The rr' ain ohi e ctive o f th is s t1] C1y was to find out therndifficulties Oromo l e ar ners of f n~lish may have in p ronouncingrncertain Enqlish sound s .rnAc c ordinq to Contr ~st i ve JI. nalysis (ell. ) hy!'othes is, inrnl ,=arning the p rol1unciat i Ol1 o f a second lanquaCJ0 ' :1(;, tenc' tornpronounce the fore irm sounCl.s a.ccorr.i n0 to the T)honologicalrnsyste m o f our mother tongue, which weans that W.:J replace themrnby th,~ ne arest sounds in c> u.r n a tive lanouaqe . This is sornbeca use, in listenin a to th e Â·tarnet lanouaqe we .'le ar thernfore .i.qn soune!> as i r th ~y were rat.i v e sOllOns.rnCi c laims that a seconrl larCJlJaae learner !'lay find. hisrntarget l al1 auaae difficult or r e lativelv eas y . I n the r ea lmrnof phonolooy th e difEcl.l l ty of ? seconel lanqU iVTC r.iepends b othrnon th.e sounds themse lve s and on thl~.i.r ab ility to combine .rn'f10 verify this clairn of Cl em pirically, [,2 nativernsoe akers o f f'romo ,,,ere gi v e n two tests : discrimi nation andrnnroductior tests. The disc rimiration t e st "ras aimed at: findirnng out the difficulties the se subjects ,"ay hilve in discriwinat:rni nq cetween F.nqlish S01)nCf; i n !l1 ini nal 'lairs. '('h e oD:ie cti vernof the p roducti. on t e st ~ra G to .fil'.d out Hhether ' the slilij ectsrncould p rod uce th" sound." ,;I'd Gh thev discrj.P1inatea a r oth"'D"i se .rn~'h2 results of thi s study reveal' thai: the suJ:>jects "l p r ernfmmd to b" be tte r in discrildn ation than .i.n "roduction. I' ostof thG sounds th a':: caus e d prob l e)11s for the subj rlC ts we r erncategorie s that are non -existen t in OrO)11O s uch as ;8, a , n,rn~ ;, diphthonos and consonant clusters. In s ome Ci".ses,rnsounds ~"h ich we re easily disc rimin a ted and produced .111 therninitial positions were found to be trouhler.;om~ in finalrnpositions.rnIn creneral , areas of dif f eren ces b e twe e n thp. phonemicrnsystems of the two l anguages caused areater cifficultiesrnfor the subjects