Phonetics and Speech Sciences (말소리와 음성과학)

Korean Society of Speech Sciences (한국음성학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

L2 proficiency and effect of auditory source in processing L2 stops

  • Received : 2015.09.01
  • Accepted : 2015.09.16
  • Published : 2015.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The current study investigates whether Korean-speaking adults show differential sensitivities to the sources of auditory stimuli (L1 Korean and L2 English) in utilizing VOT and f0 in the perceptual mode of L2 stops, and how the L2 proficiency interacts with the learners' low-level phonetic sensitivities in L2 perceptual mode. 48 Korean learners of English participated in the perception experiments where they rated the goodness of English /t/ and /d/ using an analogue scale. Two sets of stimuli (English and Korean sources) were prepared by manipulating VOT (6-steps) and f0 (5-steps) values of productions by an English male (L2 source condition) and a Korean male (L1 source condition). Findings showed that, in judging /t/-likeness, the listeners responded differently to the two auditory stimulus conditions by relying on VOT significantly more in English source condition than in Korean source condition. The listeners' English proficiency did not interact with these differential sensitivities to the auditory stimulus source either along the VOT dimension or the f0 dimension. The results of the current study suggest that low-level contextual information of the auditory source can affect the learners in faithfully being in the L2 perceptual mode.

Keywords

References

  1. Abramson, A. S., & Lisker, L. (1985). Relative power of cues: F0 shift versus voice timing. In: V. Fromkin(eds), Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged. Academic: New York, 25-33.
  2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version0.999999-0. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
  3. Bullock, B. E., Toribio, A. J., Gonzalez, V., & Dalola, A. (2006). Language dominance and performance outcomes in bilingual pronunciation. In M. G. O'Brien, C. Shea, & J. Archibald (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (GASLA): The Banff conference, pp. 9-16. Somerville, MD: Cascadilla Press.
  4. Elman, J.L., Diehl, R., & Buchwald, S.E. (1977). Perceptual switching in bilinguals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 62, 971-974. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.381591
  5. Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2002). The subset problem in L2 perceptual development: Multiple-category assimilation by Dutch learners of Spanish. In: Barbora Skarabela, Sarah Fish, & Anna H.-J. Do (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual Boston University conference on language development, pp. 208-221. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
  6. Flege, J.E. & Eefting, W. (1987). Production and perception of English stops by native Spanish speakers. Journal of Phonetics Vol. 15, 67-83.
  7. Flege, J.E., O.-S. Bohn, & S. Jang. (1997). Effects of experience on non-native speakers' production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, Vol. 25, 437-470. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1997.0052
  8. Francis, A. L., Kaganovich, N., and Driscoll-Huber, C. 2008. Cue-specific effects of categorization training on the relative weighting of acoustic cues to consonant voicing in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,Vol. 124(2), 1234-1251. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2945161
  9. Francis, A. L., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2002). Selective attention and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 28, 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.28.2.349
  10. Gordon, P. C., Eberhardt, J. L., & Rueckl, J. G. (1993). Attentional modulation of the phonetic significance of acoustic cues. Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 25, 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1993.1001
  11. Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In: J. Nicol (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing, pp. 1-22. Oxford: Blackwell.
  12. Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2006). Cue weighting in auditory categorization: Implications for first and second language acquisition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 119(5), 3059-3071. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2188377
  13. Hazan, V. L. & Boulakia, G. (1998). Perception and production of a voicing contrast by French-English bilinguals. Language and Speech, Vol. 36, 17-38.
  14. Kang, K. H., & Guion, S. G. (2008). Clear speech production of Korean stops: Changing phonetic targets and enhancement strategies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 124, 3909-3917. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2988292
  15. Kong, E. J. & Yoon, I. (2013). L2 Proficiency Effect on the Acoustic Cue-Weighting Pattern by Korean L2 Learners of English: Production and Perception of English Stops, Journal of the Korean Society of Speech Sciences, Vol. 4(4), 81-90.
  16. Kong, E. J., Beckman, Mary E., & Edwards, Jan (2011). Why are Korean tense stops acquired so early: The role of acoustic properties. Journal of Phonetics, Vol. 39, 196-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2011.02.002
  17. Kong, E. J., & Edwards, J. (2011). Individual differences in speech perception: Evidence from visual analogue scaling and eye-tracking. Proceedings of the XVIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 17-21 August 2011, Hong Kong.
  18. Kuhl, P., & Iverson, P. (1995). Linguistic experience and the "perceptual magnet effect." In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience, pp. 121-154. Baltimore: York Press.
  19. Lee, H., Politzer-Ahles, S., & Jongman, A. (2013). Speakers of tonal and non-tonal Korean dialects use different cue weightings in the perception of the three-way laryngeal stop contrast, Journal of Phonetics, 41(2), 117-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.12.002
  20. Lee, H. (2014) Effects of attention on the perception of L2 phonetic contrast, Journal of the Korean Society of Speech Sciences, Vol.6(4), 47-52.
  21. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: acoustical measurements. Words, Vol. 20, 384-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830
  22. Massaro, D. W. & Cohen, M. M. (1983). Integration of visual and auditory information in speech perception, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 9, 753-771. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.9.5.753
  23. Morrison, G. S., & Kondaurova, M.V. (2009). Analysis of categorical response data: Use logistic regression rather than endpoint-difference scores or discriminant analysis (L) Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 126(5), 2159-2162. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3216917
  24. Piske, T., Mackay, I.R.A, & Flege, J.E. (2001). Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: a review. Journal of Phonetics, Vol. 29, 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2001.0134
  25. R Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/
  26. Sancier, M. L. & Fowler, C. A. (1997). Gestural drift in a bilingual speaker of Brazilian Portuguese and English. Journal of Phonetics, Vol. 25, 421-436. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1997.0051
  27. Silva, D.J. (2006). Acoustic evidence for the emergence of tonal contrast in contemporary Korean. Phonology, Vol. 23, 287-308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675706000911
  28. Shultz, A. A., Francis, A. L., & Llanos, F. (2012). Differential cue weighting in perception and production of consonant voicing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 132, EL95-EL101. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4736711