The phonetics of second language learning and bilingualism

This chapter provides an overview of major theories and findings in the field of second language (L2) phonetics and phonology. Four main conceptual frameworks are discussed and compared: the Perceptual Assimilation Model-L2, the Native Language Magnet Theory, the Automatic Selection Perception Model, and the Speech Learning Model. These frameworks differ in terms of their empirical focus, including the type of learner (e.g., beginner vs. advanced) and target modality (e.g., perception vs. production), and in terms of their theoretical assumptions, such as the basic unit or window of analysis that is relevant (e.g., articulatory gestures, position-specific allophones). Despite the divergences among these theories, three recurring themes emerge from the literature reviewed. First, the learning of a target L2 structure (segment, prosodic pattern, etc.) is influenced by phonetic and/or phonological similarity to structures in the native language (L1). In particular, L1-L2 similarity exists at multiple levels and does not necessarily benefit L2 outcomes. Second, the role played by certain factors, such as acoustic phonetic similarity between close L1 and L2 sounds, changes over the course of learning, such that advanced learners may differ from novice learners with respect to the effect of a specific variable on observed L2 behavior. Third, the connection between L2 perception and production (insofar as the two are hypothesized to be linked) differs significantly from the perception-production links observed in L1 acquisition. In service of elucidating the predictive differences among these theories, this contribution discusses studies that have investigated L2 perception and/or production primarily at a segmental level. In addition to summarizing the areas in which there is broad consensus, the chapter points out a number of questions which remain a source of debate in the field today.https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uHX9K99Bl31vMZNRWL-YmU7O2p1tG2wHhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1uHX9K99Bl31vMZNRWL-YmU7O2p1tG2wHhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1uHX9K99Bl31vMZNRWL-YmU7O2p1tG2wHAccepted manuscriptAccepted manuscrip

Phonetic drift

This chapter provides an overview of research on the phonetic changes that occur in one’s native language (L1) due to recent experience in another language (L2), a phenomenon known as phonetic drift. Through a survey of empirical findings on segmental and suprasegmental acoustic properties, the chapter examines the features of the L1 that are subject to phonetic drift, the cognitive mechanism(s) behind phonetic drift, and the various factors that influence the likelihood of phonetic drift. In short, virtually all aspects of L1 speech are subject to drift, but different aspects do not drift in the same manner, possibly due to multiple routes of L2 influence coexisting at different levels of L1 phonological structure. In addition to the timescale of these changes, the chapter discusses the relationship between phonetic drift and attrition as well as some of the enduring questions in this area.https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eQbh17Z4YsH8vY_XjCHGqi5QChfBKcAZhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1eQbh17Z4YsH8vY_XjCHGqi5QChfBKcAZhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=1eQbh17Z4YsH8vY_XjCHGqi5QChfBKcAZAccepted manuscriptAccepted manuscrip

Laryngeal stop systems in contact: connecting present-day acquisition findings and historical contact hypotheses

This article examines the linguistic forces at work in present-day second language and bilingual acquisition of laryngeal contrasts, and to what extent these can give us insight into the origin of laryngeal systems of Germanic voicing languages like Dutch, with its contrast between prevoiced and unaspirated stops. The results of present-day child and adult second language acquisition studies reveal that both imposition and borrowing may occur when the laryngeal systems of a voicing and an aspirating language come into contact with each other. A scenario is explored in which socially dominant Germanic-speaking people came into contact with a Romance-speaking population, and borrowed the Romance stop system

Stosunek polskich uczniów do nauki wymowy języka angielskiego: analizując od nowa

It is widely agreed that acquisition of a sound system of a second language always presents a great challenge for L2 learners (e.g. Rojczyk, 2010). Numerous studies (e.g. Nowacka, 2010; Flege, 1991) prove that L2 learners whose first language has a scarce number of sounds, encounter difficulties in distinguishing L2 sound categories and tend to apply their L1 segments to new contexts. There is abundance of studies examining L2 learners’ successes and failures in production of L1 and L2 sounds, especially vowels (e.g. Flege, 1992; Nowacka, 2010; Rojczyk, 2010). However, the situation becomes more complicated when we consider third language production. While in the case of L2 segmental production the number of factors affecting L2 sounds is rather limited (either interference from learners’ L1 or some kind of L2 intralingual influence), in the case of L3 segmental production we may encounter L1→L3, L2→L3, L1+L2→L3 or L3 intralingual interference. This makes separation of L3 sounds a much more complex process. The aim of this paper is to examine whether speakers of L1 Polish, L2 English and L3 German are able to separate new, L3 vowel categories from their native and L2 categories. The research presented in this article is a part of a larger project assessing production of L3 segments. This time the focus is on German /y/. This vowel was chosen since it is regarded as especially difficult for Polish learners of German and it is frequently substituted with some other sounds. A group of English philology (Polish-English- German translation and interpretation programme) students was chosen to participate in this study. They were native speakers of Polish, advanced speakers of English and upper-intermediate users of German. They had been taught both English and German pronunciation courses during their studies at the University of Silesia. The subjects were asked to produce words containing analysed vowels, namely: P /u/, P /i/, E /uÉ/, E /iÉ/, E /ɪ/ and G /y/. All examined vowels were embedded in a /bVt/ context. The target /bVt/ words were then embedded in carrier sentences: I said /bVt/ this time in English, Ich sag’ /bVt/ diesmal in German and Mówię /bVt/ teraz in Polish, in a non-final position. The sentences were presented to subjects on a computer screen and the produced chunks were stored in a notebook’s memory as .wav files ready for inspection. The Praat 5.3.12 speech-analysis software package (Boersma, 2001) was used to measure and analyse the recordings. The obtained results suggest that L2 affects L3 segmental production to a significant extent. Learners find it difficult to separate all “new” and “old” vowel categories, especially if they are perceived as “similar” to one another and when learners strive to sound “foreign”.Przyswajanie systemu fonetycznego języka drugiego (J2) zawsze jest ogromnym wyzwaniem dla uczących się nowego języka (np. Rojczyk, 2010). Liczne badania (np. Flege, 1991; Nowacka, 2010) udowodniły, że w przypadku, gdy J1 uczących się nowego języka ma raczej ograniczoną liczbę dźwięków, wówczas osoby te mają problemy z odróżnianiem większej liczby nowych głosek i często zastępują je ojczystymi segmentami. Łatwo można znaleźć wiele badań dotyczących sukcesów i porażek w produkcji i percepcji nowych dźwięków przez uczących się J2 (np. Flege, 1992; Nowacka, 2010; Rojczyk, 2010), jednakże sytuacja staje się znacznie bardziej skomplikowana w przypadku przyswajania języka trzeciego (J3). Podczas przyswajania języka drugiego liczba czynników wpływających na proces produkcji poszczególnych segmentów jest raczej ograniczona (może to być wpływ języka pierwszego lub też interferencja językowa wewnątrz J2), natomiast podczas przyswajania języka trzeciego ich liczba jest zdecydowanie większa (J1→J3, J2→L3, J1+J2→L3 lub procesy zachodzące wewnątrz J3). To wszystko sprawia, że przyswajanie systemu fonetycznego języka trzeciego jest procesem wyjątkowo złożonym. Celem niniejszego artykułu było zbadanie czy rodzimi użytkownicy języka polskiego z J2 — angielskim i J3 — niemieckim, są zdolni do oddzielenia nowych, niemieckich kategorii samogłoskowych od tych polskich i angielskich. Badanie tu opisane jest częścią większego projektu mającego na celu ocenę produkcji samogłosek w J3. Tym razem opisana jest produkcja niemieckiego /y/. Samogłoska ta została wybrana ponieważ jest uważana przez uczących się języka niemieckiego za wyjątkowo trudną i często jest zastępowana innymi, podobnymi polskimi dźwiękami. Uczestnikami badania była grupa studentów filologii angielskiej, potrójnego programu tłumaczeniowego: polsko-angielsko-niemieckiego. Byli rodzimymi użytkownikami języka polskiego, zaawansowanymi użytkownikami języka angielskiego i średniozaawansowanymi użytkownikami języka niemieckiego. Przed przystąpieniem do badania, byli oni uczeni wymowy obu obcych języków. W trakcie badania musieli wyprodukować słowa zawierające wszystkie badane dźwięki, mianowicie: P/u/, P/i/, A/uÉ/, A/iÉ/, A /ɪ/ oraz N/y/. Wszystkie badane samogłoski były ukryte w kontekście /bSt/ . Te słowa były następnie ukryte w zdaniach: I said /bVt/ this time po angielsku, Ich sag’ /bVt/ diesmal po niemiecku oraz Mówię /bVt/ teraz po polsku. Wszystkie wypowiedzi zostały nagrane jako pliki .wav, a następnie poddane analizie akustycznej przy użyciu programu Praat (Boersma, 2001). Uzyskane wyniki pokazały jak trudne dla uczących się języków jest rozdzielenie „nowych” i „starych” samogłosek, zwłaszcza, gdy brzmią one podobnie, a mówiący starają się mówić „jak obcokrajowiec”

Acceleration in the bilingual acquisition of phonological structure: evidence from Polish–English bilingual children

This study examines the production of consonant clusters in simultaneous Polish-English bilingual children and in language-matched English monolinguals (aged 7;01- 8;11). Selection of the language pair was based on the fact that Polish allows a greater range of phonologically complex cluster types than English. A nonword repetition task was devised in order to examine clusters of different types (obstruent-liquid vs. s + obstruent) and in different word positions (initial vs. medial), two factors that play a significant role in repetition accuracy in monolingual acquisition (e.g. Kirk & Demuth, 2005). Our findings show that bilingual children outperformed monolingual controls in the word initial s + obstruent condition. These results indicate that exposure to complex word initial clusters (in Polish) can accelerate the development of less phonologically complex clusters (in English). This constitutes significant new evidence that the facilitatory effects of bilingual acquisition extend to structural phonological domains

The Effect of Bilingual Proficiency in Indian English on Bilabial Plosive

Background: Bilingual speech production studies have highlighted that level of proficiency influences the acoustic-phonetic representation of phonemes in both languages (MacKay, Flege, Piske, & Schirru 2001; Zárate-Sández, 2015). The results for bilingual speech production reveal that proficient/early bilinguals produce distinct acoustic properties for the same phoneme in each language, whereas less proficient/late bilinguals produce acoustic properties for a phoneme that is closer to the native language (Flege et al., 2003; Fowler et al., 2008). Acoustic-phonetic studies for Hindi (L1) and Indian English (L2) for bilingual speakers have been understudied, and the level of proficiency has not been considered in Hindi and Indian English bilingual speakers. The present study aimed to measure the acoustic differences produced by bilingual speakers of varying proficiencies for Indian English on bilabial plosive and determine how the bilabial plosives are different from American English bilabial plosives. Methods: The sample size for this study was twenty-four. However, only twenty participants (eleven females) between the ages of eighteen and fifty, with normal speech and hearing, were recruited. The lack of recruitment of four more participants was due to the inability to find bilingual speakers who spoke Hindi as their first language and Indian English as their second language and COVID-19 restrictions imposed on recruitment (n=4). The participants were divided into three groups based on language and proficiency: a monolingual American English group, a proficient bilingual Hindi-Indian English group, and a less-proficient bilingual Hindi-Indian English group. The bilinguals were divided into a proficient and less proficient group based on the Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (Marian, Blumenfeld, & Kaushanskaya, 2007). Following the screening, participants took part in a Nonword Repetition Task. Data were analyzed using Praat and Voice Sauce software. A linear mixed-effects model using R statistics was used for the statistical analysis. Results: Data from 20 participants (seven proficient bilingual speakers, five less-proficient bilingual speakers, and eight monolingual speakers) were included in the data analysis. Approximately four thousand repetitions were evaluated across the remaining participants. There were no significant main effects across the four dependent variables, but there was an interaction effect between group and phoneme on two dependent variables. The closure duration for proficient bilingual speakers compared to less-proficient bilingual speakers were significantly different between the voiceless unaspirated bilabial plosive (VLE) and voiceless aspirated bilabial plosive (VLH), as well as voiced unaspirated bilabial plosive (VE) and voiced aspirated bilabial plosive (VH). For spectral tilt, there was a significant difference between the VLE and VLH for proficient bilingual speakers compared to less proficient bilingual speakers. Discussion: The results of this study suggest that proficient bilingual speakers have a faster rate of speech in both their first language and second language. Therefore, it is difficult to provide information on whether this group has separate acoustic-phonetic characteristics for each phoneme for each language. In contrast, the less-proficient bilingual speakers seem to have a unidirectional relationship (i.e., first language influences the second language). Furthermore, the results of the acoustic characteristics for the control group i.e., monolingual American English speakers suggest that they may have acoustic-phonetic characteristics that represent a single acoustic-phonetic representation of bilabial plosive with their voicing contrast

Production of L3 Vowels: Is it Possible to Separate them from L1 and L2 Sounds?

It is incontrovertible that acquisition of a sound system of a second language is always a complex phenomenon and presents a great challenge for L2 learners (e.g. Rojczyk, 2010a). There are numerous studies (e.g. Nowacka, 2010; Flege, 1991) which show that L2 learners whose first language has a scarce number of sounds, have problems to distinguish L2 sound categories and tend to apply their L1 segments to new contexts. It may be easily detectable in the case of vowels. There is abundance of studies examining L2 learners’ successes and failures in production of L1 and L2 vowels (e.g. Flege, 1992; Nowacka, 2010; Rojczyk, 2010a). Usually such projects show how difficult it is for L2 learners to separate “old” and “new” vowel categories. However, the situation becomes much more complicated when we think of third language (L3) production. While in the case of L2 segmental production the number of factors affecting L2 sounds is rather limited (either interference from learners’ L1 or some kind of L2 intralingual influence), in the case of L3 segmental production we may encounter L1→L3, L2→L3 or L3 intralingual interference. This makes separation of L3 sounds a much more complex process. The aim of this study is to examine whether speakers of L1 Polish, L2 English and L3 German are able to separate new, L3 vowel categories from their native and L2 categories. Being a part of a larger project, this time the focus is on German /œ/. This vowel was chosen since it is regarded as especially difficult for Polish learners of German and it is frequently substituted with some other sounds. A group of English philology (Polish-English-German translation and interpretation programme) students was chosen to participate in this project. They were advanced speakers of English who did not encounter any difficulties in communication with native speakers of this language and upper-intermediate users of German. They had been taught both English and German pronunciation/practical phonetics during their studies at the University of Silesia. The subjects were asked to produce words containing analysed vowels, namely: P /u/, P /ɔ/, P /ɛ/, E /u/, E /ɔ / and G /œ/. All examined vowels were embedded in a /bVt/ context. The target /bVt/ words were then embedded in carrier sentences I said /bVt/ this time in English, Ich sag’ /bVt/ diesmal in German and Mówię /bVt/ teraz in Polish, in a non-final position. The sentences were presented to subjects on a computer screen and the produced chunks were stored in a notebook’s memory as .wav files ready for inspection. The Praat 5.3.12 speech-analysis software package (Boersma, 2001) was used to scroll through the audio files in order to locate an onset and offset of target vowels, measure the F1 and F2 frequencies and plot vowels on the plane. All analyses were also performed using Praat. The obtained results shed new light on L3 segmental production and L1 and L2 interference

Cross-Linguistic Influence in the Bilingual Mental Lexicon: Evidence of Cognate Effects in the Phonetic Production and Processing of a Vowel Contrast.

The present study examines cognate effects in the phonetic production and processing of the Catalan back mid-vowel contrast (/o/-/ɔ/) by 24 early and highly proficient Spanish-Catalan bilinguals in Majorca (Spain). Participants completed a picture-naming task and a forced-choice lexical decision task in which they were presented with either words (e.g., /bɔsk/ "forest") or non-words based on real words, but with the alternate mid-vowel pair in stressed position ((*)/bosk/). The same cognate and non-cognate lexical items were included in the production and lexical decision experiments. The results indicate that even though these early bilinguals maintained the back mid-vowel contrast in their productions, they had great difficulties identifying non-words and real words based on the identity of the Catalan mid-vowel. The analyses revealed language dominance and cognate effects: Spanish-dominants exhibited higher error rates than Catalan-dominants, and production and lexical decision accuracy were also affected by cognate status. The present study contributes to the discussion of the organization of early bilinguals' dominant and non-dominant sound systems, and proposes that exemplar theoretic approaches can be extended to include bilingual lexical connections that account for the interactions between the phonetic and lexical levels of early bilingual individuals

Phonological Interaction in Spanish-English Bilinguals: Effects of Cognate Usage on Voice Onset Time of Voiced Stops

This study compared Spanish-English bilinguals’ and English monolinguals’ VOT values for voiced stops /b, d, g/ in cognates and non-cognates. The data support cross-linguistic interaction in bilinguals\u27 phonologies, and indicate that cognates can interfere with bilinguals’ phonemic distinctions, realized in their phonetic productions. For voiced stops, English VOT norms generally average 0 to +35 ms, while Spanish VOT norms average -235 to -45 ms. Twenty-six participants (twelve English monolinguals and fourteen early Spanish-English bilinguals) were administered a picture-naming task, balanced for cognate and non-cognate forms. The VOT values of 30 target words per participant and per language were measured. In English, bilinguals’ VOTs exhibited significantly greater lead voicing (M = -31.53 ms) than monolinguals’ (M = 8.86 ms), and, for all participants, /b/ had longer lead voicing (M = -17.44 ms) than /d/ (-10.74 ms) and /g/ (-5.83 ms). Comparing bilinguals’ VOTs for Spanish versus English revealed significant differences by language (English shorter), differences between /b/ and /g/, and between cognates and non-cognates, with shorter lead voicing in cognates (M = -45.49 ms) than in non-cognates (M = -53.26 ms). More detailed results showed that in bilinguals’ Spanish productions with word-initial /d/ and English productions with word-initial /b/, cognates exhibited shorter lead voicing (more English-like) than non-cognates. The conclusion is that the bilinguals’ VOT values exhibited some cross-linguistic influence in relation to cognate usage, in the direction towards their dominant language (English). These results are discussed in terms of the factors that can facilitate bilingual phonological system interaction