PERCEPTION ANALYSIS
Language Learning: A Pilot Study." InternationalJournal
of Psycholinguistics, 5. 15-21.
Krashen, Stephen D. and Victoria Sferlazza, Lorna Feld-
man. and Ann K. Fathman. 1976. "Adult Performance on
the Slope Test: More Evidence for a Natural Sequence in
Adult Second Language Acquisition." Language Learn-
ing, 26. 145-151.
Labov, William. 1969. "A Study of Non-Standard English."
ERIC. Research in Education. ED 024 053.
Larsen-Freeman. Diane E. 1975. "The Acquisition of Gram-
matical Morphemes by Adult ESL Students." TESOL
Quarterly, 9.409-419.
- - . 1976. "An Explanation for the Morpheme Acquisi-
tion Order of Second Language Learners." Language
Learning, 26. 125-134.
Madsen. Harold S. 1976. "New Alternatives in EFL Exams
or. How to Avoid Selling English Short." English Lan-
guage Teaching Journal, 30. 135-144.
Oller. John W., Jr. 1973. "Cloze Tests of Second Language
Proficiency and What They Measure." Language Learn-
ing, 23. 105-118.
Oller, John W .• Jr. and Christine Conrad. 1971. "The Cloze
Technique and ESL Proficiency." Language Learning.
Perception Analysis
MARGARET HEISS MOUSTAFA.
P H O N EMIC DIFFICULTY has two as-
pects: perceptual and articulatory. Com-
munication theory tells us that the listener's deci-
sion-making processes are based on the pho-
nemic interpretation he applies to the phonetic
or acoustic material before him. He interprets
language sounds according to the phonemic
principles used in his linguistic system(s). His in-
terpretation of acoustic facts affects his subse-
quent articulation both in his native language
and in other languages.
The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis predicts
that speakers will have difficulties in learning a
second language in areas where the native lan-
guage lacks correspondence. By implication, it
predicts that speakers will not have difficulty, or
relatively less difficulty, in a second language in
MARGARET MOUSTAFA holds an M.A. in Teaching English
as a Foreign Language. She has taught English in Cairo and
published articles in ERIC and CATESOL Occasional
Papers. She currently teaches English as a Second Language
in Orange Unified School District in Orange. California.
435
21.183-196.
Oller, John W .. Jr. and Virginia Streiff. 1975. "Dictation: A
Test of Grammar-Based Expectancies." English Language
Teaching Journal, 30. 24-36.
Pimsleur, Paul. 1966. Language Aptitude Battery. New
York: Harcourt. Brace and World. Inc.
Spolsky, Bernard. 1968. "Language Testing- The Problem
of Validation." TESOL Quarterly. 2.88-94.
Taylor. Barry P. 1974. "Toward a Theory of Language Ac-
quisition." Language Learning, 24,23-25.
Upshur, John A. 1975. "Objective Evaluation of Oral Profi-
ciency in the TESOL Classroom." In Palmer. Leslie and
Bernard Spolsky (eds.). Papers on Language Testing
1967-1974. Washington. D.C.: Teachers of English to
Speakers of Other Languages. pp. 53-65.
Webster. Ronald L.. SusanJ. Schumacher. and Bobbie Boyd
Dubker. 1970. "Changes in Stuttering Frequency as a
Function of Various Intervals of Delayed Auditory Feed-
back. "Journal ofA bnormal Psychology, 75. 45-49.
Yudkovitz, Elaine and Judy Rottersman. 1973. "Language
Therapy in Childhood Schizophrenia: A Case Study of a
Monitory and Feedback Approach." Journal of Speech
and Hearing Disorder, 38.520-532.
Orange, California
areas where the native language corresponds
with the second language. While the hypothesis
has met serious challenge at the syntactic level of
language, it has been more successful at the
phonological level.
This study empirically investigates the ability
of an articulatory based contrastive analysis to
fully predict phonemic perceptual difficulties of
speakers of Egyptian Arabic with Standard
American English non-clustered obstruent pho-
nemes. It proceeds by 1) describing English and
Egyptian Arabic obstruent phonemes, 2) con-
trasting the phonemes and predicting, on the
basis of the contrast developed, obstruent diffi-
culties for native speakers of Egyptian Arabic
learning English, 3) empirically testing the per-
ceptual aspect of the prediction for educated
speakers of Egyptian Arabic and 4) analyzing the
test data.
American English and Egyptian Arabic
Obstruent Phonemes Described
Standard American English obstruent pho-
J'
nemes are /p, b, t, d, C, k, g, f, v, e, e, s, z, S, z/.
436 THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL

All speakers of Egyptian Arabic' have ob-
struent phonemes Ib, t, d, k, g, f, s, z, ~! ~, !-
!.. x, ..g:, ir, q , ?I (Harrell 1957). They also have
clusters of ItSl as in Itsu:f! (you, m. sg., see),
/kutsi.na/ (a deck of cards), and ImagitSl (you,
m. sg., did not come). The cluster ItSl can
sound like a single affricate phoneme /'c! or can
be broken down into two phonemes. Clusters of
I dzl have not been observed in Egyptian Arabic
(Lehn and Slager 1959; Gadalla 1969).
Middle and upper class speakers of Egyptian
Arabic also have the phoneme Iz/. It is used in
word initial, medial and final positions in high
frequency, common words of French origin as
lZillil (jelly), lZi: h/ (skirt), Ihkittal (jacket),
Ibih:mal (pajama), Iblaza:tl (beaches),
/garaza.t/ (garages), /bla.L' (beach), Ibe:zl
(beige), lru:zl (lipstick). Among these speakers
III contrasts with lsi in the subminimal pairs
lZilli/ (jello) and Isillal (a group) (Moustafa
1969:17-18).
The writer has often heard monolingual
speakers of Egyptian Arabic use lvl in word
initial and medial positions in words of foreign
origin as [vitamina.t] (vitamins), [volt] (volt),
[villa] (house), [vim] a trade name, [vitira] a
trade name, [tiliviziyo:n] (television), [novembir]
(November), [sa:vu] a trade name, [rivuli] a
trade name, [novalgi:n] a trade name. As in the
case of Iz/, [v] tends to be used more by middle
and upper educated or urban classes while [f] or
[b] (depending on the word) is used by unedu-
cated, lower or rural classes." A variation of the
grapheme for If!,~, has been created to repre-
sent [v],~. It occurs in newspapers, on commer-
s, ciallabels and on neon signs. Hence, the writer
perceives a linguistic shift towards a Ivl pho-
neme among urban middle and upper class
speakers.
Classical or literary Arabic has additional
phonemes of Ii,
9, d, q/. In the process of be-
coming literate, children are educated to distin-
guish these sounds phonemically and as literate
adults have occasion to both recognize and use
the distinctions.
The Contrast
The non-clustered obstruent phonemes of
Egyptian Arabic and English have been con-
trasted by Lehn and Slager (1959). However,
their contrast is based on a description of
Egyptian Arabic phonemes which are common
to all classes of speakers of Egyptian Arabic. As
phonemic differences occur among different
classes of speakers of Egyptian Arabic, it is neces-
sary to re-contrast Egyptian Arabic and English
obstruents according to sociolinguistic classes.
Chart I shows English obstruent phonemes.
Chart II shows the corresponding phonemes in
Egyptian and classical Arabic. Phonemes pecu-
liar to middle and upper class Egyptian Arabic
'Here Egyptian Arabic refers to the colloquial variety of
Arabic spoken in lower Egypt (in Cairo and the Nile delta,
the population center of the country) and used in radio,
T.V., and the movies.
'Harrel does not consider lvl a phoneme of Egyptian
Arabic because [v] varies with [f] among many speakers
(1957:17). However, he does not distinguish among classes.

CHART I. Points of Articulation of English Obstruent Phonemes

Labial Inter-dental Dental-Alveolar Palatal Velar

v
Voiceless p t cv k
~top
Voiced b d J g
v

Constrictive
Voiceless f e s s
v
Voiced v Ii z z

CHART II. Points of Articulation of Egyptian and Classical Arabic Obstruent Phonemes Which Correspond
to English Obstruent Phonemes

Labial Inter-dental Dental-Alveolar Palatal Velar

v
Voiceless 0 t ts k
~top
Voiced b d [Q] g

~onstrictive
Voiceless f 00 s
v
s

Voiced ~.X) I@j] z III

 PERCEPTION ANALYSIS
are boxed D. Phonemes peculiar to classical or
literary Arabic are double boxed D. Egyptian
Arabic Ivl is boxed in dots to represent its mar-
ginal occurrence among middle and upper class
Egyptians. Areas where Egyptian or classical
Arabic do not have phonemes which correspond
to English phonemes are circled 0 .
The writer would conclude on the basis of the
above articulatory contrast that uneducated or
lower class speakers of Egyptian Arabic will have
difficulty with non-clustered English obstruents
J,
Ip, v, 8, e, z/. Educated middle and upper
class speakers of Egyptian Arabic will have diffi-
culty with non-clustered English obstruent Ipl,
and, among some speakers, Iv/. 3 . 4
As virtually all Egyptians who are taught Eng-
lish formally are educated or of educated classes,
the following investigation is limited to educated
speakers.
An Empirical Test
Can the perceptual aspect of the above con-
clusion for educated speakers be validated by
empirical testing? In communication, the
listener does not hear the articulation of the
speaker but the acoustic result of the articula-
tion. Hence, the writer decided to use an acous-
tic rather than an articulatory description of
English phonemes as the basis for her test design.
Jakobson, Faunt and Halle's (1965) ~oncept of
distinctive features is useful here. Jakobson and
his associates maintain that phonemes of any
given linguistic system are distinguished by sig-
nificant acoustic features they call distinctive
features. No distinctive feature analysis of
Egyptian Arabic is available at the time of this
study. Jakobson et al. have described English,
however.
In English the obstruent phonemes are distin-
guished by the following acoustic oppositions.
1. grave vs. acute vs. compact
CHART 111. Distinctive Features of English Obstruent Phonemes
Tense
Mellow
Lax
Stop
Tense
Strident
Lax
Tense
Mellow
Lax
Constrictive
Tense
Strident
Lax
437
2. stop vs. constrictive
3. mellow vs. strident
4. tense vs. lax
Chart III shows how these features operate to
distinguish one phoneme from another. If a na-
tive speaker of English hears an acute constric-
tive that is mellow and tense, he interprets it as
an lsi. If he hears an acute constrictive that is
mellow and lax, he interprets it as a hi. In other
words, lsi is distinguished from If! and lsi be-
cause it is acute, not grave or compact; it is dis-
tinguished from ItI because it is a constrictive,
not a stop; it is distinguished from 181 because
it is mellow, not strident; and finally, it is distin-
guished from hi because it is tense, not lax.
3Lehn and Slager note that Egyptian Arabic It. d, s, zl are
dental and English It, d, s, zl are alveolar (1959:29). The
distinction is gratuitous. There is considerable evidence in
the literature of English phonetics that English It, d, s, zl are
articulated at both dental and alveolar positions by different
native speakers of American English.
4/8, al are of special interest. During her years of teach-
ing EFL in Egypt the writer shared with her American and
Egyptian colleagues a common observation that native
speakers of Egyptian Arabic confuse English Is, zl and 18,
a/. Many native Egyptians-some linguistically trained,
some linguistically naive-have told the writer that educated
native speakers of Egyptian Arabic confuse English 181 and
lsi -and IQ/ and hi - because 18, al are not in colloquial
Egyptian Arabic and they have not mastered 18, al in clas-
sical Arabic. Lehn and Slager's description of substitutions of
Is, zl for 18, al (but not It, dl for 18, al and not Igl for
I; I) (1959:28) reflects this thinking. These observations be-
long to the area of interlanguage, not contrastive analysis.
The contrast of English with Egyptian Arabic and classical
Arabic alone does not predics that educated speakers of
Egyptian Arabic will confuse IJ I and Igl, 181 and It I , or
Ial and Id/. Likewise, as the languages are presently de-
scribed, the contrast does not predict confusions of 181 and
I sl or confusions of I Q/ and hi.
The 18, dl problem in English for native speakers of
Egyptian Arabic is discussed more fully in "Some Deep Struc-
ture Manifestations in Second Language Errors of English
18, d/," (Moustafa 1979).
Grave Acute Compact
p t k
b d
~-
c
v
~-
f s s
v z z
8
a
438 THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL
The test this writer designed consists of a series
of minimally paired syllables contrasting the
characteristics distinguishing English obstruent
phoIJemes: tense vs. lax (lp-b, t-d, k-g, f-v, S-Z, s-
~, c-J, 8-a/); strident stop vs. mellow stop (lc-k,
J-g/); strident constrictive vs. mellow constrictive
(ls-e, z-d/}: mellow stop vs. mellow constrictive
(/t-e, d-d/); and strident stop vs. strident con-
strictive (lc-s, j_Z/).5 The test contrasts the pho-
nemes in word initial, medial and final positions
in L at/, la'_ a I and I ta_1 frames.
In the test the subjects are asked to say
whether or not each set of minimally paired
syllables "sounds the same or not." The subjects
could possibly give two types of unreliable re-
sponse: 1) saying differing pairs are the same or
2) saying identical pairs are different. Therefore,
the test has randomly placed pairs of identical
syllables and pairs of syllables theory tells us are
too extremely different to be confused. Subjects
who identify identical pairs as different or ex-
tremely different pairs as the same are excluded.
The subjects are interviewed individually. The
directions are given in Arabic. The test items are
spoken by the writer, a native speaker of stand-
ard American English, and the subjects' re-
sponses are recorded on paper by the writer im-
mediately after each response.
Over fifty people from ten to sixty years old
were tested in preliminary" and final tests in
Cairo. The findings reported are essentially the
same for all subjects tested, both in preliminary
and final testing, except for /z-d/ contrasts dis-
cussed below.
Middle-class sixth-grade children in Cairo,
ages eleven to twelve, are used in the final study.
They are used because of their accessibility and
linguistic homogeneousness and because they are
in the optimal grade before public school foreign
language training begins in Egypt. They have, of
course, well established linguistic habits in
Egyptian Arabic as well as six years of formal
school training in classical (literary) Arabic.
Twenty children, ten boys and ten girls, are in-
cluded in the final results.
Test Results
Tables I, 2, and 3 collectively show the per-
centage of subjects who identify the paired pho-
nemes as the same. Table I shows tense-lax ob-
struent confusions; Table 2 shows lax-lax ob-
struent confusions and Table 3 shows tense-tense
obstruent confusions. The data for the pho-
nemes Ip-bl are circled to signify the lack of cor-
responding contrast in middle and upper class
Egyptian or classical Arabic. The data for the
phonemes If-vi are circled in dots to represent
the marginal contrast of If-v I.
The test results confirm the prediction of the
contrastive analysis that educated speakers will
have difficulty with Ip/. However, they also
point to additional difficulties at the distinctive
feature and phonologic levels.
A Distinctive Feature Problem
The number of times lax-tense pairs are iden-
tified as "the same" (Table 1) points to a diffi-
culty not predicted by the above articulatory
contrastive analysis. Although It-d/, Ik-g/ and
Is-zl contrasts occur in all socio-linguistic classes
of Egyptian Arabic, approximately 20 percent of
the responses identify these three pairs of English
phonemes as "the same"; the responses to Is-zl
contrasts which occur in the middle class speech
of the subjects and le-dl contrasts which occur
in classical Arabic which the subjects had been
studying six years parallel It-d/, Ik-gl and Is-zl
contrasts. What could cause this confusion?
The difference between the data in Table 2
and Table 3 suggests an answer. Table 2 shows
lax-lax contrasts and Table 3 shows tense-tense
contrasts. Lax-lax pairs shown in Table 2 are
identified as the same 20 percent of the time.
However, tense-tense pairs shown in Table 3 are
identified as the same only 8 percent of the time,
less than one half as often as their lax counter-
parts in Table 2. The difference in perception in
Tables 2 and 3 indicates that stop-constrictive
and strident-mellow contrasts in themselves do
not constitute a perception problem for speakers
of Egyptian Arabic but when a lax phoneme is
involved distinction becomes more difficult. This
suggests that the lax obstruents of the tense-lax
pairs in Table 1 are causing interference in per-
ception. The same problem would seem to
underlie all lax-tense obstruent confusions
'The writer regrets that while she was in Cairo she did not
gather data on grave-acute, acute-compact, and compact-
grave contrasts.
"The preliminary tests differed from the final test in that
actual English words were used for minimal pairs rather than
the controlled phonemic environments of Ita-l, la_a I and
1_9t/. Also, the subjects used were 10 to 60 years old rather
than 11 to 12 years old.
 PERCEPTION ANALYSIS 439

TABLE 1. Percentage of Times Tense-Lax Obstruent Contrasts Are Identified as the Same

Tense-Lax Stop Contrasts Tense-Lax Constrictive Contrasts

Phoneme Frame Phoneme Frame
I-cHI I~_.,I Iw_1 I_Eltl liJ_el I ta..l
t-d 0 5 20 s-z 20 25 35
k-g 20 20 25 e-e 10 30 40
v v v v
c-J 35 50 35 s-z 20 30 40
....
p-b ~ ~ @ f-v ':~Q: ¥: '.?Q:
Total percentage = 36 percent (excluding /p-h/, If-vi = 26 percent).

TABLE 2. Percentage of Times Lax-Lax Obstruent Contrasts Are Identified as the Same

Lax Strident-Mellow Contrasts Lax Stop-Constrictive Contrasts

Phoneme Frame Phoneme Frame
I_tl ILal llil-l LGltl I~LClI Ita_I
z-e
v
65 35 15 d-e 10 5 5
v v
i-s 0 10 5 J-z 45 15 30
Total percentage = 20 percent (excluding post-juctural /z-el = 16 percent).

TABLE 3. Percentage of Times Tense-Tense Obstruent Contrasts Are Identified as the Same

Tense Strident-Mellow Contrasts Tense Stop-Constrictive Contrasts

Phoneme Frame Phoneme Frame
Latl 16-al ltaJ Letl la_al Ita-I
s-e 5 5 5 toe 0 0 10
v v
~-k 0 0 5 cos 35 5 30
Total percentage = 8 percent.

whether or not the particular phonemes have
analogous phonemes in Egyptian Arabic.
The fact that the interference is intermittent
rather than regular suggests that a free variant
allophone is involved. jakobson. Faunt and
Halle (1965:38) say that voicing is a redundant
feature in English lax obstruents: the lax pho-
v v •
nemes Ib, d, g, J, v, z, Z, al have VOIced, par-
tially voiced and voiceless allophones. If
Egyptian Arabic uses voicing rather than laxness
to distinguish It, k, s, sl from Id, g, z, zl and if
the writer occasionally uses partially voiced or
voiceless allophones of lax obstruents during the
interviews, it may lead subjects to perceive I d, g,
z, zl as "the same as" It, k, s, s/, e.g., voiceless.
This, of course, would need laboratory testing. If '
the subjects are using voicing to distinguish Eng-
lish obstruents, they are using a redundant fea-
ture rather than a distinctive feature of English.
If a lack of voicing is causing interference, it is
a perceptual problem not indicated by a pronun-
ciation problem. The writer perceives no differ-
ence between native English speakers' and native
Egyptian speakers' pronunciations of English ob-
struents Id, g, z/; voiced pronunciations of Eng-
lish lax obstruents are correct. If the native
speaker of Egyptian Arabic studying English is
ta~ght to equate Arabic graphemes) , ~ and
./ with the English graphemes, d, g, and z, his
pronunciation of Id, g, zi is quite acceptable,
but his perception would be erratically inaccu-
rate. Hence, it appears when features redundant
to a target language are distinctive to a native
language, intermittent perceptual problems may
occur which are not indicated by pronunciation
problems.
Phonemic Problems
The empirical data also expand the insights of
the articulatory contrastive analysis on an indi-
vidual phonemic level. In addition to identifying
new problems, they show the degree and direc-
tion of phonemic confusions.
440 THE MODERN LANGUAGE JOURNAL
The phoneme Ipl
English Ip-bl (Table 1) are identified as the
same approximately 92 percent of the time. Con-
trasts of Ip-bl are identified as the same more
constantly than any other obstruent contrast
tested. They are identified as the same at least
twice as often as any other lax-tense obstruent
pairs.
The phonemes Ic-il
The subjects' responses indicate that they hear
the strident quality of Icl when contrasted with
Ikl but can fail to hear the stop quality of Icl
when contrasted with lsi in word initial and
word final positions 35 percent and 30 percent of
the time (Table 3). Why should difficulty occur
word initially and finally but not word medially?
A re-examination of Egyptian Arabic 1t'S1 re-
veals that I tl in word initial I t'S/, and lsi in
word final I dl, have syntactic functions. In
It'Su:f!, ItI signals the pronoun "you" and IS! is
the first phoneme in the morpheme Isu:f!. In
/rnagits/. Imal and lsi signal negation and It I
is the last phoneme in the morpheme /git/,
Medially, as in Ikut'Si:na/, 1t'S1 does not have a
syntactic component. The stop quality of English
Ic, j/can be less distinct than the stop quality of
English /t.d/. As word initial and word final
1t'S1 have syntactic components, the stop quality
of ItI may be more important in these positions
than medially to distinguish the two distinct pho-
nemes in the cluster. It appears that the subjects
are unable to distinguish English Icl and IS!
when allophones of Icl with abbreviated stop
qualities are used in word initial and final
positions.
Contrasts of Ii I with Igl and I'll (Table 2)
closely parallel that of their tense counterparts:
the subjects can hear the strident quality of Ii I
when contrasted with I gl but can fail to hear the
stop quality of Ii I when contrasted with I'll in
word initial and word final positions 45 percent
to 30 percent of the time. Classical Arabic Iii as
used in Egypt may be a cluster of Id'll with a
stop quality parallel to that of I t'S/.
The phoneme Ivl
Contrasts of Ivl and If! are not perceived 40
percent, 34 percent and 55 percent of the time.
While Iv-f! contrasts are perceived more often
than /p-b/ contrasts, the occurrence oflax-tense
confusions masks any particular difficulties
which may occur with Iv/. Hence, we must rely
on the accuracy of the analysis of Egyptian
Arabic underlying the contrast or use other in-
vestigatory tools.
The phoneme I Ell
While Is-8/, It-81 and Id-d.1 contrasts are
almost always distinguished, Iz-d.1 contrasts are
identified as the same 65 percent of the time
word initially (Tables 2 and 3). The high fre-
quency of /z-d.1 confusions appears to be influ-
enced by the ItI used in the test frame. During
some of the preliminary testing, /z-d.1 contrasts
were made in non-/tl environments. Ten mono-
lingual adults, ages twenty to sixty whose re-
sponses passed the reliability screening, identi-
fied /z-d.1 contrasts as the same 20 percent, 10
percent and 20 percent of the time, respectively,
in these pairs, or approximately as often as they
confused lax-tense pairs. The difference between
the responses in It I and non-/tl environments
suggests that it is more difficult for native
speakers of Egyptian Arabic to distinguish
strident constrictive /zl and mellow constrictive
I d.1 in the environment of mellow I tl than in a
non-/tl environment. A similar difficulty with
mellow-strident contrasts in mellow or strident
environments has been noted in pronunciation
problems of native speakers of Egyptian Arabic
speaking English (Moustafa 1979). Further test-
ing controlled for mellow (It, d, 8, 81) and non-
mellow environments would be helpful. If the
lax quality of the Iz-d.1 phonemes increases the
difficulty for the subjects it would account for
their ability to distinguish Is-81 but not /z-Q1 in
the environment of I tl .
Summary
Before the writer conducted the empirical test
described above, she concluded on the basis of
an articulatory contrastive study that native
speakers of Egyptian Arabic from educated
middle and upper classes will have difficulty with
English obstruent Ipl and, among some
speakers Iv/.
The results of the empirical investigation of
perception may be summarized as follows:
1) The data reveal lax Ib, d, g, J'
v , z, 'l, d.1
may be perceived as their tense counterparts Ip,
t, k, C, f, s, S, 81. The data show this problem is
intermittent. Laboratory analysis of why this
occurs is needed. It may be that Egyptian Arabic
 PERCEPTION ANALYSIS 441

distinguishes these obstruent pairs through voic-
ing rather than laxness as in English.
2) The data confirm difficulties with Ipl and
show it may be perceived as Ib/. The data show
this is the most constant obstruent confusion.
3) The data reveal difficulties with word
initial and word final lei and IJ I. They show
that in these positions lei may be perceived as
lsi, and IJ I may be perceived as /z/. The data
show the problem is intermittent. It is hypothe-
sized that the difficulty occurs when allophones
of IC/ and IJ I with abbreviated stop quality are
used.
4) The data neither support nor contradict the
prediction that some speakers will have difficulty
with Iv/; the occurrence of lax-tense confusions
masks any particular difficulties which may
occur with Iv/.
5) The data tentatively suggest lax IElI may be
perceived as lax /zl in the environment of I t/'. A
controlled study of educated native speaker per-
ceptions of IElI in mellow and non-mellow envi-
ronments is needed.
Conclusion
The results of the empirical investigation
demonstrate that an articulatory contrastive
analysis of native and target language phonemes
alone predicts some but not all phonemic per-
ception problems with a second language. The
articulatory contrastive analysis of English and
Arabic obstruent phonemes developed in this
paper successfully predicts that educated
speakers of Egyptian Arabic will have perceptual
difficulty in English with Ip/. However, the con-
trastive analysis does not predict the perceptual
confusion in all eight tense-lax obstruent pairs,
the perceptual difficulty with word initial and
word final lei and ;j I and the perceptual diffi-
culty with 181 in the environment of I r/. In the
case of the lax obstruents and lei, the data
caused a re-examination of the analysis upon
which the contrast is based.
The empirical test of perception augments the
articulatory contrastive analysis in several ways:
1) it tests the accuracy of the analysis upon which
the contrast is based; 2) it identifies areas of dif-
ficulty not predictable by articulatory contras-
tive analysis; 3) it indicates the phonemes with
which troublesome phonemes may be confused;
4) it reveals the constancy of each problem.
It would also augment an error analysis by
pointing to areas of perceptual confusion not
indicated by pronunciation errors.
Hence, it is suggested here that systematic em-
pirical testing of perception using distinctive fea-
ture contrasts in the target language expands the
insights of both articulatory contrastive analysis
and error analysis.
REFERENCES
Gadalla, Barbara. A Contrastive Study of the Consonant
Blending Features of CairoEgyptian Arabic and Standard
American English. Unpublished M.A. thesis. The Ameri-
can University in Cairo. 1969.
Harrell, Richard S. "A Linguistic Analysis of Egyptian Radio
Arabic." Contributions to Arabic Linguistics, Charles
Ferguson. Ed. Cambridge. Massachusetts: Harvard Uni-
versity Press. 1965.
Harrell, R. S. The Phonologyof ColloquialEgyptian Arabic.
New York: American Council of Learned Societies, 1957.
jakobson, Roman C .. Gunnar M. Faunt and Morris Halle.
Preliminaries to Speech Analysis. Cambridge. Massachu-
setts: The M.l.T. Press. 1965.
jakobson, Roman and Morris Halle. Fundamentals of Lan-
guage. The Hague: Mouton and Co .. 1956.
Lehn, W. and William S. Slager. "A Contrastive Study of
Egyptian Arabic and American English: The Segmental
Phonemes." Language Learning, IX (1959).
Moustafa, Margaret Heiss. Perception and Articulation Dif-
ficulties of Cairene Arabs Learning English Segmental
Phonemes: An Exploratory Study. Unpublished M.A. the-
sis. The American University in Cairo. 1969.
Moustafa, Margaret Heiss. "Some Deep Structure Manifesta-
tions in Second Language Errors of English 18. Ill."
ERIC: Resourcesin Education. Ref. No. FLOI0127.

* * * * * * * *
MLJ Statistics: 1971-1979
During my tenure the MLJ editorial office processed over 1,300 manuscripts submitted for publication as
articles, academic or conference reports, review articles or essays, a yearly average of 147 manuscripts. The fifty-
six issues of volumes 55 through 63 (1971-79) contain 367 articles, academic or conference reports, review articles
or essays in addition to several guest editorials. (Items counted as "articles" include ERIC Document Lists and the
annual lists of doctoral degrees.)
In volumes 55-63 there are 1,832 reviews, an average of over 203 per year. -CHARLES L. KING, Editor