DIPLOMATURA UNIVERSITARIA DE LA PEDAGOGÍA DE

LA FONÉTICA CON ORIENTACIÓN EN LENGUA

INGLESA

DIDÁCTICA DE LA FONOLOGÍA Y DICCIÓN DEL

INGLÉS

THE IMPORTANCE OF ARTICULATORY PHONETICS

THROUGH MINIMAL PAIRS, ACTIVITIES AND GAMES

FINAL EXAM

PROFESORA: SILVANA GARÓFALO

ALUMNA: ANDREA ALEJANDRA SCARBACIO
SEDE: CAPITAL FEDERAL
AÑO: 2020
 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Setting the Scene
Many foreign language learners encounter difficulties when trying to communicate
in English. One of the reasons is that they fail to produce or understand certain
sounds because these are not present in their mother tongue. Only one phoneme
can change the whole meaning learners are trying to communicate (convey?);
therefore, the teaching of articulatory phonetics is crucial. (Apart from that, a
mispronunciation mistake could have a global effect on the utterance and then
becomes a global error)This is the case of global errors. Brown states that “[g]lobal
errors hinder communication; they prevent the hearer from comprehending some
aspect of the message [… In contrast,] local errors do not prevent the message
from being heard, usually because there is only a minor violation of one segment of
a sentence, allowing the hearer/reader to make an accurate guess about the
intended meaning” ( Brown, 1980: pp. 231-232). But if a minor violation of one
segment of the message can prevent the hearer understand the meaning the
interlocutor is trying to convey, it may become a global error Omit? An example of
global error, then, could be found….. For example, some phonemes can be
troublesome in a telephone conversation. What is more, the awareness and
mastery of the segmental elements which can hinder communication can be
achieved by different pedagogical strategies and techniques. Within those
strategies and techniques, we can find minimal pairs. Besides, The teaching and
practice of minimal pairs can take place by means of different activities and games
that can reach/meet the diverse characteristics of learners.

In conversation Intelligibility is of utmost importance, since it constitutes the means

to attain what every learner desires: being able to communicate/put his/her
message across. This can take place in different settings like a classroom, at work,
in a foreign country, among others. for example. Intelligibility “concerns the
production and recognition of the formal properties of words and utterances, and in
particular, the ability to produce and receive phonological form, but regards the
latter as a prerequisite (though not a guarantee) of ILT [International Language
Teaching] success at the locutionary and illocutionary level” (Jenkins, 2001: p. 78).
In order to be intelligible, foreign language learners resort to their mother tongue
when they do not know how to say something in the target language. Sometimes
they succeed because they can find an equivalent in their mother tongue, but
sometimes they do not because they think that their first language can be useful,
but unfortunately they fail to convey the desired meaning, since what they consider
can help them in communicating hinders understanding. Pennington and Rogerson
Revell (2009)19 assert that positive transfer takes place when there is a possible
facilitating influence of the L1 in the case of correct performance while negative
transfer, or interference from the L1, occurs in the case of incorrect performance.

1
Transfer errors indicate “that the speaker has wrongly activated a plan from his
mother tongue store” (Littlewood, 1984: p. 75).
What will be tackled in the present paper is how interference can be solved
(diminished/ tackled?) with the help of articulatory phonetics. “The phonetics of a
language concerns the concrete characteristics (articulatory, acoustic, auditory) of
the sounds used in languages” (Cruttenden, 2014: p. 3). “Describing how sounds
are made is the business of articulatory phonetics” (Ashby, 2011, p. 9).
Articulatory aspects relevant to Spanish learners of English will be taken into
consideration. Special emphasis will be made on errors produced because of
interference, since the sounds which will be analysed are not present in students’
their mother tongue. The selected phonemes of this study will be /z/ and /v/.
Once the relevant articulatory phonetics related to the sounds chosen has been
described, we will try to show how…what will be shown is how it can be
systematized and practised by means of a selection of minimal pairs through the
use of present in different activities and games. This is a very important step
because it gives learners the possibility of putting into practice what they have
learnt or need to reinforce in a fun and joyful moo/way.
The universe of study taken into account in the present paper is Argentinian
learners of English (AGE/LEVEL?) who need to learn phonemes which are not
present in their mother tongue. These phonemes prove to be very difficult to
acquire, to internalize, therefore, articulatory phonetics plays a crucial role in EFL
learning. Yet Our research hypothesis/assumption is that if learners are presented
with all the relevant theory and this theory is then systematized and practised by
means of appealing activities and games, the road to success can be attainable.
1.2 Stating the problem
Due to the vast number of phonemes which have proved to be problematic to
Argentinian learners who want to learn English properly, the description of these
phonemes exceed the confines of this paper; therefore, a selection of minimal pairs
will be taken into consideration to make the purpose of this work possible. The
objectives of the present study are to examine different phonemes in their minimal
pairs and how these minimal pairs can be systematized in different activities and
games.
The following is a selection of the minimal pairs that will be analyzed:
1) /s/ /z/
2) /b/ /v/

The purpose of this paper can be encapsulated in the following research questions:

2
  To what extent is articulatory phonetics important in to the teaching of
minimal pairs?
 How can the differences present in them be systematized and practised by
means of a variety of activities and games?

The following hypotheses derive from the research question stated above: only 1
- Taking into account that Articulatory phonetics can be is important in the
teaching of certain problematic phonemes Argentinian learners of English
cannot do not encounter in their mother tongue and that certain phonemes
could be taught more easily by means of minimal pairs the implementation
of activities related to Minimal pairs embedded in games and game-like
activities (Penny Ur) which meet students’ diversity in terms of sensory
channels: – visual, auditory and kinaesthetic might enhance learners’
articulatory/ pronunciation skills.
-
- can be systematized and practised by means of activities and games which
may enhance their acquisition respecting the different types of learners –
visual, auditory and kinaesthetic.

3
 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Finch and Ortiz Lira affirm that “the motor nerves that link the speaker’s brain with
his speech mechanism activate the corresponding muscles. The movement of the
tongue, lips, vocal folds, etc., constitute the articulatory stage of the chain, and the
area of phonetics that deals with it is articulatory phonetics” (Finch and Ortiz Lira,
1982: p.2).
One phoneme which is mispronounced can provoke misunderstanding in our
interlocutor. “The most important sounds are the ones that can change the
meaning of words. These are called phonemes. If you say pin and it sounds like
bin, people will misunderstand you” (Carley et al, 2018: p 1). A phoneme can be
defined as “the smallest contrastive phonological unit which can produce a
difference in meaning” (Fudge, 1970, as cited in Finch and Ortiz Lira, 1982, p.23).
That is why the teaching of minimal pairs is of utmost importance. “It is possible to
establish the phonemes of a language by means of a process of commutation
(= substituting) or the discovery of MINIMAL PAIRS, i.e. pairs of words which are
different in respect of only one sound segment” (Cruttenden, 2014: p.43). “In all
languages, there are certain variations in sound which are significant because they
can change the meanings of words. For example, if we take the word man, and
replace the first sound by [p], we get a new word pan. Two words of this kind
distinguished by a single sound are called a minimal pair” (Collins and Mees,
2013:p.12).
Burt and Kiparsky “distinguish between local and global errors. Local errors do not
hinder communication and understanding the meaning of an utterance. Global
errors, on the other hand, are more serious than local errors because global errors
interfere with communication and disrupt the meaning of utterances. Local errors
involve noun and verb inflections, and the use of articles, prepositions, and
auxiliaries. Global errors, for example involve wrong word order in a sentence”
(Burt and Kiparsky, 1974, as cited in Touchie, 1985, p. 76). A phonological error
can become a global one because it can hinder communication - it can change the
whole meaning of what is being tried to verbalise. On the other hand, a local error
might not hinder the whole understanding because the whole message is taken
into consideration the meaning of the message can be recapitulated/recovered
from the other elements of the utterance and, thus, Communication is not put at
risk.this can be omitted. Depending on the effect of the error within the interaction
or within the chunk of language where it appears, it might become a global or local
error. If it becomes a global one, intelligibility will be at risk.
Here is when intelligibility comes into the picture. “Some researchers have
considered how mutual intelligibility can be sustained in such contexts where
English is primarily used as a lingua franca. Jenkins (2000, p. 95) […] suggests the
need for ‘some sort of international core of phonological intelligibility,’ which she
4
refers to as the “Lingua Franca Core” (LFC). She sees this as “a set of unifying
features which at the very least, has the potential to guarantee that pronunciation
will not impede successful communication in EIL settings” (Pennington and Revell,
2019: pp. 135-136). Consequently, Jenkins in her Lingua Franca Core suggests
that there is a need for changing the goals of pronunciation in an international
context. The target is aiming at successful communication, that is to say,
intelligibility, but not at native-like pronunciation.
Moreover, she speaks of incorporating “notions of ‘teachability’ and ‘learnability’
into pronunciation teaching. Some phonological features, like nuclear stress will be
categorized as ‘teachable’ because of the clear-cut, generative nature of their
rules, and others, like pitch-movement, as ‘learnable’ (acquirable) outside the
classroom (Jenkins, 2001: p.2).In relation to this, the phonemes which have been
included in the present paper seem to be teachable, that is to say, they would need
to and can be taught inside the classroom.
In her Lingua Franca Core inventory, Jenkins asserts that all consonants are
essential, “except for /θ/ and /ð/ sounds, as in thin and this. Allophonic variation is
acceptable as long as it does not cause confusion with another phoneme (e.g.,
Spanish pronunciation of /v/ as [β] in word initial position can be heard as /b/, e.g.,
vowels is heard as ‘bowels’) (Jenkins, 2002, as cited in Pennington and Revell,
2019: p 138).According to Jenkins, the mispronunciation of some segmental
elements can affect communication. The phonemes that will be tackled below can
create misunderstanding if they are not pronounced in the correct way and then,
intelligibility can be at risk/be challenged.
Apart from that, analysing key phonemes in minimal pairs can lead to the solution
of interference learners may encounter when trying to acquire a new sound
because differences between the phonemes in the minimal pair will be taught,
systematized and practised. To see, hear and feel these differences, articulatory
phonetics can be really helpful. What will be taken into account here/ in this study
is how certain consonants are articulated. As was mentioned above, the sounds
which will be taken into consideration are the contrastive pairs: /s/ /z/ and /b/ and
/v/ because /z/ and /v/ can be difficult to produce because they are non-existent in
Spanish.
Consonants are classified in different ways. The aspects that will be taken into
account/ focused on are: What will be considered and analysed are voicing and the
place and the manner of articulation of the consonants which mark the difference in
the minimal pairs chosen for the present paper. “A consonant is a speech sound
which involves an obstruction of the airstream as it passes through the vocal tract.
Describing a consonant involves describing the nature of the obstruction, and there
are three factors to be taken into consideration: voicing, place of articulation and
manner of articulation” (Carley et al., 2018: p. 10).

5
Voicing refers to the actions of the vocal folds during the articulation of a
consonant. Different actions of the vocal folds produce voiced and voiceless
sounds. In voiced sounds “[t]he vocal folds are held together so that the airflow
from the lungs causes them to vibrate. [In the case of voiceless sounds t]he vocal
folds are held apart as in the position of normal breathing” (Ibid, p. 10). At any
place of articulation sounds can make the vocal chords vibrate or not; therefore
consonants are called voiced and voiceless respectively (Cruttenden, 2013: p. 29).
Some consonants have the same place of articulation but they differ in the energy
with which they are produced and it is here that voicing is vital to make these
sounds different. “Certain of the English consonants function in pairs – being in
most respects similar, but differing in the energy used in their production. For
instance, /p/ and /b/ are articulated in the same way, except that /p/ is a strong
voiceless articulation, termed fortis; whereas /b/ is a weak potentially voiced
articulation, termed lenis” (Collins and Mees, 2013: p.14).
The second characteristic that differentiates consonants is the place of articulation,
that is to say “where in the vocal tract the obstruction is made. Place of articulation
is described in terms of an active articulator that moves towards a passive
articulator which is in a fixed position” (Carley et. al., 2008: p.11). “The active
articulator is the organ that moves; the passive articulator is the target of the
articulation – i.e. the point towards which the active articulator is directed.
Sometimes there’s actual contact, as in [t] and [k]. In other cases, the active
articulator is positioned close to the passive articulator, as in [s] or [θ]” (Collins and
Mees, 2013: p. 46). Consonants are produced in different parts inside the mouth.
They can be bilabial, labio – dental, dental, alveolar, palato – alveolar, palatal,
velar and glottal. These places of articulation will be described below if they are
present in the minimal pairs that have been chosen for the purpose of this paper.
The third characteristic which marks a difference among consonants is the manner
of articulation. “Manner of articulation is the term used to describe the kind of
obstruction involved in articulating a consonant” (Carley et al., 2013: p. 12).
“Manner of articulation tells us how the sound is produced. All articulations
involve a stricture, i.e. a narrowing of the vocal tract which affects the airstream”
(Collins and Mees, 2013: p. 47). “The obstruction made by the organs may be total,
intermittent, partial, or may merely constitute a narrowing sufficient to cause
friction” (Cruttenden, 2013: p. 30). If there is a complete closure, the consonant will
be a plosive, an affricate or a nasal. If an intermittent closure is present, a trill (or
roll) as in French and Spanish, and a tap in many Scottish pronunciations as well
as in Spanish will occur. In the case of a partial closure, laterals come into action. If
there is narrowing, fricatives will be present, but if the narrowing is not
accompanied by friction, approximants or frictionless continuants will come into the
picture (Ibid, 2013).
Some phonemes which are used in English do not exist in the Spanish variety
spoken in Argentina. This provokes misunderstandings when a learner living in this
from this country wants to communicate with a native speaker, a second language
or foreign language learner in any circumstance. Learners turn to what they have
at hand and this results in an interference which hinders understanding. As was

6
mentioned above, a way to dissipate this problem is to resort to the teaching of
articulatory phonetics in minimal pairs. This is of utmost importance because only
one sound can change the meaning the learner is trying to convey can be omitted.

What also needs to be taken into consideration is that learners experience the
world in different ways; therefore, when teaching takes place, it has to be done in a
way which can attract and suits all learners. “People who experience the world
primarily visually like to take in information through their eyes. They like to see
things written down, read books, look at pictures, diagrams and so on. They take
notes (usually neatly) in order to look at them again. People who experience the
world primarily auditorily like to get information through their ears. They like to
hear things being said, perhaps even have a chance to repeat things in their own
head. They would rather record a lecture than take notes. People who experience
the world primarily kinaesthetically like to get information through their hands or
bodies or emotions. They like to touch things, move their hands and feet, walk
around the room. They also take notes, not necessarily to look at them again, but
because the movement of their hand across the page helps them to absorb
information” (Revell and Norman, 1997: p. 31). Teachers, when teaching minimal
pairs, need to integrate all kinds of learners; that is to say, those who are visual,
auditory and kinaesthetic.
Yet, some authors assert that the first approach towards learning a second or
foreign language is mainly kinaesthetic. “Underhill (2012) advises that teachers
need to help learners become aware of the muscles that make sounds in order to
develop their ‘proprioceptive intelligence’ and retrain muscular habits. Developing
this awareness is what is termed proprioception, a neurological concept referring to
the internal sense of knowing which muscles and body parts one is using and with
how much energy. (Underhill, 2012, as cited in Pennington and Revell, 2019, p.
205). However, “we note that from the perspective of cognitive phonology,
pronunciation patterns exist at a cognitive level as well as a muscular and
mechanical level” (Pennington and Revell, 2019, p. 205). What can be said then is
that although the first steps taken towards learning the pronunciation of a second
or foreign language can be kinaesthetic, it also needs to be tackled in a cognitive
way, depending on the level, to include all types of learners as was stated above in
order to provide a comprehensive an integral approach.

7
 ANALYSIS

The chosen minimal pairs are some of the ones which seem to be troublesome for
Argentinian speakers. What will be described are the phonemes which change in
the minimal pairs and how these phonemes can be systematized and practised by
means of activities and games. The minimal pairs in question are /s/ /z/, and /b/ /v/.
The first set of minimal pairs is constituted by /s/ and /z/. The second phoneme is
non-existent in Argentina; therefore, English foreign language learners tend to
produce/use /s/ thinking that it will suffice. Unfortunately, they will not succeed as
can be seen in the following minimal pairs.Here are some examples:
/s/ /z/
face phase
price prize
race rays
sap zap
sink zinc
sip zip
sue/Sue zoo

Although these phonemes have differences, they share some characteristics. They
coincide in the place of articulation, since they are both alveolar and, as to the
manner of articulation, fricative. In alveolar sounds the active articulator is the tip of
the tongue which moves towards the upper incisors which constitute the passive
articulator.In the case of fricatives, “[t]he articulators are close to each other but
don’t make a complete closure. The airstream passes through a narrowing,
producing audible hiss-like friction, as in English /f v θ q s z t n h/” (Collins and
Mees, 2013, p.51). They differ in that /s/ is voiceless and fortis whereas /z/ is
voiced and lenis. (Cruttenden, 2013). This seems to be very simple, but
Argentinian speakers find it difficult to pronounce because an equivalent cannot be
found in their mother tongue. What becomes key in their succeeding when
pronouncing this phoneme is in diminishing the energy with which it is produced
and in using the vibration of the vocal chords.
The second and last minimal pair chosen is /b/ and /v/. Once again, the first
component exists in the learners’ mother tongue, not the second one; that is why, it
needs to be worked upon.

8
 /b/ /v/
bail veil
ban van
be/bee v
best vest
bet vet
boat vote
bowels vowels
curb curve
In this case, more differences than coincidences are found. The only
characteristics they share are that they are voiced and lenis. Yet, they do not
coincide in the place nor manner of articulation. As regards the place of
articulation, /b/ is bilabial and /v/ is labio-dental. The former is bilabial because the
lower lip articulates with the upper lip and the latter is labio-dental, since the lower
lip moves towards the upper incisors. They have the active articulator in common.
This can be helpful. The manner of articulation is another issue. /b/ is a plosive
whereas /v/ is a fricative. In a plosive “a complete closure is formed in the vocal
tract, blocking the airstream, and then released” (Carley et al., 2013: p. 12) and in
a fricative “a narrowing is formed in the vocal tract, causing turbulence and fricative
noise as the airstream is forced through” (Ibid, 2013: p. 12).
The characteristics that these sounds share can bridge the gap between them and
make teaching and learning easier. This constitutes a stepping stone towards
working on the interference by means of a/the description of the key phonemes in
these minimal pairs and practice as follow up. How can these descriptions stop
being theory to become practice?
The first step could be resorting to proprioception; that is to say, learners can
experience the way these sounds are articulated in a kinaesthetic way. Teachers
can help learners become aware of the muscles they use when they pronounce
sounds and feel how and where they are produced. This can apply to all levels:
from beginners to advanced learners.
As was mentioned above, pronunciation patterns exist at a cognitive level as well
as a muscular and mechanic level. Therefore, a theoretical presentation can be
delivered according to the level learners have/of learners in order to enhance their
awareness related to the specific sounds/target sounds. If they are just starting
learning English, this presentation would not be profitable for them. In fact, it could
hinder understanding. For this theoretical presentation, the teacher can resort to
activities which include different kinds of learners this should be developed further
9
or omitted. Learners experience the world in various ways: visually, auditorily and
kinaesthetically. Teaching needs to be appealing to all kinds of learners omit.
Once, they have experienced the sounds kinaesthetically, they could be shown a
video to see and hear how the phoneme is articulated and power points with
attractive colours and drawings or pictures for those who are visual, to resort to
audios and drilling for those who are auditory. What is more, all kinds of learners
can benefit from all these activities because they will help them to internalize the
differences present in the minimal pairs.
It is time for them to start practising by means of games. What will be found below
is a selection of games taking into consideration the different types of learners.
In this first game, learners use their bodies to recognise the different words in the
minimal pairs. They still do not produce them. Yet, by listening to them over and
over again, they start internalizing them. Alex Case (Case, 2011) describes a game
called “Minimal Pair Stations.” The teacher can choose a minimal pair and the
learners will run and touch one of the two walls in the classroom, for example the
right wall is for “ban” and the left wall is for “van.” If this is not possible, learners
can hold up their right or left arm, or hold up flashcards with the two sounds written
on them, or they can stand up or sit down, depending on the word mentioned. This
activity can be ideal for auditory and kinaesthetic learners. Yet, if some pictures are
added with the phonetic symbols, or pictures of the words mentioned, it can also
attract visual learners.
Tiny Tefl Teacher shares different ideas as regards practising minimal pairs in her
webpage. One of the activities she suggests is playing a bingo. Learners will
choose 9 words from the minimal pairs the teacher is teaching and they will write
them down. Then, the teacher will call out words and they will tick them off and
they come up. If they have crossed out all the words, they will shout “Bingo!”
(Minimal Pairs Activities, (n.d.). This game can be appealing to all kinds of
learners.

In Ship or Sheep, one of the games which is proposed to practise minimal pairs is
called “Fingers.” In the first stage, learners use their bodies, but then, they start
producing the sounds in question. At first, the teacher, for each pair, says words at
random, e.g. bet, bet, vet, bet, vet, vet. Learners show with one or two fingers if
they hear sound 1 or sound 2. Then, learners practise in pairs (Baker, 2006: p. vii).
Learners first listen to the teacher performing the activity and then, with the model,
they are the ones to put the game into action. This can apply to auditory and
kinaesthetic learners.
Yet, a variation on this game proposed by Tefl Teacher called “Number Dictation”
can become attractive to visual learners as well. The teacher can write the minimal
pairs learners need to practise on the board. Then, they can do some drilling. After
this, the teacher can dictate some of the words, but the learners will only need to
write the number, not the word. For example, the teacher can say “buzz, bus, eyes,
zoo”. The students should write “2, 1, 2, 2”. Afterwards, they can work in pairs.

10
One will play the role of the teacher by dictating the words and the other will say or
write the corresponding numbers. Still, another variation on this activity could be
used. Instead of saying the words, they could be mouthed silently. By doing this,
attention to the way phonemes are articulated will be drawn more thoroughly.
(Minimal Pairs Activities, (n.d.)
Another game in Ship or Sheep is called “Mingling.” In this case, it is not only part
of the class who produces the sounds in question, but all of them and, at the same
time, it seems to appeal to all kinds of learners: visual, auditory and kinaesthetic.

Each student has one of the minimal pair cards. Students mingle (move
around randomly), not showing their cards but repeating their word to find
the others with the same sound. They form a group, which checks correct
membership. The first group to complete their set of words with the same
sound wins. Students swap cards within their group and check
pronunciation of new words before all mingling again to find the person in
the other group with the other half of their minimal pair. Students change
cards with that person and check each other’s pronunciation. Then start the
mingling game from the beginning so both sounds are used (Baker, 2006:
p.viii).

Another game proposed by Alex Case is called “Minimal Pairs Pelmanism.” This
appears to be a visual and kinaesthetic game. Nevertheless, auditory learners can
profit from it as well because they can exercise other ways of learning. “Students
spread a pack of cards face down across the table and take turns turning two cards
over to find a matching pair” (Case, 2011). These cards can contain words or
pictures. This can be played as a whole class, in groups or in pairs depending
upon the number of students.
A very popular game for the practice of minimal pairs is the one proposed by Mark
Hancock in his book Pronunciation Games. It is called “Pronunciation Journey.”
Learners are given a tree-like diagram which has a starting point in the trunk of the
“tree” and then the learners have to choose whether to go up on the right side or
the left side depending upon what word of the minimal pair they hear. The teacher
can choose four minimal pairs. The final “branches” have a different place name,
for example “Buenos Aires,” “Moscow,” etc. Then, the teacher will tell them if the
place they arrive at is the correct one or not. Again, this game seems to be suitable
to all kinds of learners (see Appendix).
Another game which can be used to practise minimal pairs and can be attractive to
all kinds of learners is a word match proposed by the web page EslGames.com.
There are two stages in this game. In the first one, the teacher needs to choose
some minimal pairs and to write them on the board in two columns, for example:

11
 1 2
ban van
be/bee v
best vest
boat vote
bowel vowel
curb curve

Afterwards, the teacher says one of the words from the board and the students
need to decide which the correct sound is. This needs to be done a few times and
then, students can practise in pairs.

In the second stage, the teacher will need a set of around 20 cards that contain
examples of minimal pairs that students need to practise. Students will work in
pairs. Each pair will need their own complete sets of cards. They will also need to
set up a barrier between them so they can lay out their cards without the other
student seeing them. A course book propped up on the table will usually do the job.

The first student chooses eight cards from their set and lays them out on the table
behind the barrier, the other student should spread out their cards on the desk so
he or she can see them all. The leading partner now clearly speaks (and repeats if
necessary) each of their chosen words and the listening partner attempts to lay
their matching card. After all 8 cards have been laid, remove the barrier and see
whether the listening student has managed to match all of the speaker’s cards
correctly. It’s a good idea to rotate pairs so that students are exposed to different
speakers. You could also do this activity in groups of four with a pair on each side
of the barrier” (Word Match, (n.d.). This appears to be suitable for all kinds of
learners (see Appendix.)

Another game Tiny Tefl Teacher suggests and that is attractive to different types of
learners is called “Vocab-grab game”. In this game, students will work in groups of
3-4. The teacher needs to put a few minimal pair words on slips of paper and
needs to give a set to each group. First, the teacher will be the one to call out the

12
words, but then, one of the learners in each of the groups will be in charge
(Minimal Pairs Activities, n.d.). The learner who picks up the correct word will get a
point. A variation on this one would be working in pairs and having an eraser, for
example, between the students. The teacher “will tell the class which sound they
are listening for (e.g. /b/). You call out a list of words (“vet, vote, big”) and as soon
as they hear that sound, they grab the object – if they are right, they get a point”
(Ibid., n.d.).

This section has attempted to show how articulatory phonetics can play an
important role in the systematization of phonemes in certain minimal pairs and how
these minimal pairs can be practised by means of activities and games which can
be appealing to different types of learners.

13
 LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the number of minimal pairs Argentinian language learners can profit from,
this constitutes a small-scale study on two sound pairs which are troublesome to
Spanish learners which has attempted to answer the research questions and to
validate the hypothesis set.
The present paper has tried to demonstrate that there is a variety of activities and
games that can cater for the heterogeneous characteristics of learniers in terms of
sensory channels: kinaesthetic, auditory and visual which can be used for the
purpose of practising the minimal pairs mentioned above and could lead to
overcoming the mispronunciation difficulties, through awareness raising and
focused and enjoyable practice. However, given the large number of fun and game
like activities available, this study has focused on just a small sample for length
constraints.
In addition to this, due to the fact that the world is undergoing a pandemic at the
moment, an action research could not have been accomplished along the present
study. Yet, it is highly recommended to carry out the selected activities to prove
what has been stated and analysed in a real class. The idea would be to continue
working on this step in another paper in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Along this paper we have seen that global errors are different from local errors
because the former can hinder communication. What learners desire is to be
intelligible when they are trying to convey a message. Some errors put intelligibility
at risk; therefore, they need to be spotted, taught (focused on) and practised. The
problem of interference of Spanish sounds into the target language, English, can
be solved with the help of articulatory phonetics.

The present paper has tried to show that Argentinian students can benefit from the
acquisition of articulatory characteristics of certain English phonemes that have
proved to be troublesome in order to improve their intelligibility; that is to say, to
avoid global pronunciation errors. This can be achieved if teachers resort to
articulatory phonetics by presenting and helping learners to notice/become aware
of the different features which can be found in minimal pairs in an appealing way to
visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learners. Once these have been presented, then,

14
the moment comes for learners to start acquiring/experiencing/using the different
phonemes present in the minimal pairs which have been chosen. This can be done
by means of a variety of attractive games and fun activities that cater for the
different sensory styles of learners.

The purpose of the present paper was to prove that articulatory phonetics is
relevant in the teaching of certain problematic phonemes Argentinian learners of
English do not encounter in their mother tongue system. What is more, these
phonemes which are difficult to learn can be taught and learned by means of
minimal pairs, which can be practised by means of integral activities and games
which may enhance their acquisition.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashby, Patricia. (2011). Understanding Phonetics. London: Routledge.

Baker, A. (2006). Ship or Sheep. (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H.D., (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. (5th ed.).
USA: Pearson Education
Carley, P., Mees, I.M. & Collins, B. (2018). English Phonetics and Pronunciation
Practice. London and New York: Routledge.
Case, A. (2011). Minimal Pairs Games. [Online]. Retrieved October 21 st 2020 from
https://www.englishclub.com/efl/tefl-articles/minimal-pairs-games/
Collins, B. & I.M. Mees. (2013). Practical Phonetics and Phonology. (3rd ed.). Oxon:
Routledge.
Cruttenden, A. (2014). Gimson’s Pronunciation of English. London and New York:
Routledge.
Finch, D.F & H. Ortiz Lira. (1982). A Course in ENGLISH PHONETICS for Spanish
Speakers. London:Heinemann Educational Books.

15
Hancock, M. (1996). Pronunciation Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Jenkins, J. (2001).The Phonology of English as an International Language.
OxfordUniversity Press.
Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and Second Language Learning. Language
acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Minimal Pairs Activities. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22 nd, 2020, from
https://www.tinyteflteacher.co.uk/teach-english/pronunciation/minimal-pairs
Pennington, M.C and P. Rogerson - Revell (2019). English Pronunciation Teaching
and Research. London. Macmillan.
Revell, J. & S. Norman. (1997). In Your Hands. NLP in ELT. London: Saffire Press
Touchie, H. (1985). Second language learning errors, their types, causes and
treatment.[Online]. Retrieved November 5th, 2020, from https://jalt-
publications.org/files/pdf-article/art5_8.pdf
Word Match – a minimal pairs game for teaching pronunciation. (n.d.). Retrieved
October 22nd, 2020, from https://eslgames.com/minimal-pairs-game/

 Excellent development.
 Clear object of study and relevant theoretical framework chosen.
10 (ten)

Format: 1,5 spacing

Uniform colour (grey or black)

16
17
APPENDIX

18
Minimal pair cards - /s/ /z/
Sue zoo loose lose

bus buzz eyes ice

rice rise peas piece

race rays gross grows

plays place phase face

prize price police please

© ESLgames.com

19
Minimal pair cards - /b/ /v/

berry very bail veil

bolt volt boat vote

ban van bars vase

best vest bowels vowels

bet vet dribble drivel

fibre fiver curb curve

© ESLgames.com

20