acquisition of the

foreign phonology, such as aspiration, lengthening, and consonant devoicing. These strategies

are not common in the native phonology of Brazilian Portuguese. They are not present in the

25

phonology of English in relation to word final codas. They are due to language Universals

related to markedness constraints or developmental processes natural to all languages.

The findings of this study fit with Major’s (2001) definition of second language

phonology and loanword phonology. He claims they are ends of a spectrum where the native

phonology, the foreign phonology and universals interact to produce the phonotactics we see in

this experiment. The BR speakers are one end of the spectrum with native phonology surpassing

by far the influence of the foreign phonology and universals. Major says that once the person

starts to learn the second language, acquisition of the foreign phonology will increase as

influence of native phonology decreases but universals increase. At the end of the spectrum,

universals decrease again and then the foreign phonology will be responsible for most of the

pronunciation characteristics.

There is a practical advantage to understanding the specific differences between the two

linguistic systems. A description of the phonology of borrowed English words in Brazil can help

educators understand the mentality that Brazilian students bring to the classroom as they take the

first steps towards learning a second language. The difficulties and tendencies are better defined

and easier for instructors to call attention to or practice during pronunciation drills. By

understanding second language phonology, educators will know what difficulties Brazilian

students face once they’ve acquired some of the English phonology but still have a strong accent

when speaking English. In general, by exploring the explicit differences between the two

systems, linguistics might gain a little more understanding in how a second grammar develops in

the mind of an adult who is learning a second language.

26

6. Conclusion

The phonological adaptations done to borrowed lexical items and to a second language in

the acquisition process are the result of factors acting upon the phonology of the speaker. The

literature on language contact lacks contrastive comparison between the differences in the

adaptation of loanwords and that of second language learning. This study focused in comparing

the two phonological systems in order to understand if they are the same or if they are different.

The finds show that loanword phonology is different from second language acquisition in several

ways. The factors that drive adaptations are different. In loanword phonology transfer of the

native language drives adaptation. In second language phonology universals and developmental

processes are responsible for mispronunciation. Consequently, the phonotactics and frequency of

adaptation in the speech of monolingual Brazilians is different from that of the speech of

Brazilian English speakers.

Acknowledgements

A special thanks to Professor Lori Repetti from the Linguistics department for her

guidance and input, to Professor José Elías-Ullo from the department of Hispanic Languages and

Literature for his assistance in analyzing the data with the software Praat, and to Professor

Christina Bethin from the Linguistics department for her suggestion in the editing of the final

draft.

27

References

Bettoni-Techio, M. et al (2006). Palatalization in Brazilian Portuguese/English

interphonology. Revista Virtual de Estudos da Linguagem – ReVel. V. 4, n. 7

Cardoso, W. (1999). A quantitative analysis of word-final /r/-deletion in Brazilian Portuguese

[Electronic version]. Lnguistica Atlantica 21, 13-52.

Cardoso, W. (2005). The Variable Acquisition of English Word-final Stops by Brazilian

Portuguese Speakers. Proceedings of the 7th Generative Approaches to Second Language

Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2004), ed. Laurent Dekydtspotter et al., 38-49.

Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

Major, R. C. (2001). Foreign accent: The ontogeny and phylogeny of second language

phonology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Nevins, A. and Braun, D. (2009). The Role of Underlying Representations in L2 Brazilian

English. In Calabrese, A., and Wetzels, W. L. (Eds.), Current issues in linguistics Theory

V. 307: Loan phonology (181-191). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistics influence in language learning.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pap, L. (1949). Portuguese-American Speech: An outline of Speech Conditions Among

Portuguese Immigrants in New England and Elsewhere in the United States. New York:

King's Crown Press.

Perini, M. A. (2002). Modern Portuguese: A reference grammar. New Haven: Yale University

Van Coetsem, F. (1988). Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact.

Dordrecht, Holland: Foris Publications.

28

Appendix A Words ending in [f], [v], [g], [k], [p], or [b]

29

Appendix B Words ending in [t] and [d]

Appendix C Words ending in nasal consonants

30

Appendix D Words ending in [l]

Appendix E Words ending in [z]

Appendix F Words ending in [s] and [r]

31

Appendix G Other contexts – words ending in [ʧ], [ɵ] and [ʃ]