English and Hausa Consonant Sounds: A Constrastive-Cum-Error Analyses

Cite this article as: Umar Dahiru (2025). English and Hausa Consonant Sounds: A Constrastive-Cum-Error Analyses. Zamfara International Journal of Humanities,3(2), 84-92.www.doi.org/10.36349/zamijoh.2025.v03i02.010

ENGLISH AND HAUSA CONSONANT SOUNDS: A CONSTRASTIVE-CUM-ERROR ANALYSES

Umar Dahiru

Department of Libral Studies, Federal Polytechnic Kaura Namoda, Zamfara State

Abstract: This study analyses the consonant sounds of English and Hausa languages, by identifying  the similarities, differences as well as source of errors made by Hausa ESL learners. Learning of English as a second language by Hausa native speakers is usually faced with difficulties which are usually attributed to the influence of the features of their first language (L1). The Hausa speakers of English use English as a second language and features of the Hausa consonants are transferred into their spoken English. This study as an exercise in applied linguistics adopts a 'Contrastive Analysis Approach' which was initiated by Charles C.C. Fries in (1945) and developed by Robert Lado in (1957) by describing and identifying the similarities and differences between the consonants of the two languages in question. The researcher also adopts 'Error Analysis Approach' which was founded by Corder et-al (1960) to analyse and explain the sources of errors made by the Hausa ESL learners with the aid of the primary data. The result of this study shows that English and Hausa languages have more in common than differences. With a total number of 18 consonants shared by the two languages, yet the Hausa ESL learners still face a lot of challenges in their spoken form. The primary source of these errors according to this study is the intrusion of the L1 features in the learning of English language followed by factors such as inattention to detail and linguistic incompetence.

Keywords: Contrastive analysis, error analysis, English Consonants, L1 interference, Hausa ESL learners.

Introduction

English language is unquestionably a global asset. It is an official language in several African countries, including Liberia, Nigeria, and South Africa. Worldwide, more than 100 countries speak English in some forms. Children around the world learn English as a foreign language and English often becomes a common denominator between people of different nationalities when meeting while traveling or doing business (Richard Nordquist, 2024).

Today there are about 6,000 languages in the world, and half of the world population speaks only 10 of them. English is the single most dominant of these 10, (Kenneally, 2007). It is spoken nearly everywhere. In Nigeria particularly, it serves as a medium of instruction, language of national assembly and instrument of unison among its array of functions. It is against this background, people perpetually make efforts in learning the language. In northwest region, where the predominant population speaks Hausa language, communicating in English is plagued by mother tongue interference. First language influence jeopardizes the positive transfer of the language. Although diverse perspectives among linguists have led to spirited debates on issues relating to language studies, they have unanimously agreed that, First language (L1) significantly influences the acquisition of target language (L2) (Eckman,2004). Therefore, at the segmental level, the pronunciation difficulties being faced by English as a Second Language (ESL) learners are quite attributable to the phenomenon of negative transfer where sounds of L1 are erroneously transferred into the target language. Brown (2014). The threat of segmental transfer errors is so detrimental to the success of ESL learning that they make expressions odd or even unintelligible especially when the listener does not share an L1 with the speaker.’ To avoid this, ESL learners must master the L2 sounds. Mastering the L2 sounds means having a firm understanding of both the phonetic and phonological features of the sounds. The worst pitfalls are the distributions and realizations of the different phonemes (Jenkins,2008). These distributions hinder the success of oral communication. It is against this backdrop linguists founded approaches to ameliorate the situation. The first pedagogic approach to errors is contrastive analysis which was developed by the American Linguist, Lado, (1957) in his book, Linguistics across Cultures. This approach is based on the premise that languages are different and that because of these differences the language learner will encounter difficulties. Ferguson (1965), pointed out that one of the major problems in the learning of a second language is the interference caused by the structural differences between the native language of the learner and the second language. A natural consequence of this conviction is the belief that a careful contrastive analysis of the two languages offers an excellent basis for the preparation of instructional materials, the planning of courses and the development of actual classroom techniques.

Error analysis on the other hand, is the second approach, it is sometimes referred to as posteriori contrastive analysis. Error analysis was founded by the British linguist, Stephen Pit Corder in the 1960s. The purpose of the approach is to assess, and determine a language learner’s proficiency in a second language. The approach locates, quantifies, classifies, and categorizes errors in learner’s texts. The concern in this paper is on the both approaches. Therefore, this paper attempts to describe the two languages in question (Hausa and English), compares and contrasts their consonant sounds and proceed by identifying the sources of errors in the ESL spoken language

Review of Related Literature

Many studies have been conducted on the comparison between two or more languages in an attempt to identify areas of similarities and differences with a view to predict or analyze challenges of either of the compared languages. For example, Baso (2013), discovered that the Indonesians always pronounce s as /s / even when it comes after voiced sound as in needs (needz). This occurs due to the intrusion of Indonesian language. Similarly, Kwambehar and Waya (2014), discovered that the dental fricatives / θ / and / ð / are missing in the TIV language and the TIVs substitute /ꝋ/ with /t/ and /ꝺ/ with /d/. The vowels /ə/ and /ꬱ/ are not found in TIV Language, therefore speakers of the TIV face challenges in pronouncing these sounds. They found that /l/ and /r/ are more of allophones in Unlike in English where ‘lice’ and ‘rice’ are different words, ‘lwam’ and ‘rwan means the same thing in TIV.

In a similar study, Shiaondo and Dangana (2020) found out that in certain TIV words /r/ and /l/ are interchangeable and considered to be in free variation as in gure, - gule (to kneel down), mbamaren mbamalen (parents), the knowledge which some TIV learners of English make them to realize words like: radio /reidiəu / as ladio/leidiəu /, red/red/ as led/led/. It has also been found that / θ / and /ð/sounds are not found in TIV language and as such some TIV learners of English find it difficult to pronounce words with such sounds but instead replace them with /t/ and /d/ that are available in TIV phonology as in faith /feiθ/ realized as fate /feit/ and then /ðən / realized as den /den/ respectively.

Hence, Baso (2013), conducted a study of the Indonesian and English. The researcher discovered that the English sound /b/ is mostly /p/ word-finally in Indonesian. The /l/ is not in the Indonesian inventory. In view of this, the Indonesian ESL learners should pay a meticulous attention to practicing these sounds in order to avoid error transfer.

Awe (2013), who studies the effects of phonemic differences on Yoruba speakers of English, attributed the errors to the distinctions between the two compared languages. The study revealed that Yoruba speakers of English have difficulties with some English phonemes, particularly the sounds that are obviously absent in their mother tongue. Learners’ failure to produce the English sounds that are not readily available in their L1 jeopardizes the positive transfer of the language.

In the research, 100 Yoruba students were randomly sampled to test the effects of phonemic distinctions of the two languages. The result reveals that some sounds of English, such as long  vowels and consonant clusters, are absent in Yoruba language. These dissimilarities constitute difficulties by Yoruba ESL learners.

Keshavarz and Khamis (2017) study the problems faced by Hausa native speakers in the articulation of certain English vowels such as /ᴧ/, /ᴐ:/, and /з:/. The study discovered that there was error transfer and that all the errors committed by the participants were due to the influence of the learners’ L1. The study discovered that the participants failed to pronounce certain English vowels; for instance, /ᴧ/ was pronounced as /o/. English words mispronounced by Hausa speakers of English include ‘young’ [yong/ yon], ‘brush’ [broʃ/buroshi], ‘cup’ [kop/ kopi], and ‘lovely’ [lofeli/ lobili]. This is because the sound /ᴧ/ is non-existent in Hausa. Such a sound would normally be replaced with the available Hausa vowel sound /o/. Favouring the idea of substitution, Jowitt (1991) asserts that the English vowel /ᴧ/ is considered a problem for Hausa speakers. Meanwhile, majority of the participants substituted the English vowel /ᴐ:/ with /o/, so that words such as ‘water’ are pronounced as [wotǝ], ‘saw’ pronounced as [so], and ‘ball’ pronounced as [bol]. In a kindred study, Linda (2011) discovered that Igbo speakers of English in Nigeria replace /з:/ with /e/ when trying to pronounce ‘girl’ [gel].

In addition to the above, Sabariah and Malah (2015), in their research work, they discovered that although English and Hausa share some certain number of phonemes, there is a significant difference between their phonemic systems and as a result, the Hausa ESL speaker would pronounce /d/ as /d/ instead of /t/ especially in regular verbs past form. This is because Hausa /d/ is not voiced. Meanwhile, the Hausa ESL learners should pay a special attention in their pronunciation of the /d/ sound when preceded by a voiceless sound as in the word passed, punished, helped etc.

Ekpe (2010), who works on the phonological features of Nigerian English, contends that these features affected the segmental sounds and supra-segmental of the Nigerian ESL learners. The study discovers that most of the Nigerian speakers substitute /t/ for /θ/ and /d/ for /ð/, therefore, thin becomes tin and this become diz. He said this happens because most of the Nigerian languages do not have the dental fricatives.

Methodology

This study is a primary research and the researcher employs a quantitative statistics for data analysis. First off, 120 Hausa native speakers of Zamfara state studying at Federal Polytechnic Kaura Namoda were randomly selected and given a pronunciation test on the six (6) English consonant sounds that were found absent in Hausa language. The participants comprise 60 male and 60 female students across the departments in the institution with none of them as an English major since the school neither offers English nor linguistics as a program. However, Use of English and communication is taught across all the departments in the institution as a required general study course.

The researcher describes, compares and contrasts the English and Hausa consonant sounds and proceeds by examining critically the two classes of consonants in order to realize how the familiarity of Hausa affects the learning of the English phonemes. The former being the method of the earlier approach of contrastive analysis and the latter being the error analysis approach. In the course of doing this, the researcher first took the standard accent of English (RP) and the standard accent of Hausa (Daidaitacciyyar Hausa D.H.).

Description of English Consonant Sounds

English consonant sounds are obviously produced with some degree of stricture of air coming from the lungs. They are 24 in number and they are classified based on places of articulation, manner of articulation and voicing state of the glottis. The table below shows the consonant sounds indicating places of articulation and manner of articulation.

Table I: English RP Consonants, based on Cruttendan a. Gimson's Pronunciation

	Bilabial	Labio-Dental	Dental	Alveolar	Post-Alveolar	Palatal	Velar	Labio- velar	Glottal
Plosive	p b			T d			K g		[ʔ]
Fricative		F v	θ ð	S z	ʃ ʒ				H
Affricate					tʃ dʒ
Nasal	M			N			ŋ
Lateral				L
Approximant					R	J		W

Description of Hausa Consonant Sounds

Hausa has 34 consonant sounds which include even the sounds that are not found in English. They include ejectives and plosives, laryngealized glide, alveolar trill, retroflex flap etc. The following gives a clear description of Hausa consonant sounds

TABLE II: Hausa (D.H. Consonants, base d on Jeggar P.J. Hausa Amsterdam, (2001), M.A.Z. Sani: An Introductory Phonology of Hausa (2005), Siffofin Daidaitacciyar Hausa (2009) and Maraka Yanki (2013), Zarruk Shimfidar Ilmin Harsuna a Hausa (1996).

	Description	Sound		Description	Sound
1	Bilabial plosive	___ b	15	Alveolar nasal	N
2	Alveolar plosive	T d	16	Palatal nasal	ɲ
3	Velar plosive	k g	17	Velar nasal	Ŋ
4	Labialized velar plosive	kw gw	18	Bilabial fricative	ɸ ___
5	Palatalized velar plosive	kj gj	19	Palatalized bilabial fricative	ɸj ___
6	Glottal plosive	ʔ	20	Alveolar fricative	s z
7	Palatalized glottal	ʔj	21	Post-alveolar fricative	ʃ
8	Bilabial implosive	___ ɓ	22	Glottal fricative	H
9	Retroflex implosive	___ ɗ	23	Post-alveolar affricate	tʃ dʒ
10	Alveolar ejective	s’ ___	24	Alveolar lateral	L
11	Velar ejective	K’ ___	25	Alveolar Trill/roll	R
12	Labialized velar Ejective	K’w ___	26	Retroflex flap	ɽ
13	Palatalized velar ejective	K’j ___	27	Palatal approximant	J
14	Bilabial nasal	M	28	Labio velar Approximant	W

C. English and Hausa Consonants Compared

Plosives: while the English language has a total of 6 plosives (the glottal stop /ʔ / being an allophone): /p b t d k g /, Hausa language has 11: / b t d k g kw gw kj gj ʔ ʔ j /. However, the Hausa implosives /ɓ/ and /ɗ/ and the ejectives /s’/, /kˊ/, /kw/ and /ky/, which are glottalic sounds, can also be described as plosive consonants because of the plosion as the articulators abruptly separate (Roach 2000). The English language does not have any implosive or ejective. The plosive /p/ is missing in the Hausa inventory and English also lacks / kw/, /gw/, /kj/, /gj/ and /ʔj /. These are some of the Hausa consonants with two levels of articulation (Sani 2013). The plosives / b t d k and g/, are the same in Hausa and English.

Fricatives: the English fricative consonant sounds / f v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ h / are 9 in number but Hausa has only 6 / ɸ ɸj s z ʃ h /. Subsequently, the sounds: / f v θ ð ʒ / are not found in the Hausa inventory and the two languages share: / s z ʃ h /. From a point of view, ESL learners whose L1 lacks /θ/ and /ð/ use /t/ and /d/ instead (Cruttendan, 2001) The English /s/, when used after a voiced sound as in needs and begs, assumes voicing and is therefore realized as /z/ McMahon (2002). However, the Hausa /s/ always maintains its voicelessness even after a voiced sound as in tilas (must) and tabbas (sure) (Sani 2005). The English /z/ is sometimes /s/ in spelling (as in is and pause ), the Hausa /z/ is always written as /z/. The /ʃ/ sound in English is represented by different combination of letters like ‘sh’ – shin, ‘ch’ –champagne, ‘t’ – inertia, ‘ss’ –comission etc., the Hausa /ʃ/ is always ‘sh’. The sound /h/ does not occur word-finally after vowels in both the languages.

Affricates: both Hausa and English have two affricates only: /tʃ dʒ/.The sound / tʃ/ occurs in English as ‘t’, ‘ch’ or ‘tch’ Demola) as in nature, chill, and match but in Hausa it always occurs as ‘c’ (Sani 2005) as in cibiya (navel) and ciwo (injury). Moreover, it occurs in all positions in English but it does not occur word-finally in Hausa. On the other hand, the sound /dʒ/ is spelt only as ‘j’ in Hausa as in jaka (bag), jimla (sentence) but in English,‘’ it’s spelt with: ‘j’, as in job, ‘g’as in fragile, ‘dg’ as in fridge, ‘dj’ as in adjunct, adjacent, et-cetra. Words like soldier, suggest, exaggerate, grandeur and arduous are also pronounced with / dʒ/ in them.’’ Ismail and Barmo (2016).

Nasals: English has 3 nasals /m n/, the Hausa language has 4: /m n ɲ ŋ/. The English nasals are spelt differently as ‘mm’, ‘mn’, (for /m/) ‘nn’, ‘gn’, ‘kn’ (for /n/), ‘ng’, ‘nk’ (for ŋ ) respectively, while Hausa /m n/ occur as ‘m’ and ‘n’ but /ɲ/ and /ŋ/ basically occur as allophones of /n/. /ŋ/ occurs word-finally as in caŋ (there) and naŋ (here) or syllable finally before a velar sound as in baŋgo (wall) and niŋka (double) (Sani M.A.Z., 2005). ‘’The /ɲ/ is a palatalized nasal and is always realized in the combination ‘ny’ as in hanya (road) and kunya (shyness). /m/ and /n/ can both occur in all positions in English but in Hausa /n/ becomes /ŋ/ word-finally. /ŋ/ does not occur in initial position in both, and /ɲ/ in Hausa is restricted to medial position (Malah and Sabariah 2014:110). Nasal sounds are all voiced but when they follow /s/ in initial cluster in English they become devoiced as in snail and smuggle (Beverely and Inger 2008:79-105). However, owing to the fact that, Hausa has no consonant clusters, its nasals are always voiced and they do not occur as syllabic. (Sani M.A.Z. 2011:1-49). As in the English words spittoons and nanny.

Laterals: In both English and Hausa, the lateral sound is /l/. This sound occurs in English as either ‘l’ or ‘ll’ but Hausa always has it as ‘l’. in English, /l/ has two allophonic variants. When it occurs before a vowel or /j/ as in look, live or value, it is clear [l] (Eckman, 2004); and when it occurs after a vowel as in meal, bull or fill, or before another consonant as in feels and deals, it is dark [ɫ]. The /l/ is devoiced after /p/ or /k/ as in please, people, clean and close, Cruttendan (2001), Roach P. (2000) and Beverely C. and Inger M.M. (2008). “The Hausa language does not use consonant clusters and the /l/ in Hausa is fully voiced in all positions Sani M.A.Z. (2005) and Beverely C. and Inger (2008). Finally, while the English /l/ may be silent as in calm, film and would, the Hausa /l/ never occur in silent form_ it is always pronounced.

Approximants: the English language has three approximants which include:/r j w/ but Hausa has only two which include /j w /. The Approximants, Trill/roll and Flap: the English RP does not have any Trill or Flap but the Hausa language uses the trill /r/ and the Flap /ɽ/. The English /r/, which is a post-alveolar approximant, contrasts with the Hausa /r/, which is an alveolar trill/roll.

The Hausa /ɽ/ is unique and is not found in English. The Hausa /r/ is articulated in two ways /r/ and /ɽ/, and like the other ESL users, the Hausas too will face problem in not pronouncing the sound Roach P. (2000:19-80). This is because while in English it occurs only before vowels, in Hausa it also appears after vowels and it is always pronounced. But the English /j/ and /w/ are similar to those in Hausa. In Hausa, the two sounds are restricted to onset position as in yabo (praise) and baya (back), wando (trousers) wasu (some). The two can also come as coda elements of medial geminate glide as in tarbiyya (discipline) dawwama (eternity) Jeggar P. (2001) and Sani M.A.Z. (2011).

Table III: Displaying the total number of errors made by the participants per sound and their percentages

S/N	Sounds	Response words	error response	Correct response	Percentage of errors
1.	/p/	Palm	34	86	28.3%
2.	/f/	Fan	38	82	31.6%
3.	/v/	Van	108	12	90%
4.	/θ/	Throttle	111	9	92.5%
5.	/ð/	The	90	30	75%
6.	/Ʒ/	Vision	40	80	33.3%

The table above shows the total number of errors made by the participants per word where the sound /θ/ has the highest number of errors. A total number of 111 errors were made by 120 participants, which amounts to 92.5%. Meanwhile, out of 120 participants, only 9 participants got it correctly. This sound is followed by the labio-dental, fricative voiced sound /v/, voiced dental fricative /ð/, voiced alveolar palatal fricative /Ʒ/ with 108, 90 and 40 errors respectively. There is also voiceless labiodental fricative /f/ with 38 errors and the voiceless bilabial plosive /p/ with 34 errors. The table shows that the dental fricative voiceless sound /θ/ has the highest number of errors while the bilabial, plosive, voiceless /p/ has the least number of errors.

Discussion of the Findings

The consonants of both English and Hausa are explored and it has been understood that although the languages have shared similarities in some consonant sounds, there exist some significant differences based on their phonemic systems. English language has 24 consonant sounds while Hausa has 34. Out of the 24 English consonant sounds, 18 are shared by both English and Hausa. The ones that are not present in the Hausa language are the ones that were used by the researcher to give a test to the students. And, while all English consonants are produced with pulmonic airstreams, Hausa consonants are produced using both pulmonic and glottalic airstreams. Also, this study also found that the two languages have different allophonic variations and sound structuring. While English uses consonant clusters, Hausa uses long consonants and abutting consonants. Unlike English where some consonants such /l/in palm, /s/ in debris are not pronounced, the Hausa consonants are always pronounced and a syllable must always begin with a consonant sound.

Studies of this nature have always been carried out in order to identify similarities and differences between the phonemes of the compared languages so that areas of possible difficulties are predicted especially for effective ESL/EFL learning. This helps in the area of curriculum planning and classroom instruction.

Error Analysis

Linguists such as Johnson (1975) are of the view that, contrastive analysis should be used to explain difficulties already found rather than predicting such difficulties. In the view of this, the researcher also adopts this approach.

Error analysis which is the second approach adopted by the researcher, provides data on actual attested problems and so it forms a more efficient basis for designing pedagogical strategies. Thus, the analysis of errors focuses the attention of the investigator on errors and understanding their sources. In the light of this, the following errors are hereby analyzed based on the pronunciation test given to a total number of 120 students.

The Hausa ESL learners obviously have difficulties in pronouncing the consonant sounds:/p f v θ ð and Ʒ/. The Hausa speakers pronounce /p/ and /f/ as /ɸ / (the Hausa bilabial fricative), so that pan becomes /ɸan/ and friend becomes / ɸren/. The Hausas substitute /v/ with /b/, /θ/ with /t/, /ð/ with /d/ and / Ʒ/ with / dʒ/.

The source of these errors is the L1 of the participants. The above highlighted errors occur as a result of the differences between the English and Hausa consonants. Secondly, lack of practice hinders the pronunciation of the English consonant sounds by the Hausa ESL learners as it has been observed that some of the participants are conscious about the correct pronunciation of these consonants but were inattentive to putting them into practice.

Henceforth, the Hausa ESL learners always pronounce the silent sounds in English. This is because Hausa consonants are always pronounced.

Similarly, the Hausa ESL learners make mistakes in the combination of letters like /tt/, /mm/ and /bb/ etc. as long consonants that should be longer than when single letters are used. This is because the consonant sounds in Hausa can be both long and short. Unlike English where all consonants are short and only vowel sounds have this feature.

While previous studies on contrastive analysis such “English and Hausa Segmental Phonemes: a Contrastive Analysis” by Zubairu and Sabariah developed data from archive and use only one hypothesis, in their studies, this research combined the two major theories: Error Analysis and Contrastive Analysis and used a primary data to test the students’ pronunciation based on the predicted challenging English Consonant sounds by Hausa ESL learners and discovered that, apart from Mother Tongue Interference (MTI), factors such as incompetence in the target language and inattention to detail are part of the reasons why Hausa ESL learners make errors while communicating in English.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of this study, the researcher concludes that Hausa and English consonants have more in common than differences with a total number of 18 English consonants shared by the two languages.

The differences in the sounds are what result the substitution of the English sounds with the Hausa equivalents; this substitution is what creates error transfer, the error transfer is what affects speakers’ intended meanings. This results in misinterpretations among the Hausa ESL learners of Federal Polytechnic Kaura Namoda. By and large, mother tongue interference is what makes learning of the English consonants by the Hausa native speakers utterly challenging. Hence, the Hausa ESL learners are not putting efforts in practicing what they learn in English classes; they often ignore the applications of the rules deliberately.

Subsequently, this study concludes that these errors are like a sin which must be avoided in order to achieve communicative competence.

Sequel to the above, the researcher recommends that:

1.      English language teachers across all levels should pay a meticulous attention to the Oral English aspect; more specifically, the problematic consonant sounds should be given a special attention during classroom instruction and the Hausa ESL learners should make assiduous efforts in effectively pronouncing the problematic consonants in connected speeches.

2.      Lecturers of English at Federal Polytechnic Kaura Namoda and all tertiary institutions in the state should apply effective teaching methods such as drill method and objectives with a view to address this area of language use.

3.      School administrators, government, non-governmental organizations and decision makers at all levels, especially in Hausa dominant areas, should contribute in the provision of adequate and appropriate audio and audio-visual teaching-learning resources that will help the lecturers of English in teaching English consonant sounds easily and effectively.

4.      The Hausa ESL learners should be aware of the implications of incorrect pronunciations and should be putting what they learn in classroom and outside into practice: they should be paying attention to detail.

5.      Finally, journalists should be aware about the implications of error pronunciation in their reports which is the primary cause of negative transfer.

References

1.      Awe, B. (2013). Effects of Phonemic Dissimilarities on Yorubá Speakers of English language. English Language Teaching Today (ELLT): A Journal for Teachers of English and Communication Skills, 10(1), 19-30

2.      Baso, A. (2013), A Comparative Analysis between English and Indonesian Phonological System. IJELE. (online): from: http://www.macrothink.org/ijele

3.      Beverley, C. and Inger M. M. (2008), Practical Phonetics and Phonology, New York: Routledge Publishers, pp. 79-105

4.      Brown, H.D. (2014), Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 6th Ed. New York, Pearson Education

5.      Cruttenden, A. (2001), Gimson’s Pronunciation of English 6th ed. London: Arnold International Publishers, , pp. 91-216

6.      Corder, S.P. (1967). The Significance of Learner's Errors. 1RAL, 5(1-4), 161-170.

7.      Demola, J. (2010), Phonology of English, Lagos: National Open University of Nigeria, pp. 19-111.

8.      Eckman, F.R. (2004), Phonetic Differences to Constraint Rankings, Milwaukee, University of Wisconsin

9.      Ekpe, M.B. (2010), The English Language in Nigeria, Lagos: National Open University of Nigeria, 2010, pp. 61-90.

10.  Fries, C. C. (1945), Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

11.  Ferguson, C.A. (1965), General Introduction to Contrastive Structural Series. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press

12.  Jaggar, P. J. (2001), Hausa, Armsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Com. ch. 2.

13.  Jenkins, J. (2008), The Phonology of English as an International Language, Oxford, Oxford University Press

14.  Johnson, (1975), cited in Abdullahi S. (20y24). A Contrastive Analysis of English and Hausa Segmental and Suprasegmental Sounds. In Global

14.Journal of Research in Humanities & Cultural Studies (Vol. 4, Number 3, pp. 41–47). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12628204

15.  Jowitt, D. (1991), Nigerian English usage: An Introduction. Lagos, Nigeria: Learn Africa Plc

16.  Kennelly, C. (2007), The First First Word, New York, Viking Penguin

17.  Keshavarz, M. H. & Khamis, A. M. (2017), An Investigation into Pronunciation Problems of Hausa Speakers, Learners of English. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 4(1), 61-72

18.  Lado, R.. (1957), Linguistic across culture. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

19.  Linda, C. N. (2011), Phonology in teacher education in Nigeria: The Igbo Language Example. African Journal of Education, 1(1), 48-63.

20.  Malah, Z. and Rashid S. Md. (2015), Contrastive Analysis of the Segmental Phonemes of English and Hausa. International Journal of Languages , Literature and Linguistics. Vol 1, No. 2.

21.  Mahon, Mc. A. (2002), An Introduction to English Phonology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd., pp. 12-91.

22.  Moyi, M.I. and Barmo I.S. (2017), English Sound System: An Introductory Approach for Learners New Ed. Kaduna: Dee Smart Concept

23.  Nordquist, R. (2024), English Language: History, Definition, and Examples.ThoughtCo, thoughtco.com/what-is-the-english-language-1690652.

24.  Roach, P. (2000), English Phonetics and Phonology, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19-80.

25.  San,i M. A. Z. (2005), An Introductory Phonology of Hausa, Kano: Benchmark Publishers Ltd., ch. 1-4.

26.  Sani, M.A.Z. (2009), Siffofin Daidaitacciyar Hausa, Kano: Benchmark Publishers Ltd, pp. 6-22.

27.  Sani, M. A. Z. (2011), Gamayyar Tasrifi Da Tsarin Sautin Hausa, Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Pres , pp. 1-49.

28.  Sani, M.A.Z. (2013), Maraka Yanki A Tsarin Sautin Hausa, Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press, pp. 1-87.

29.  Shiaondo, A.S. and Dangana D. (2020), Phonological Analysis of the Effects of First Language Acquisition (L1) on Second Language Learning: A Case Study of TIV Language and English Language VL - 1 DO -10.56666/ahyu.v1i3.11 JO - Ahyu: A Journal of Language and Literature ER

30.  Waya, D.T. and Kwambehar S.T. (2014), A Phonetic Contrastive Analysis of Tiv and English Segmentals IJSS.[Online].pp12Available:https://scholar.google.com.my/scholar?hl=en&q=waya+and+kwamb ehar&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=

31.   Zarruk, R.M. (1996), Shimfidar Ilmin Harsuna a Hausa: Furuci, Zaria: ABU Press, pp. 1-27