Cover not available
Part of
Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development
Edited by Hagen Peukert
[Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4] 2015
► pp. 53–86

Segmental targets versus lexical interference

Production of second-language targets on first exposure and the result of minimal training

ORCID logo | University of Calgary
 | University of Calgary
This chapter reports on a study of Anglophone adults exposed to German for the first time. Production data are examined and compared to the stimuli participants were exposed to. Data provide clear evidence of lexical influences on speech behaviour; L1 words interfere in production and provide a context for sub-lexical contextual effects at the syllabic and foot level, as well as at the segmental level. We discuss vowels and /r/-sounds in particular. Our data are consistent with claims that speech perception involves a dynamic interaction between objective properties of the speech signal, the structure of the L1 lexicon, and the L1 phonetics-phonology interface. Crucially, we show that on first exposure, learners are already sensitive to L2 sounds not part of the L1. This will serve as a basis for learning novel phones, but lexical competition clearly constrains the learning process.
Keywords: first exposure learners, phonological features, rhotics, syllable positions, transfer
Published online: 29 April 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.4.03car
References (69)
References
Best, C.T. & Strange, W. 1992. Effects of language-specific phonological and phonetic factors on cross-language perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics 20: 305-30.Google Scholar
Best, C.T., Traill, A., Carter, A., Harrison, K.D. & Faber, A. 2003. !Xóõ click perception in English, Isizulu and Sesotho listeners. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, M.J. Solé, D. Recasens & J. Romero (eds), 853-56. Barcelona: Causal Productions.Google Scholar
Best, C.T., & Tyler, M.D. 2007. Non-native and second-language speech perception. Commonalities and complementarities. In Second Language Speech Learning: The Role of Language Experience in Speech Perception and Production [Language Learning & Language Teaching 17], M.J. Munro & O.-S. Bohn (eds), 13-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bradlow, A.R., Pisoni, D.B., Akahane-Yamada, R.A. & Tohkura, Y. 1997. Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101(4): 2299-2310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brent, M.R., & Cartwright, T.A. 1996a. Distributional regularity and lexical access. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26: 363-375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brent, M.R. & Cartwright, T.A. 1996b. Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation. Cognition 61: 93-125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, S.E. 2012. Segmentation on first exposure to an L2: Evidence for knowledge-driven, top-down processing. In Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 13], K. Braunmüller, C. Gabriel & B. Hänel-Faulhaber (eds), 23-45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Processing ‘words’ in early-stage SLA: A comparison of first exposure and low proficiency learners. In Input Processing in Second Language Acquisition, Z.H. Han & R. Rast (eds). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Chambers, J.K. 1975. Canadian raising. In Canadian English. Origins and Structures, J.K. Chambers, 83-100. Toronto: Methuen.Google Scholar
. 1989. Canadian raising: Blocking, fronting, etc. American Speech 64(1): 75-88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chambers, K.E., Onishi, K.H. & Fisher, C. 2003. Infants learn phonotactic regularities from brief auditory experience. Cognition 87: B69-B77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cholin, J., Schiller, N.O. & Levelt, W.J.M. 2004. The preparation of syllables in speech production. Journal of Memory & Language 50(1): 47-61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colantoni, L., & Steele, J. 2007. Acquiring /ʁ/ in context. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29: 381-406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., Caramazza, A. & Sebastian-Galles, N. 2000. The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26(5): 1283-96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curtin, S. 2002. Representational Richness in Phonological Development. PhD dissertation, University of Southern California.
. 2009. Twelve-month-olds learn word-object associations differing only in stress patterns. Journal of Child Language 36: 1157-1165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curtin, S., Mintz, T.H. & Christiansen, M.H. 2005. Stress changes the representational landscape: Evidence from word segmentation. Cognition 96: 233-62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A. 2012. Native listening. Language Experience and the Recognition of Spoken Words. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. & Norris, D.G. 1988. The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 14: 113-21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Jong, K.J., Silbert, N.H. & Park, H. 2009. Generalisation across segments in second language consonant identification. Language Learning 59(1): 1-31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, A., Grainger, J. & van Heuven, W.J.B. 1999. Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory & Language 41: 496-518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, E., Pallier, C., Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Mehler, J. 1997. A destressing 'deafness' in French? Journal of Memory & Language 36: 406-21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, P. 2004. Grundriß der Deutschen Grammatik. Das Wort, 2nd edn. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler.Google Scholar
Escudero, P. 2005. Linguistic Perception and Second Language Acquisition: Explaining the Attainment of Optimal Phonological Categorisation. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.
. 2006. Second language phonology: The role of perception. In Phonology in Context, M.C. Pennington (ed.), 109-34. Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Finn, A. & Hudson Kam, C.L. 2008. The curse of knowledge: First language knowledge impairs adult learners' use of novel statistics for word segmentation. Cognition 108: 477-99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J.E. 2003. Assessing constraints on second-language segmental production and perception. In Phonetics and Phonology in Language Comprehension and Production: Differences and Similarities, N.O. Schiller & A.S. Meyer (eds), 319-55. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J.E., Frieda, W.M. & Nozawa, T. 1997. Amount of native-language (L1) use affects the pronunciation of an L2. Journal of Phonetics 25: 169-86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J.E., Munro, M.J. & MacKay, I.R.A. 1995. Effects of age of second language learning on the production of English consonants. Speech Communication 16: 1-26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J.E. & Wang, C. 1989. Native-language phonotactic constraints affect how well Chinese subjects perceive the word-final English /t/-/d/ contrast. Journal of Phonetics 17: 299-315.Google Scholar
Flege, J.E., Yeni-Komshian, G.H. & Liu, S. 1999. Age constraints on second language acquisition. Journal of Memory & Language 41: 78-104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friel, B.M. & Kennison, S.M. 2001. Identifying German-English cognates, false cognates, and non-cognates: Methodological issues and descriptive norms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 4: 249-74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldrick, M. & Larson, M. 2008. Phonotactic probability influences speech production. Cognition 107: 1155-64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guion, S., Flege, J.E. & Loftin, J.D. 2000. The effect of L1 use on pronunciation in Quichua- Spanish bilinguals. Journal of Phonetics 28: 27-42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M., Roberts, L., Dimroth, C., Veroude, K., & Indefrey, P. 2010. Adult language learning after minimal exposure to an unknown natural language. Language Learning 60(Suppl. 2): 5-24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M., Roberts, L. & Dimroth, C. 2012. What word-level knowledge can adult learners acquire after minimal exposure to a new language? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 50: 239-76.Google Scholar
Hall, T.A. 1993. The phonology of German /R/. Phonology 10(1): 83-105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamann, S. 2009. The learner of a perception grammar as a source of sound change. In Phonology in Perception, P. Boersma & S. Hamann (eds), 111-49. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hohne, E.A. & Jusczyk, P.W. 1994. Two-month-old-infants' sensitivity to allophonic differences. Perception & Psychophysics 56: 613-23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jusczyk, P.W. 1997. The Discovery of Spoken Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P.W., Cutler, A. & Redanz, N. 1993. Infants' preference for the predominant stress patterns in English. Child Development 64: 675-87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jusczyk, P.W., Luce, P.A. & Charles-Luce, J. 1994. Infants' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. Journal of Memory & Language 35(5): 630-645. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kohler, K. 2010. German. In Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A Guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet, I. Maddieson & M. Barry (eds), 86-89. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Levelt, W.J.M. 1999. Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In The Neurocognition of Language, C.M. Brown & P. Hagoort (eds), 83-122. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Li, P. 1996. Spoken word recognition of code-switched words by Chinese-English bilinguals. Journal of Memory & Language 35: 757-74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lisker, L. & Abramson, A.S. 1967. Some effects of context on voice onset time in English stops. Language & Speech 10: 1-28.Google Scholar
Luce, P.A., Pisoni, D.B. & Goldinger, S.D. 1990. Similarity neighbourhoods of spoken words. In Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives, G.T.M. Altmann (ed.), 122-47. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mattys, S.L. & Jusczyk, P.W. 2001a. Do infants segment words or recurring contiguous patterns? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance 27(3): 644-55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001b. Phonotactic cues for segmentation of fluent speech by infants. Cognition 78: 91-121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattys, S.L., Jusczyk, P.W., Luce, P.A., & Morgan, J.L. 1999. Phonotactic and prosodic effects on word segmentation in infants. Cognitive Psychology 38(4): 465-94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattys, S.L., White, L. & Melhorn, J.F. 2005. Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: A hierarchical framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134(4): 477-500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McQueen, J.M. 1998. Segmentation of continuous speech using phonotactics. Journal of Memory & Language 39: 21-46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moreton, E. & Thomas, E.R. 2007. Origins of Canadian raising in voiceless-coda effects: A case study in phonologization. In Laboratory Phonology IX, J. Cole & J.I. Hualde (eds), 37-64. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Peperkamp, S. & Dupoux, E. 2002. A typological study of stress 'deafness'. In Laboratory Phonology VII, C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (eds), 203-240. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piske, T. 2007. Implications of James E. Flege's research for the foreign language classroom. In Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honor of James Emil Flege [Language Learning & Language Teaching 17], M.J. Munro & O.-S. Bohn (eds), 301-314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piske, T., MacKay, I., & Flege, J.E. 2001. Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics 29: 181-215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piske, T., Flege, J.E., MacKay, I.R.A., & Meador, D. 2002. The production of English vowels by fluent early and late Italian-English bilinguals. Phonetica 59: 49-71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pisoni, D.R., & Lively, S.E. 1995. Variability and invariance in speech perception. A new look at some old problems in perceptual learning. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Cross-language Speech Research, W. Strange (ed.), 433-59. Timonium MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Polka, L. 1992. Characterizing the influence of native experience on adult speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics 52: 37-52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rast, R. 2008. Foreign Language Input: Initial Processing. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
. 2010. The role of linguistic input in the first hours of adult language learning. Language Learning 60 (Suppl.2): 64-84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rast, R. & Dommergues, J.-Y. 2003. Towards a characterisation of saliency on first exposure to a second language. EUROSLA Yearbook 3: 131-56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shoemaker, E., & Rast, R. 2013. Extracting words from the speech stream at first exposure. Second Language Research 29(2): 165-83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tench, P. 2003. Non-native speakers' misperception of English vowels and consonants: Evidence from Korean adults in UK. International Rreview of Applied Linguistics in Teaching (IRAL) 41: 145-73.Google Scholar
Tremblay, A. 2008. Is L2 lexical access prosodically constrained? On the processing of word stress by French Canadian L2 learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics 29: 553-84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vitevitch, M.S. & Luce, P.A. 1999. Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory & Language 40: 374-408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weber, A. & Cutler, A. 2006. First-language phonotactics in second language listening. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119: 597-607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werker, J.F. & Tees, R.C. 1984. Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual re- organisation during the first year of life. Infant Behavior & Development 7: 49-63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, R. 2004. A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In Phonetically based Phonology, B. Hayes, R. Kirchner & D. Steriade (eds), 34-57. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Hracs, Lindsay
2024. Chapter 1. Introduction. In Perspectives on Input, Evidence, and Exposure in Language Acquisition [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 69], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Majdoub, Hedi, Marzena Watorek, Rebekah Rast & Pascale Trévisiol
2023. Crosslinguistic differences in initial word recognition. Language, Interaction and Acquisition 14:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Carroll, Susanne E. & Angela George
2018. What absolute beginners learn from input. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 2:2 ► pp. 112 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.