On overcoming phonetic interference in teaching russian as a foreign language

Yulia Mel'nik, Anastasia Zhurova, Ksenia Russu

К ВОПРОСУ О ПРЕОДОЛЕНИИ ФОНЕТИЧЕСКОЙ ИНТЕРФЕРЕНЦИИ ПРИ ОБУЧЕНИИ РКИ

В статье рассматривается вопрос интерференционного влияния родного языка обучающихся на результаты усвоения норм иноязычного произношения. Нарушения языковой системы как результат действия интерференции проявляется в речи иноязычных на всех ее уровнях, в том числе и на звуковом. Фонетические ошибки, вызванные интерференцией, создают специфический иностранный акцент, способны замедлять формирование навыков и умений во всех видах речевой деятельности, могут являться препятствием для проведения успешной коммуникации. Отмечается важность профилактики и коррекции ошибок, вызванных перенесением артикуляционных свойств и фонологических принципов родного языка на изучаемый. Ставится вопрос о необходимости продолжения разработки национально ориентированной методики и применения ее на практических занятиях по РКИ. Наиболее оптимальным при обучении фонетическому аспекту видится коммуникативно-направленное обучение, позволяющее выработать правильное произношение русских звуков иностранными обучающимися на уровне, позволяющем поддерживать коммуникацию на высоком уровне, удовлетворяющем их коммуникативным потребностям.

Ключевые слова: РКИ, фонетическая интерференция, ошибка, слухо-произносительные навыки, акцент.

The problem of interference influence of a mother tongue of a student on a learnt language has been described in detail in scientific literature. Also the issue of taking into account mother tongue while teaching foreign language in general and Russian as a foreign language in particular isn't controversial anymore [4; 6; 8; 5; 10; 12; 15; 19]. Variations in a foreign nonnative speech which are typical and widespread among speakers of a particular language are caused by language interference. For a long time interference refers to “substitution of linguistic units and rules of communication by relative and rules close to or common for contacting languages” (according to U. Weinreich) [9, p. 43]. The present definition was suggested in 1979 and nowadays is much wider. Modern researchers consider interference in different aspects: from structural- semantic equivalence to semantic interference and component analysis as well as within frames of sociocultural level of contrastive analysis, integration and switching [20, p. 9]. V. Alimov defines linguistic interference as a contact of two or more languages that may be both positive (reflected in an acquisition, consolidation and strengthen of skills in one language under the influence of another) and negative (reflected in deviation from norm because of language interaction) [2, p. 25]. Researchers point out that the interference might be both interlingual and intralingual. The first “arises from the existence of differences in the systems of mother tongue and learnt language and occurs on the level of meaning and use”. The second one “is relevant for those, who have already acquired experience in language learning. It is manifested in the fact that previously acquired skills and more strong skills interfere with new ones and it leads to mistakes”[24, p. 466]. Moreover, the transfer of mother tongue skills which are connected with associative links between the mother tongue and foreign language facts in the consciences of a student might be divided into direct and indirect interferences. In the first case what exists in the mother tongue influences the Russian speech, in the second one influences what is absent [25].

The question of interference influence of languages is particularly acute when it deals with the quality of acquisition of the Russian language phonetics. Violations of the language system as a result of interference actions appear in the speech of students at all levels including phonic [11, p. 196]. Phonic system of a language is a special usage in its structure. Phonetic level is one of the most strictly systemic, accurately theoretically organized. It rarely lets exceptions happen so it demands exceptional efforts while language acquisition by a foreigner and teacher's particular attention.

As well as E. Budnik, we consider phonetic interference as “a violation (distortion) of the secondary language system and its norm as a result of interaction between phonetic systems or pronunciation standards of two or more languages in the consciousness of a speaker. Such interaction appears through interference of pronunciation skills built on the base of interacting systems” [8, p. 171].

U. Weinreich considers phonetic interference in the broad sense of the term, meaning not only mistakes in phoneme manifestation but also destruction of their oppositions [9, pp. 25-60]. He suggests the following division of interference on types while analyzing its phenomenon in secondary phonetic system on phonological level:

a) not full differentiation of secondary language system phonemes,

b) over differentiation in phonemic composition of the second language,

c) reinterpretation of distinction of phonemes in secondary language system.

Contacting language systems determine the following phonetic patterns of:

- honological systems,

- articulatory base,

- prosodic features of speech.

As a result of comparative analysis of the Russian language and a mother tongue as a rule we may find out

1) full analogy features,

2) nonequivalent features (exist only in one language and have no analogs),

3) partial analog features [17, p. 166].

Features of the first group provide the conditions for the perfect use of a so-called positive transfer. Features of the second group have no analogs in the mother tongue of a student and exist only in the Russian language.

Usually the attention of linguists as well as of educators and instructors is concentrated on the negative result of interference, its prediction, research and prevention. Violation of the language system as a result of interference action happens at all levels including phonics in the speech of foreigners. It is a so-called phonetic negative interference.

According to modern Russian as foreign language teaching methods, it is recommended to provide instructions “with the account of ethno-lingual affiliation of a specific group of students” [18, p. 174]. It means that the important role here is given to consideration of mother tongue and matching it with the learnt one. Nationally-oriented approach in teaching Russian as a foreign language arises particularly urgently when it touches upon phonetic interference. Occurrence of a mixed language in the result of phonetic interference leads to emergence of the third intermediate system [27, p. 68].

A. Leont'ev's statement given 30 years ago is still up-to-date now. “An instructor has to remember that students, especially at the elementary level, usually unconsciously transfer speech skills of their mother tongue or interlanguage to the learnt Russian language speech. When it deals with the phonetics, the so- called accent arises. When it deals with vocabulary, Russian word is either chosen wrongly or is used in wrong collocations. When it comes to grammar, wrong or nonexistent structures in the Russian language come up. Thus, typical (widespread) stable mistakes emerge in the speech of students, which reflect the influence of mother tongue skills (or another foreign language learnt before). The goal of an instructor is not just to correct them but also to prevent it if it is possible.” [16, p. 31].

Modern methods determine the effectiveness of language teaching based on practical results. That is why one of the most important tasks for teachers, especially at the elementary level, is the ability to expect, prevent and correct mistakes in due time. Such mistakes could be made by a student because of transfer of articulatory properties and phonological principles of mother tongue to learnt language. However, an instructor is not always able to identify the reason for mistakes occurrence in Russian speech of students. It lies in the difficulty of a learnt language or in the systemic peculiarities of the mother tongue. N. Fedotova and A. Kasatkina separate groups of problems “arises in the process of foreign phonetic skills acquisition and teaching foreign pronunciation”. Among them the leading role is played by “psycholinguistic problems (phonetic interference)” or “linguistic problems (acquisition of the language, genetically non-relative to mother tongue)” [26, pp. 151-152]. N. Rogoznaja divides significance of mistakes in the process of communication into typical (appear many times and have systemic nature, are caused by interference influence of contacting languages) and untypical (individual or “a result of wrongly formed phonetic skills and also slips, hesitations” [22, p. 8]. Specificity of stable mistakes is that they present in speech of students of a particular nationality during the whole studying period and also after it. We strongly agree with N. Rogoznaja that “linguists are interested in both stable and unstable mistakes because in the process of teaching it is impossible to speak about the stability of formed skills and abilities” [22, p. 8]. We believe that for a practicing instructor of Russian as a foreign language the mentioned statement seems to be substantial as it is known that “psychologically and methodically it is easier to prevent a mistake than to correct it” [21, p. 113]. Phonetic mistakes caused by interference form not only a peculiar foreign accent but also may become a barrier for appropriate communication. N. Ljubimova says that “phonetic interference slows down the building of phonetic base of a learnt language. It influences both the production and perception of speech. The result is the disturbance of the interaction between listening and speaking skills in leamt language” [14, p. 15]. The mentioned statement doesn't contradict principles of modern nationally-oriented methods. According to them, the introduction of phonetic units has to be “founded on data of comparative analysis of phonetic systems of contrastive languages and based on the account of pronunciation challenges arisen in the speech of foreign students. It prevents possible violation and assesses the ways of errors correction” [26, p. 154].

T. Balyhina and O. Ignatieva divide mismatches occurred in the result of contrastive language study into phonemic and non-phonemic. “Phonemic mismatches lead to pronunciation mistakes which are, as a rule, unacceptable because they prevent correct understanding of statements. For example, [golat]-gorod (city). The mistake occurs because of the absence of phoneme [r] in some languages. Nonphonemic differences might be phonetic or distributive by nature. Phonetic differences don't depend on sound position while distributive ones have positional character [3, p. 60]. We believe that identification and methodical description of “mixed” mistakes which are the result of interaction of articulation bases and phonological systems of contacting language is useful. Conducting comparative analysis of two languages (mother tongue and studied language) lets identify cases of interference on each other. In our view, to accomplish this task it is important to have an idea of phonetic systems of comparative languages. It “allows to carry out diagnosis of listening and speaking mistakes correctly, understand reasons and sources, fundamentally map the way for correction, facilitate articulation skills and phonemic listening formation” [23, p. 42].

We note that E. Bryzgunova states that “mistakes of articulation type don't lead to phonemes intermixture as they don't touch upon the main phonological features of the phoneme”. She provides an example: “phoneme [f] doesn't oppose in hardness/softness so the pronunciation of hard [f] creates foreign accent but doesn't mix this phoneme with others” [7]. The variation from pronunciation standard could be the reason for “speech with an accent” so mistakes of articulation nature create one of the most stable features of foreign accent in the Russian language.

According to E. Azimov and A. Shhkin, for prevention and correction of stable mistakes in the process of forming listening and speaking skills in learnt language one should:

1) base on mother tongue of students in order to overcome negative phonetic interference,

2) regularly, consistently and systematically work on particular elements of articulation, deal with pronunciation of an isolated sound and within a word,

3) apply imitative and conscientious teaching methods [1, p. 19].

E. Bryzgunova while working on correction of the enumerated mistakes again emphasizes the importance of “listening exercises working out sound perception aurally foregoing speaking ones” [7, p. 13].

In actual practice of teaching foreign pronunciation instructors face a number of difficulties resulting from interference influence of a mother tongue. For instance, pronouncing a sound or a sound combination not existing in a mother tongue a student feels strong muscle tension of speech organs as well as face and neck muscles. That is why a student first should find “a combination of pronunciation movements which gives necessary pronunciation effect” [1, pp. 10-11]. However it is difficult to do without an instructor. One of the ways to handle such tension is regular training. It might be phonetic warm-up or articulation training before each class. Their goal is to get speech organs of foreign students ready for articulation of Russian sounds, set phonematic hearing up, and develop abilities of Russian speech perception. Moreover, it is necessary to take into account that the volume of air needed to pronounce Russian sounds could be different from similar sound pronunciation in a student's mother tongue.

While training pronunciation skills it is important not to downplay the importance of verbal advance since “successful sounds pronunciation mastering in foreign language depends on advanced development of phonematic hearing to a significant extent. Just in this case a person who has a normal hearing is able to control articulation and manage it” [13, p. 15]. It should be noted that not all students are able to imitate Russian sounds and rhythm models as they don't have phonematic hearing. We believe that in this case the most effective method is communication oriented teaching.

The recent researches show that the modern methods of teaching Russian as a foreign language use comparative linguistic knowledge and strive to the systemization of all mistakes from a nationally oriented point of view. For a practicing teacher it is really important to know the peculiarities of the taught language as well as students' mother tongue for pronunciation training and correction including elementary level.

An instructor has to gain an understanding about linguistic (phonetic) peculiarities of interfering language by means of studying specialized scientific and methodical literature. Secondly, the work on registration and systematization of mistakes on phonetic level is highly important. It enables both an instructor and a student to see and evaluate real consequences of interfering influence of contrasting languages, analyze and explain the reasons for mistakes. The consistency of everyday work is essential. It is advisable to start every class with phonetic exercises and training of intonation patterns. They should be based on determined problems. When necessary it is possible to use illustrative material demonstrating the correct position of speech apparatus organs. On-time correction of mistakes in the process of speech production is significant. In the case of inadequate attention there is a high risk of wrong phonetic skill development. For instance, it is possible to apply the echo repetition method or method of written recording of mistakes with further analysis.

The ignoring of mistakes and speeding up the class are inappropriate. Communion oriented teaching seems to be the most appropriate while learning phonetic aspects. It lets work out the correct pronunciation of Russian sounds by foreign students enough for maintaining high level communication satisfying communication demands. Intensification of teaching Russian pronunciation to foreign students involves consideration of dynamics of building listening and speaking skills and elimination of an accent which are detected by experimental analysis of mistakes in the students' speech.

Mastering of listening and speaking skills and elimination of an accent have to be carried out during the whole educational process based on nationally oriented initiatory phonetic and corrective courses. Effectiveness of phonetic classes might be raised by a balanced combination of practical and theoretical objectives of teaching.

References

interference pronunciation learning foreign language

1. Azimov Je.G., Shhukin A.N. Novyj slovar' metodicheskih terminov i ponjatij (teorija i praktika obuchenija jazykam) [New dictionary of methodic terms and definitions (theory and practice of languages teaching)]. Moscow, 2009. 448 p. (In Russian).

2. Alimov V.V. Special'nyj perevod i lingvisticheskaja interferencija.[Specialized translation and linguistic interference]. Moscow, MOSU, 2003. 134 p. (In Russian).

3. Balyhina T.M. Lingvodidakticheskaja teorija oshibki i puti preodolenija oshibok v rechi inostrannyh uchashhihsja [Liguodidactic theory mistakes and ways to overcome them]. Moscow: Izd-vo RUDN, 2006. 195 p. (In Russian).

4. Barahta A. V. Yavlenie interferencii v usliviyah izucheniya vtorogo inostrannogo yazika, vkluchaya russkiy kak inis- trannii [The phenomenon of interference in studying second foreign language including Russian as foreign // Vest- nik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Bulletin of Tomsk State Pedagogigal University]. 2015, no. 10 (163). Pp. 83-87. (In Russian).

5. Bescennaja V.V., Fedjaeva E.V. K voprosu о grammaticheskoy interferencii vo francuzsskom I russkom yazikah pri oboznachenii mesta I napravleniya dvizeniya [To the issue of grammatical interference in French and Russian languages in designating location and direction of movement] // Innovacionnoe obrazovanie i ekonomica [Innovative education and economics]. 2016, no. 21. Pp. 28-30. (In Russian).

6. Bozhenkova R.K., Mirzaeva T.E. The interference as linguocultural interaction of different phonetic systems: statement of the problem // Proceedings of the South-West State University. 2011, no. 1. Pp. 19-24. (In Russian).

7. Bryzgunova E.A. Prakticheskaja fonetika i intonacija russkogo jazyka [Practical phonetics and intonation of the Russian language]. Moscow, MGU, 1963. 305 p. (In Russian).

8. Budnik E.A. Foneticheskaya interferenciya i inostranniy accent pri obuchenii russkomu proiznosheniyu [Phonetic interference and foreign accent in teaching Russian pronunciation]. Lingua mobilis. 2012, no. 3 (36). Pp. 171-179. (In Russian).

9. Vajnrajh U. Jazykovie kontakti [Language contacts]. Kiev: Vishha shkola, KGU, 1979. 263 p. (In Russian).

10. Vahromeeva G.Je. Evolyuciya vzglyadov na problemu yazikovoy interferencii [Evolution of views on the problem of language interference] // Polilingvalnoe obrazovanie kak osnova sohraneniya yazikovogo naslediya i kulturnogo raznoobraziya chelovechestva [Bilingual education as a basis for conservation of cultural diversity of mankind]. 2014, no. 5. Pp. 17-22. (In Russian).

11. Vashutina O.Ju.. Tipichnie oshibki v ustnoy I pismennoy rechi kursantov-tadzikov (na primere subtekstov «Pis- mo», «Govorenie»). Typical mistakes in oral and written speech of Tajik students (on the example of subtexts “Letter”, “Speaking”) // Problemy modernizacii sovremennogo vysshego obrazovanija: lingvisticheskie aspekty. Materi- aly III Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferentsii [Problems of modernization of modern higher education: linguistic aspects. Materials of international scientific-practical conference]. Omsk, Omsk Automative- Armored Tank Engineering Institute, 2017. Pp. 191-197. (In Russian).

12. Krasnoperova L.S., Tokareva T.E. Lingvodid akticheskaja strategija obuchenija russkomu jazyku kak inostrannomu na jetape dovuzovskoj podgotovki [Linguodidactic strategy of teaching Russian as a foreign language at the level of pre-university training]. Moscow, 2011. 129 p. (In Russian).

13. Ljubimova N.A. Lingvisticheskie osnovy obuchenija artikuljacii russkih zvukov. Postanovka i korrekciya [Linguistic bases of teaching articulation of Russian sounds. Training and correction]. Moscow, 2011. 240 p. (In Russian).

14. Ljubimova N.A. Foneticheskaja interferencija [Phonetic interference]. Leningrad: Izd-vo LGU, 1985. 56 p. (In Russian).

15. Matjushina N.V. Lingvisticheskaya interferenciya na razlichnih yazikovih urovnyah [Linguistic interference at different language levels] // Nauchniy vestnik Voronezskogo gosudarstvennogo arhitekturnogo stroitelnogo universi- teta [Scientific Herald of the Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering]. 2015, no. 2 (26). Pp. 159-168. (In Russian).

16. Metodika. / Pod red. A. A. Leont'eva. M., 1988. (In Russian).

17. Mitrofanova O.D. Metodika prepodavanija russkogo jazyka kak inostrannogo [Methodology of teaching Russian as a foreign language]. Moscow, 1990. 270 p. (In Russian).

18. Nikitina T.G. Sopostavitelnie materiali v metodicheskom prilozenii k uchebniku russkogo yazika kak inostrannogo: fonetika [Comparative materials in methodical appendix to Russian as a foreign language textbook: phonetics] // Teoreticheskie i prikladnye aspekty sovremennoj nauki. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov po materialam IV Mezhdunarod- noj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii. [Theoretical and applied aspects of modern science. Collection of scientific papers. Materials of IV international scientific practical conference], in 3 vol. 2014. Pp. 173-176. (In Russian).

19. Radbil' T.B., Raciburskaja L.V. Slovoobrazovatelnie innovazii na baze zaimstvovannih elementov v sovremennom russkom yazike [Derivative innovations on the bases of adoption elements in modern Russian: linguoculturological aspect] // Mir russkogo slova [World of Russian word]. 2019, no. 2. Pp. 33-39. (In Russian).

20. Rogoznaja N.N. Tipologija lingvisticheskoj interferencii v russkoj rechi inostrancev (na materiale raznostrukturnyh jazykov). [Typology of linguistic interference in Russian speech of foreigners (on the material of different languages)]. Dis. ... d-ra philol. sciences. Moscow, 2003. 381 p. (In Russian).

21. Rogoznaja N.N. O postanovke trudnyh sluchaev proiznoshenija v russkoj rechi japoncev [About training of difficult cases of speaking in Russian speech of Japanese]. In: Jazyk, soznanie, kommunikacija: sbornik statej [Language, consciousness, communication: collection of articles] / Otv. red. V. V. Krasnyh, A.I. Izotov. Moscow: Maks press, 2001, no. 18. Pp. 113-122. (In Russian).

22. Rogoznaja N.N. Foneticheskaya interferenciya v russkoy rechi mongolov [Phonetic interference in Russian speech of Mongols] // Rossija i Mongolija: sovremennoe sostojanie i perspektivy razvitija sotrudnichestva: trudy nauchno- prakticheskoj konferencii [Russia and Mongolia: modern state and perspectives of development: collection of scientific practical conference]. Irkutsk, 2005. Pp. 3-16. (In Russian).

23. Sarkisova A.Ju. Interferencionnie trudnosti osvoeniya russkoy fonetiki nositelyami mongilskogo yazika [Interference difficulties of mastering of Russian language by native speakers of the Mongolian language]. Vestnik TSPU [TSPU Bulletin]. 2016, no.7 (172)/ Pp. 39-44. (In Russian).

24. Usatjuk N.B., Rogozhnikova T.P. Javlenija foneticheskoj interferencii v rechi laosskih studentov [Phenomenon of phonetic interference in speech of Lao students] // Jazyk. Tekst. Diskurs. Nauchnyj al'manah Stavropol'skogo otdelenija RALK [Language. Text. Discourse. Scientific almanac of Stavropol division RALK] / pod red. G.N. Manaenko. Stavropol', Izd-vo SGPI, 2011, no. 9. Pp. 465-470. (In Russian).

25. Uspenskij N.B. Vneshnyaya interferenciya I mezyazikovie sopostavleniya na urokah russkogo yazika [External interference in cross linguistic comparison at Russian as a foreign language classes] // Russkiy yazik v nacionalnoy shkole [Russian language in national school]. 1975, no. 1. Pp. 6-10. (In Russian).

26. Fedotova N.L., Kasatkina A.Ju. O trudnostjah ovladenija inojazychnym proiznosheniem i obuchenii foneticheskomu aspektu [About difficulties of acquisition of foreign pronunciation and teaching phonetic aspect] // Russkij jazyk kak inostrannyj i metodika ego prepodavanija: sbornik nauchnyh trudov [The Russian language as a foreign and methods of teaching: collection of scientific papers]. SPb, 2017, no. 28. Pp. 151-158. (In Russian).

27. Shherba L.V. Jazykovaja sistema i rechevaja dejatel'nost' [Language system and speech reality]. Leningrad, Nauka, 1974. 427 p. (In Russian).

СПИСОК ИСТОЧНИКОВ И ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

1. Азимов Э.Г., Щукин А.Н. Новый словарь методических терминов и понятий (теория и практика обучения языкам). М., 2009. 448 c.

2. Алимов В.В. Специальный перевод и лингвистическая интерференция. М., МОСУ, 2003, 134 c.

3. Балыхина Т.М. Лингводидактическая теория ошибки и пути преодоления ошибок в речи иностранных учащихся. М.: Изд-во РУДН, 2006. 195 c.

4. Барахта А.В. Явление интерференции в условиях изучения второго иностранного языка, включая русский как иностранный // Вестник Томского государственного педагогического университета. 2015, № 10 (163). C. 83-87.

5. Бесценная В.В., Федяева Е.В. К вопросу о грамматической интерференции во французском и русском языках при обозначении места и направления движения // Инновационное образование и экономика. 2016, № 21. C. 28-30.

6. Боженкова Р.К., Мирзаева Т.Е. Интерференция как лингвокультурное взаимодействие различных фонетических систем: к постановке проблемы // Известия Юго-Западного государственного университета. 2011, № 1. C. 19-24.

7. БрызгуноваЕ.А. Практическая фонетика и интонация русского языка. М., МГУ, 1963. 305 с.

8. Будник Е.А. Фонетическая интерференция и иностранный акцент при обучении русскому произношению // Lingua mobilis. 2012, №3 (36). С. 171-179.

9. Вайнрайх У. Языковые контакты. Киев: Вища школа, КГУ, 1979. 263 с.

10. Вахромеева Г.Э. Эволюция взглядов на проблему языковой интерференции // Полилингвальное образование как основа сохранения языкового наследия и культурного разнообразия человечества. 2014. № 5. С. 17-22.

11. Ватутина О.Ю. Типичные ошибки в устной и письменной речи курсантов-таджиков (на примере субтестов «Письмо», «Говорение») // Проблемы модернизации современного высшего образования: лингвистические аспекты. Материалы III Международной научно-практической конференции. Омск, Омский автобронетако- вый инженерный институт, 2017. С.191-197.

12. Красноперова Л.С., Токарева Т.Е. Лингводидактическая стратегия обучения русскому языку как иностранному на этапе довузовской подготовки. М., 2011. 129 с.

13. Любимова Н.А. Лингвистические основы обучения артикуляции русских звуков. Постановка и коррекция. М., 2011. 240 с.

14. Любимова Н.А. Фонетическая интерференция. Л.: Изд-во ЛГУ, 1985. 56 с.

15. Матюшина Н.В. Лингвистическая интерференция на различных языковых уровнях // Научный вестник Воронежского государственного архитектурного строительного университета. 2015, № 2 (26). С. 159-168.

16. Методика. / Под ред. А. А. Леонтьева. М., 1988.

17. Митрофанова О.Д. Методика преподавания русского языка как иностранного. М., 1990. 270 с.

18. Никитина Т.Г. Сопоставительные материалы в методическом приложении к учебнику русского языка как иностранного: фонетика // Теоретические и прикладные аспекты современной науки. Сб. науч. трудов по материалам IV Международной научно-практической конференции: в 3-х ч. 2014. С. 173-176.

19. Радбиль Т.Б., Рацибурская Л.В. Словообразовательные инновации на базе заимствованных элементов в современном русском языке: лингвокультурологический аспект // Мир русского слова. 2019, № 2. С. 33-39.

20. Рогозная Н.Н. Типология лингвистической интерференции в русской речи иностранцев (на материале разноструктурных языков): дис. ... докт. филол. наук. Москва, 2003. 381 c.

21. Рогозная Н.Н. О постановке трудных случаев произношения в русской речи японцев // Язык, сознание, коммуникация: сборник статей / Отв. ред. В.В. Красных, А.И. Изотов. М.: Макс пресс, 2001, № 18. С. 113-122.

22. Рогозная Н.Н. Фонетическая интерференция в русской речи монголов // Россия и Монголия: современное состояние и перспективы развития сотрудничества: труды научно-практической конференции. Иркутск, 2005. С. 3-16.

23. Саркисова А.Ю. Интерференционные трудности освоения русской фонетики носителями монгольского языка // Вестник ТГПУ. 2016, № 7 (172). С. 39-44.

24. Усатюк Н.Б., Рогожникова Т.П. Явления фонетической интерференции в речи лаосских студентов // Язык. Текст. Дискурс. Научный альманах Ставропольского отделения РАЛК / под ред. Г.Н. Манаенко. Ставрополь: Изд-во СГПИ, 2011, № 9. С. 465-470.

25. Успенский Н.Б. Внешняя интерференция и межъязыковые сопоставления на уроках русского языка // Русский язык в национальной школе, 1975, № 1. С. 6-10.

26. Федотова Н.Л., Касаткина А.Ю. О трудностях овладения иноязычным произношением и обучении фонетическому аспекту // Русский язык как иностранный и методика его преподавания: сб. науч. трудов. СПб, 2017, № 28. С. 151-158.

27. ЩербаЛ.В. Языковая система и речевая деятельность. Л.: Наука, 1974. 427 c.

Размещено на Allbest.ru