

303   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and  
Learning in STEM Education 

Volume 02, Issue 03, 2024 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 

 
Phonetic Variation Within the Ǹko ̩̀ro ̩́ o ̩̀  Speech Community 
 

Ebitare F. Obikudo 

Department of Linguistics & Communication Studies, University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria 

 
Abstract: Nko̩ro̩o̩ is an Eastern Ijoid language spoken in Rivers state, Nigeria, West Africa. 

Phonetic variation that correlates with both linguistic and social factors were observed in the 

speech of speakers from the three sections that make up the Nko̩ro̩o̩ speech community within 

Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩. The sections include Kpokpo, Otoni-ama, and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩, divided along the lines 

of kinship affiliation which serves as the social variable. Data was elicited from competent native 

speakers from each section via participant observation and with the aid of the SIL comparative 

African word list and a Marantz digital audio recorder. Word-final lip rounding assimilation, 

intervocalic consonant deletion, and intra-word and boundary CV syllable deletion were 

identified as the linguistic variables that affect phonetic variation. The findings revealed that 

while speakers from Otoni-ama could be identified by lip rounding assimilation, speakers from 

Kpokpo employed all the deletion processes. These variables served as markers for both 

sections. Speakers from O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ represent the unmarked section. No reasons were established 

for the choices made by each section thus affirming that the relationship between linguistic form 

and social category is arbitrary. The paper concluded that the variations observed are a pattern of 

learned speech behavior that aid the expression of group identity as exhibited by each kinship 

affiliation. 

Keywords: Nko̩ro̩o̩, Ijoid, phonetic variation, intra-community variation, lip rounding 

assimilation, and CV syllable deletion. 

 
1. Introduction 

Variation is an inherent feature of human language. The way a language is spoken does not vary 

across speakers alone but also within the speech of a single speaker. When language varies 

across speakers, it is referred to as inter-speaker variation and as intra-speaker variation when it 

is observed within an individual speaker. Various factors such as internal change, geographical 

location (in terms of distance from other speakers), social class, speaker's age, sex or degree of 

education contribute to give rise to variation in language (Holmes and Wilson, 2017; O'Grady et. 

al., 2011; Velupillai, 2012; Wardhaugh and Fuller, 2015). Variation manifests in different 

realizations of speech, phonetically, phonologically, and lexically. However, the most obvious 

linguistic variation involves pronunciation (Hay and Drager, 2007; Holmes and Wilson, 2017).  

The different patterns exhibited in linguistic variation carry social meanings that serve as 

motivations for speakers to feel a common bond, and the linguistic features that characterize 

variation patterns correspond with membership in particular social groups (Wardhaugh and 

Fuller, 2015). According to O'Grady et. al. (2011, p. 477), "details of word choice, syntax or 

pronunciation reveal us to be members of a particular speech community, a group of people who 

share social conventions, or sociolinguistic norms, about language use." This means that both 

linguistic and social factors affect variation in language and contribute to marking social identity. 

Examples of linguistic factors that affect variation include word position, voicing, and boundary 

deletion (Eckert and Labov, 2017; Thomas, 2016) while social factors include geographical 

location, ethnicity, group affiliations, time, language contact, social class, speaker gender, age, 


304   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
and speaking style (Foulkes and Docherty, 2006; O'Grady et. al., 2011). It is thus established that 

one of the major reasons for linguistic variation is the construction of group or social identity 

(Hay and Drager, 2007; Horsu et. al., 2022). 

As mentioned earlier, linguistic variation is most pronounced at the level of phonetics, that is, 

pronunciation. Phonetic variation is a situation where the choice of expression among speakers is 

conditioned by phonetic contexts. In other words, the variation is based on the sounds found 

within a particular phonetic environment. Phonetic variation can be used for the construction of 

social identity. The relationship between phonetic variation and social identity has been a subject 

of investigation over the years (Wells, 1982). As a result, a framework for investigating the 

relationship between sound (the phonetic or phonological form) and social meaning, called 

sociophonetics, has evolved (Zimman, 2021). According to Foulkes and Docherty (2006, p. 

411), sociophonetic variation "refers to variable aspects of phonetic or phonological structure in 

which alternative forms correlate with social factors." The social factors reflect how speakers use 

sounds for the purposes of inclusion or exclusion within a social group, while the variable refers 

to the sound or feature that can be realized in several possible ways. This work draws insights 

from the underpinnings of the sociophonetics framework in its investigation, although it may not 

be considered a sociophonetic research in its strictest sense.  

Phonetic variation may occur at the levels of sound segments, suprasegments, or subsegments. 

However, the majority of works on phonetic and sociophonetic variation deal with segmental 

variation. There are four main types of segmental variation established by Wells (1982) which 

Foulkes and Docherty (2006) adopt as parameters for describing sociophonetic variation. They 

are variation in the phoneme inventory, allophonic variations, phonotactic distribution of 

phonemes, and lexical distribution of phonemes. Variation in the phoneme inventory is systemic 

and involves a dialect or speech form having some phonemes in its inventory that are absent in 

another dialect. For instance, Defaka is reported to have the glottal stop [ɂ] in its consonant 

inventory (Essien, 2013), a sound that is absent in other Ijoid dialects. Allophonic variations are 

quite common in languages and can be seen in the use of different pronunciation variants (known 

as allophones) for the same distinctive sound segment (known as a phoneme). In the Igboid 

language group (Benue-Congo subphylum), some dialects employ [ɛ] where others use [a] as in 

[ɛ́ká] and [áká], both meaning 'hand'. Phonotactic distribution is concerned with the occurrence 

of sound segments within the word. The distribution of phonemes in word-initial, word-medial, 

word-final, and intervocalic positions can determine variation patterns. This is the variation type 

that pertains to this study. Lastly, speech forms may vary based on the phoneme used in lexical 

items.  

It is important to note that the patterns of variation in language are not haphazard but patterned 

and rule-governed. The essence of a research such as this is to describe the variation patterns that 

can be observed within the Nko̩ro̩o̩ speech community and identify the rules that order the 

patterning with a view to seeing how variation relates to social identity within the community. 

2. The Nko ro o  speech community 

The Nko̩ro̩o̩ people are located in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria, specifically in 

Opobo/Nko̩ro̩o̩ local government area of Rivers state located on latitude 4° 32' 46.79' N and 

longitude 7° 27' 56.93' E. Their geographical neighbors include the Obolo speakers on the south 

and west, the Kana speakers on the north, and the I̩b̩ani̩ people of Opobo kingdom and the Ibibio 

on the east. The language is also referred to as Nko̩ro̩o̩ (sometimes, wrongly spelt Nkoro) in the 

official records but the people call it Kirika language (Obikudo, 2013, 2022). In this work, the 

term Nko̩ro̩o̩ is used to refer to the people and community while Kirika is used to refer to the 

language. Kirika is a small group Eastern I̩jo̩ language that belongs to the Ijoid language cluster 

within the Niger-Congo phylum. Its closest linguistic relatives are Kalab̩ari̩, Ki̩ri̩ke̩ (Okrika), and 

I̩b̩ani̩, a mutually intelligible dialect cluster that together with Nko̩ro̩o̩ form the Eastern I̩jo̩ 

branch (Jenewari, 1989; Williamson and Blench, 2000). 


305   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
The Nko̩ro̩o̩ community is governed by a monarchy system and the seat of power, where the 

King resides, is at Nko̩ro̩o̩ town, otherwise called Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩. In addition to Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩, the 

speech community extends to three other smaller villages; Olom Nko̩ro̩o̩, Iwo̩ama Nko̩ro̩o̩, and 

Olom-ama Nko̩ro̩o̩. Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩ is divided into four sections or wards namely, Kpokpo (also 

called Po̩ko̩ye), Otoni-ama, O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ (also called Diepriye), and Defaka. The Defaka people, 

who are called Afakani by the Nko̩ro̩o̩, have a distinct identity from the Nko̩ro̩o̩ people and speak 

Defaka, an Ijoid language. Defaka is severely endangered and although the people recognize 

their Defaka heritage, they all speak Kirika. Only a few of them can actually speak Defaka 

(Essien, 2013; Jenewari, 1983; Obikudo, 2013). The focus of this study however, is on the 

Kpokpo, Otoni-ama, and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ sections that belong to the Nko̩ro̩o̩ people. These three 

sections are located on the same land mass alongside Defaka.  

Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩ is a small community and the Kirika language is the mother tongue of the people, 

so one would expect the community to be homogeneous, but this is not the case. Apart from 

Kirika, other languages spoken within the community include Defaka, Igbo (especially the 

Bonny/Opobo variety), Obolo, Ibibio, Kana, I̩b̩ani̩, Ki̩ri̩ke̩, Kalab̩ari̩, Nembe, I̩zo̩n, English, and 

Nigerian Pidgin. Kirika is used alongside English and Nigerian Pidgin for social events such as 

marriages and funerals. English is used as the medium of instruction in the nursery, primary, and 

secondary schools. Kirika is also used to teach at the nursery and primary levels, when 

necessary. Kirika and English are used for christian worship, while Kirika alone is used for 

traditional worship. The Nko̩ro̩o̩ community is thus a multilingual state.  

The Nigerian society does not operate an elaborate social class system as is evident in some 

other non-African communities (Oladipupo and Akinjobi, 2015). However, there are still ways in 

which a society can be stratified. The division into sections within the Nko̩ro̩o̩ community is not 

based on a social class system but on kinship relations. Hence, one can only become a member 

of the Kpokpo, O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩, and Otoni-ama sections either by ancestry or by marriage. Kinship 

ties are a type of social relations because they are the basic building blocks of the society and 

form the fundamental framework for organizing people into social groups, constructing their 

identity and roles, and integrating them into the society. Kinship is "one of the most vital features 

of the African heritage" (Kanu, 2014, p. 1) and constitutes the social variable for this study. 

There are observable sound variations in the speech of the speakers that belong to these Nko̩ro̩o̩ 

kinship groups. It is a case of variation across speakers (that is, inter-speaker variation) and 

variation within a community located in the same geographical location (that is, intra-community 

variation).  

 
Fig.1: The location of the Nko ro o  people (circled in blue) within Rivers state (available 

online at www.nigerianfinder.com). 

 
http://www.nigerianfinder.com/


306   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
3. Materials and methods  

The SIL comparative African word list (Snider and Roberts, 2006) is a thematic list of one 

thousand seven hundred words (1,700) in English and French. The list was used to elicit data 

from competent native speakers from the three sections who served as language consultants. Not 

all the words in the list had Kirika equivalents and as is the case with data elicitation on the field, 

additional words which were not originally on the list were also gathered. All the data collected 

were recorded with a Marantz PMD 660 digital audio recorder and later transferred to a 

computer for playback and transcription. Additional data were gathered through participant 

observation, by engaging in the communal life during field trips to the community. 

4. Results and discussion 

This section presents language data that show evidence of segmental variation based on 

phonotactic distribution of phonemes within the Kpokpo, Otoni-ama, and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ sections of 

the Nko̩ro̩o̩ speech community.  

4.1. Phonetic variation within the Nko ro o  community 

The variations observed in the speech of Nko̩ro̩o̩ speakers are minimal and so are not perceived 

by the people as dialectal differences. They are phonetic and do not affect the meanings of the 

words or the sentences in which these words occur. However, these phonetic variations are 

socially conditioned as they serve to identify the ward of the speech community that a speaker 

comes from. The variations observed occur at the segmental level only. No variations at the 

suprasegmental level, that is, tone, were observed. The linguistic variables that affect phonetic 

variation are lip rounding assimilation and deletion.  

4.1.1. Lip rounding assimilationː [i] ~ [u] variants 

The Kirika vowel system consists of seven oral vowels and seven corresponding nasal vowels 

(Harry, 1987; Obikudo, 2008, 2022). The seven oral vowels and their corresponding nasal 

vowels are [i e ɛ a ɔ o u] and [ĩ ẽ ɛ ̃ã ɔ̃ õ ũ] respectively. All seven oral vowels occur word-

medially and word-finally. The vowels [ɛ] and [u] do not occur word-initially. From the data 

gathered, the vowel [e] rarely occurred in the word-initial position. The non-occurrence of [ɛ] in 

word-initial position is as a result of vowel mergers with [e] and [i] in this position (Obikudo, 

2008). On the other hand, [u] never occurs word-initially in the Eastern I̩jo̩ group. All the nasal 

vowels do not occur in word-initial position, but they all occur in word-medial and word-final 

positions except for [ẽ] which does not occur word-finally. 

We observe vowel variation between the oral vowels [i] and [u] at word-final position that is 

based on the shape of the lips parameter. The close front unrounded vowel [i] and the close back 

rounded vowel [u] are phonetically similar. Both vowels are of approximately the same height 

but vary in the shape of the lips parameter, in other words, lip rounding. In some lexical items, 

[i] in the speech of speakers from Kpokpo and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ varies with [u] in the speech of 

speakers from Otoni-ama word-finally. The variation is as a result of [u] agreeing in lip rounding 

with the vowel in the penultimate syllable, which is either [o] or [ɔ]. Whereas speakers from 

Kpokpo and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ retain the vowel [i] in the last syllable of the word, speakers from Otoni-

ama assimilate the rounding feature of either [o] or [ɔ] in the preceding syllable but retain the 

same vowel height as [i], thus becoming [u]. This implies that the variable of lip rounding is 

sensitive to vowel height. The use of word-final lip rounding assimilation thus distinguishes 

speakers from Otoni-ama from the Kpokpo and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ sections. Examples are shown in the 

table below. 

Table 1ː [i] ~ [u] vowel variation as a result of lip rounding 

Kpokpo O po ro kuno  Otoni-ama English gloss 

ŋḿɡbɔ́lí ŋḿɡbɔ́lí ŋḿɡbɔ́lú 'seed' 

ɡbòlì ɡbòlì ɡbòlù 'be short' 

Kórí kórí kórú 'wait, remain, stay' 


307   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
lɔ̀kì ~ lɔ̀ɣì lɔ̀kì ~ lɔ̀ɣì lɔ̀kù ~ lɔ̀ɣù 'want' 

sòkì ~ sòɣì sòkì ~ sòɣì sòkù ~ sòɣù ~ sòwù 'dig' 

tòkòrì ~ tòɣòrì tòkòrì ~ tòɣòrì tòkòrù ~ tòɣòrù 'chew' 

We can posit a rule that states that at word-final position, the close front unrounded vowel [i] 

assimilates the lip rounding feature of the vowel in the preceding CV syllable. The rule schema 

is presented as R1. 

R1ː [i] → [+ round] / [C V+ round] ___ # 

4.1.2. Deletion  

There are twenty seven consonant (27) phonemes in Kirika language consisting of five nasals [m 

n ɲ ŋm ŋʷ], ten plosives [p b t d k ɡ kp ɡb kʷ ɡʷ], one implosive [ɓ], one affricate [dʒ], six 

fricatives [f v s z ɣ h], three central approximants [ɹ j w], and one lateral approximant [l] 

(Obikudo, 2022). All the consonant phonemes can occur in word-initial and word-medial 

positions. The only exceptions are the voiced labiodental fricative [v] which does not occur 

word-medially (actually, the occurrence of [v] is rare in the language) and the voiced velar 

fricative [ɣ] which only occurs in word-medial position (that is, intervocalically). The palatal 

nasal [ɲ] rarely occurs word-initially. The only instances of the voiceless glottal fricative [h] in 

word-initial position are in the words [hɛ́ḿ] and [hi ̃ɔ́̃́] used as a call and response respectively 

when telling stories. Kirika consonants generally do not occur word-finally. The bilabial nasal 

[m] and the alveolar nasal [n] that appear to occur word-finally are usually syllabic when they 

are found in this position. In other words, they do not function as word-final consonants. 

The intervocalic position is a natural phonetic environment that triggers consonant weakening. 

According to Thomas (2016), weakening and strengthening refer to changes in the manner of 

articulation of a consonant sound. In Kirika, the voiceless velar plosive [k] may be weakened to 

its voiced counterpart [ɡ] and to the voiced velar fricative [ɣ] intervocalically. This process is 

technically known as spirantization. The fricative may in turn be weakened to a labial-velar 

approximant [w]. This weakening may eventually lead to consonant deletion and sometimes the 

deletion of a following vowel, that is the CV syllable that hosts the consonant. Deletion is the 

ultimate kind of weakening. Examples (1) – (3) provide insights to the weakening process in 

Kirika. 

Voiceless velar plosive weakened to a voiced velar plosive and to a voiced velar fricative 

(1)k>ɡ>ɣ 

pìkì→pìɡì→pìɣì'turn' 

lìkì→lìɡì→lìɣì'look at, watch' 

pòkì→pòɡì→pòɣì'listen' 

dʒìkè→ dʒìɡè→dʒìɣè'shake, shiver, tremble' 

ólókó→ólóɡó→ólóɣó'law, command' 

Voiceless velar plosive weakened to a voiced velar fricative 

(2)k>ɣ 

pɔ̀kɔ̀→pɔ̀ɣɔ̀'throat' 

fùkù→fùɣù'jump' 

jɔ́kɔ̀ríjɔ́kɔ̀rí→jɔ́ɣɔ̀ríjɔ́ɣɔ̀rí'be slippery'  

fìkífìkí→fìɣífìɣí'saw' (n)  

Voiceless velar plosive weakened to a voiced velar fricative and to a voiced labial-velar 

approximant 

(3)k>ɣ >w 


308   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
tɔ̀kú → tɔ̀ɣú→ tɔ̀wú'child' 

sòkù→ sòɣù →sòwù'dig' 

On the strength hierarchy, voiced sounds are weaker than their voiceless counterparts. So when a 

voiceless sound becomes voiced, it has undergone weakening. Also, stops are stronger than 

fricatives and fricatives are stronger than approximants. This process of consonant weakening 

and deletion applies generally in the language. As an indicator of kinship affiliation within the 

Nko̩ro̩o̩ speech community, deletion processes are employed as linguistic variables. The 

variation variables include intervocalic consonant deletion, intra-word CV syllable deletion, and 

boundary CV syllable deletion. Intervocalic consonant deletion occurs when a consonant that 

occurs in between two vowels is deleted.     

Table 2ː Variation as a result of intervocalic consonant deletion 

Kpokpo O po ro kuno  Otoni-ama English gloss 

dá̃á̃ dá̃á̃ dá̃ɣá̃ 'arrow' 

míɔ́kù míwɔ̀kù míwɔ̀kù 'now' 

On table 2, Kpokpo deletes a syllable-initial consonant that occurs in between two vowels, while 

Otoni-ama retains the consonant. O̩po̩ro̩ku̩no̩ alternates between both choices. The deletion of 

the consonant intervocalically results in vowel hiatus, a phenomenon that is attested in Ijoid 

languages. Thus, a CV‧CV syllable pattern becomes CV‧V. The rule schema for the intervocalic 

consonant deletion is presented as R2. 

R2ː C → Ø / V__V 

A second type of deletion involves a CV syllable either within the word as in mɔ́̃‧ɣɔ̀̃‧nɔ̀̃‧mà 

(CV‧CV‧CV‧CV) which becomes mɔ́̃nɔ̀̃mà (CV‧CV‧CV) when the second CV is deleted, or 

word-finally as in ò̃‧ŋʷɔ̀̃‧kù (V‧CV‧CV) which becomes ò̃‧ŋʷɔ̀̃ (V‧CV) after the final syllable has 

been deleted.  

Table 3ː Variation as a result of CV deletion 

Kpokpo O po ro kuno  Otoni-ama English gloss 

mímɔ̀ mímɔ̀ɣɔ̀ mímɔ̀ɣɔ̀ 'sugarcane' 

ò̃ŋʷɔ̀̃ ò̃ŋʷɔ̀̃kù ò̃ŋʷɔ̀̃kù 'tobacco pipe' 

mɔ́̃nɔ̀̃mà mɔ́̃nɔ̀̃mà mɔ́̃ɣɔ̀̃nɔ̀̃mà 'secretly observing human behavior' 

As seen on table 3, Kpokpo consistently deletes CV syllables while O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ retains the CV 

syllables. On the other hand, Otoni-ama employs only intra-word CV deletion. We can posit two 

rules to capture the processes of intra-word CV deletion as in R3 and word-final CV syllable 

deletion as in R4. 

R3ː CV → Ø / CV__CV 

R4ː CV → Ø / CV__# 

Seeing that parts of the conditioning environment for the application of the rule in R3 are 

contained in R4, both rules can be collapsed into one as presented in R5. R5 may be stated thus; a 

CV syllable is deleted either intervocalically or word-finally. 

R5ː CV → Ø / CV__ CV 

# 

In many languages, the syllable is a key factor that determines the application of certain 

phonological rules. According to Katamba (1989, p. 166), "Syllable structure often plays an 

important role in conditioning the application of phonological rules internal to a language." The 

deletion rules apply within the syllable and affect the structure of the syllable indicating that the 

process is sensitive to a domain that is larger than the sound segment. Most languages employ 

ways in which to resolve the issue of vowel hiatus, but in the data presented, intervocalic 

consonant deletion is used to create vowel hiatus. As such, a CVCV syllable structure is realized 


309   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
as CVV. We observe that Kpokpo consistently employs intervocalic consonant deletion, intra-

word CV deletion, and word-final CV syllable deletion, while Otoni-ama does not apply any 

deletion processes. O̩po̩ro̩ku̩no̩ falls in between both ends of the scale, applying intervocalic 

consonant deletion arbitrarily and intra-word CV syllable deletion, but never applies boundary 

syllable deletion. The use of the deletion variable thus serves as an identity marker for the 

speakers from Kpokpo section, distinguishing them from the Otoni-ama and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ 

sections. 

5. Conclusion 

It has been established that linguistic variation is most pronounced at the level of phonetics and 

that phonetic variation can be used for the construction of social identity by relating linguistic 

variables to social variables. This paper discussed the phonetic variation patterns that occur 

amongst the Nko̩ro̩o̩ people of Rivers state, Nigeria, located at Opu Nko̩ro̩o̩, a community that is 

divided into three sections, namely Kpokpo, O̩po̩ro̩ku̩no̩, and Otoni-ama, on the basis of kinship 

affiliation which was identified as the social variable. The language data presented reveal 

segmental variation based on phonotactic distribution of phonemes. The linguistic variables that 

affect variation are lip rounding assimilation and deletion.  

Phonetic variation based on lip rounding assimilation occurs at word boundary, specifically at 

the word-final position. The variants are the vowels [i] and [u]. While Kpokpo and O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ 

employ the use of [i], Otoni-ama employs lip rounding to derive [u], making [u] the marked 

variant. Consequently, the lip rounding variable serves to identify Otoni-ama as the marked 

section. Lip rounding assimilation in the data presented is also sensitive to vowel height, hence 

the choice of [u] and not [ɔ] or [o] which are the vowels that condition the assimilation. The 

process of deletion is evident in intervocalic consonant deletion, intra-word CV syllable deletion 

and boundary CV syllable deletion. While speakers from Kpokpo section consistently employ all 

the deletion processes, speakers from Otoni-ama never elide in the words presented in the data. 

Speakers from O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ engage in random intervocalic consonant deletion and intra-word CV 

deletion but not in boundary CV deletion. Rules were posited for each linguistic variable.  

The findings revealed that speakers from Otoni-ama may be identified by their engagement in lip 

rounding assimilation while speakers from Kpokpo may be identified via their engagement in the 

deletion processes. Speakers from O̩po̩ro̩kuno̩ employ intervocalic consonant deletion randomly 

and intra-word CV deletion, making them the unmarked section of the community. There are no 

established reasons for the choices made by each section thus confirming that the "relationship 

between linguistic form and social category is arbitrary, and sociophonetic variation represents a 

pattern of behavior learned by speakers through the experience of using language in social 

interaction" (Foulkes and Docherty, 2006, p. 411). This paper corroborates that the variations 

observed are a pattern of learned speech behavior exhibited by each kinship affiliation. That this 

speech behaviour is learned, is buttressed by the fact that speakers are able to maintain these 

variation patterns that can be used as identity markers for each kinship group in spite of the 

Nko̩ro̩o̩ community being a multilingual one where the people are exposed to other languages in 

addition to their mother tongue, Kirika. This observation not only lends credence to the 

behaviorist theory of language development but also raises questions about the cognitive abilities 

of the human mind, especially the multilingual mind, thus providing a basis for further research.  

We ascertained that the relationship between linguistic and social variables is arbitrary. 

However, this does not apply to the patterns of phonetic variation which are systematic, enabling 

the formulation of rules that help capture the phonetic processes. The linguistic processes 

observed are consistent with natural phonology and help to describe linguistic generalizations 

which are useful for studies in language typology.  

Finally, the paper demonstrated how speakers can combine vocalic features and 

phonetic/phonological processes to construct styles that are relevant to their kinship identity 

within the speech community thus establishing that phonetic variation can be used for the 


310   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
construction of social or group identity, and that there can be considerable internal variation even 

within a small group (minority) speech community.  

References 

1. Eckert, P. & Labov, W. (2017). Phonetics, phonology and social meaning. Journal of 

Sociolinguistics, 1-30. 

2. Essien, I. N. G. (2013). A grammar of Defaka (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). 

University of Port Harcourt. 

3. Foulkes, P., & Docherty, G. J. (2006). The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of 

Phonetics 34(4), 409-438. 

4. Harry, O. G. (1987). A phonology of Nko̩ro̩o̩ (Unpublished undergraduate thesis). University 

of Port Harcourt. 

5. Hay, J., & Drager, K. (2007). Sociophonetics. The Annual Review of Anthropology, 36, 89-

103. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120633 

6. Holmes, J. & Wilson, N. (2017). An introduction to sociolinguistics. 5th ed. Routledge. 

7. Horsu, S., Dadzie, S., Kyei, E. & Boakye, B. (2022). Sociophonetic variation of lingua 

franca in West Africa: An empirical review. Himalayan Journal of Education and Literature, 

3(6), 27-35. 

8. Jenewari, C. E. W. (1983). Defaka: Ijo's closest linguistic relative. University of Port 

Harcourt Press. 

9. Jenewari, C. E. W. (1989). Ijoid. In J. Bendor-Samuel (Ed.). The Niger-Congo languages 

(pp. 105–118). University Press of America. 

10. Kanu, I. A. (2014). Kinship in African philosophy and the issue of development. 

International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(9), pp. 1-6.  

11. Katamba, F. (1989). An introduction to phonology. Longman. 

12. Obikudo, E. F. (2008). On the reduction of the vowel harmony system in Nko̩ro̩o̩. Journal of 

the Linguistic Association of Nigeria, 11, 217-227. 

13. Obikudo, E. F. (2013). A grammar of Ǹkò̩̩ ró̩̩ ò̩̩  (Kìrìkà) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). 

University of Port Harcourt. 

14. Obikudo, E. F. (2022). A practical orthography for the Ǹkò̩ró̩ò̩ (Kìrìkà) language. Journal of 

Linguistics and Communication Studies, 4(3), 155-169. 

15. O'Grady, W., Archibald, J. & Katamba, F. (2011). Contemporary Linguistics. 2nd ed. Pearson 

Education Limited. 

16. Oladipupo, R. O. & Akinjobi, A. A. (2015). A sociophonetic study of young Nigerian 

English speakers. Ghana Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 92-107. 

http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/gjl.v4i2.4  

17. Snider, K. & Roberts, J. (2006). SIL comparative African wordlist. SIL International.  

18. Thomas, E. R. (2016). Sociophonetics of consonant variation. The Annual Review of 

Linguistics, 2, 95-113. DOI:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040534 

19. Velupillai, V. (2012). An introduction to linguistic typology. John Benjamins Publishing 

Company. 

20. Wardhaugh, R. & Fuller, J. M. (2015). An introduction to sociolinguistics. 7th ed. Wiley 

Blackwell. 

21. Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English. Cambridge University Press.  


311   Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education                                             www. grnjournal.us  

 
22. Williamson, K. and Blench, R. (2000). Niger-Congo. In B. Heine and D. Nurse (Eds.). 

African languagesː An introduction (pp. 11–42). Cambridge University Press. 

23. Zimman, L. (2021). Sociophonetics. In J. Stanlaw (Ed.). The International Encyclopedia of 

Linguistic Anthropology (pp. 1-5). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. DOI: 

10.1002/9781118786093.iela0363