English Ambisyllabic Consonants and Half‐Closed Syllables in Language Teaching

This study justifies increased attention to word and phrase‐level syllabification in pronunciation instruction for students of English and for English foreign language students. The latter need to recognize what their native syllabification patterns actually are in order to combat interference arising from them in the L2. The apparent simplicity and automaticity of syllabification belies its complexity within and across languages and its importance not only to correct allophonic production but also to correct word‐stress, rhythm, and intonation. The following pairs of English words reveal the importance of teaching students about half‐closed syllables as well as the traditional open and closed syllables (brackets mark the single consonant sound shared by the two syllables, hence the term ambisyllabic ): Mi‐nos/mi[n]us, adore/a[d]o‐ra[ti]on, co‐mmune/co[mm]on, de‐ssert/ de[s]ert, re‐ply/re[p]licate. As the stress shifts from the first to the second syllable in these pairs of words, the syllabification of the first syllable changes from open to half‐closed with an ambisyllabic consonant. Trying to produce a conversational pronunciation of the second word in each pair with a clearly open or closed first syllable results in an artificial pronunciation. In this study, the case for including the notions of ambisyllabic consonants and half‐closed syllables in teaching syllabification is made on articulatory, theoretical, instrumental, and psycholinguistic grounds. This expanded concept of syllabification is also shown to be important in studies of syllable structure transference between first and second languages and in contrastive analyses. However, much of the evidence adduced in supporting the case for ambisyllabification was indirect, since it came from studies aimed at proving or investigating other points.In this study, the case for including the notions of ambisyllabic consonants and half‐closed syllables in teaching syllabification is made on articulatory, theoretical, instrumental, and psycholinguistic grounds. This expanded concept of syllabification is also shown to be important in studies of syllable structure transference between first and second languages and in contrastive analyses. However, much of the evidence adduced in supporting the case for ambisyllabification was indirect, since it came from studies aimed at proving or investigating other points. In spite of the length and detail of this study, it has had little impact. It is not likely that teaching and research practices in the areas concerned will change much until more direct instrumental research shows a clear physical difference between types of syllabification across languages. Experimental evidence is also needed on the negative effects of nonnative syllabification upon the rhythmic matrix of suprasegmentals, which helps to break utterances into decodable units of input for the native listener. That is, a connection between incomprehensible input and incorrect syllabification must be made clearer.