Embodiment, categorization, and prototypicality
Foreign accent identification, prototypicality, and lectometric methods
Lects constitute prototype categories (
Gitte Kristiansen 2003). This
implies that central/prototypical speakers are more easily identified as members of a specific lect (
Kristiansen et al. 2018). The prototypicality of elements within natural categories have generally been
measured through direct questions, indirect questions, or reaction time. Nonetheless, abstract categories (e.g., foreign accents)
may be difficult to examine via questions. Following previous research that analyzed the use of the Levenshtein Distance (LD)
(
Vladimir I. Levenshtein 1965) to predict foreign-accentedness (
Martijn Benjamin Wieling et al. 2014) or the intelligibility of foreign accents (
Jurado-Bravo 2021), this study explores the use of LD as a predictor of prototypicality
of Spanish-accented English. The LD between 50 Spanish speakers of English and different prototype benchmarks were calculated.
These recordings were used as speech stimuli in an accent identification test. Reaction time measures were collected and
correlated to the calculated LD. Results suggest that the LD to the stereotypical prototype can partly predict the prototypicality
of Spanish-accented English.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methods used to calculate the prototype
- 3.The Levenshtein Distance as a tool to predict prototypicality
- 3.1The Levenshtein Distance algorithm
- 3.2The prototype as a benchmark for comparison
- 4.Methodology
- 4.1Speech stimuli and phonetic transcriptions
- 4.2Participants
- 4.3Identification task and procedure
- 4.4Data treatment
- 5.Results and discussion
- 5.1Analysis of Levenshtein Distances to the prototype
- 5.2Patterns of speaker’s identification rate
- 5.3Patterns of speaker’s categorization based on reaction time
- 6.Conclusions
- Notes
-
References
References (60)
References
Altendorf, U. (2016). Caught
between Aristotle and Miss Marple…-A Proposal for a Perceptual Prototype Approach to “Estuary
English”. Complutense Journal of English
Studies
24
1, 131–154. 

Atagi, E., & Bent, T. (2013). Auditory
free classification of nonnative speech. Journal of
Phonetics,
41
(6), 509–519. 

Atagi, E., & Bent, T. (2016). Auditory
free classification of native and nonnative speech by nonnative listeners. Applied
Psycholinguistics,
37
(2), 241–263. 

Baker, W., Eddington, D., & Nay, L. (2009). Dialect
identification: The effects of region of origin and amount of experience. American
Speech,
84
(1), 48–71. 

Bent, T., Atagi, E., Akbik, A., & Bonifield, E. (2016). Classification
of regional dialects, international dialects, and nonnative accents. Journal of
Phonetics,
58
1, 104–117. 

Berger, B., Waterman, M. S., & Yu, Y. W. (2021). Levenshtein
distance, sequence comparison and biological database search. IEEE Transactions on Information
Theory,
67
(6), 3287–3294. 

Bloem, J., Wieling, J., & Nerbonne, J. (2016). Automatically
identifying characteristic features of non-native English
accents. In M.-H. Côté, R. Knooihuizen & J. Nerbonne (Eds.), The
future of dialects: Selected papers from methods in dialectology
XV (pp. 155–172). Berlin: Language Science Press.
Boughton, Z. (2006). When
perception isn’t reality: Accent identification and perceptual dialectology in French. Journal
of French Language
Studies,
16
(3), 277–304. 

Campbell-Kibler, K. (2012). The
implicit association test and sociolinguistic
meaning. Lingua,
122
(7), 753–763. 

Clopper, C. G. (2004). Linguistic
experience and the perceptual classification of dialect variation. Ph.D.
dissertation. Bloomington: Indiana University.
Díaz-Campos, M., & Navarro-Galisteo, I. (2009). Perceptual
categorization of dialect variation in Spanish. In J. Collentine, M. García, B. A. Lafford & F. A. M. Marín (Eds.), Selected
proceedings of the 11th Hispanic Linguistic
Symposium (pp. 179–195). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
Flege, J. E. (1984). The
detection of French accent by American listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America,
76
1, 692–707. 

Gnevsheva, K. (2018). Variation
in foreign accent identification. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development,
39
(8), 688–702. 

Gooskens, C. (2007). The
contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development,
28
(6), 445–467. 

Gooskens, C., Heeringa, W., & Beijering, K. (2008). Phonetic
and lexical predictors of intelligibility. International Journal of Humanities and Arts
Computing,
2
(1–2), 63–81. 

Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring
individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of
Personality and Social
Psychology,
74
(6), 1464–1480. 

Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding
and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of
Personality and Social
Psychology,
85
(2), 197–216. 

Heeringa, W. J. (2004). Measuring
dialect pronunciation differences using Levenshtein distance. Ph.D.
dissertation. Groningen: University of Groningen.
Jurado-Bravo, M. Á. (2018). The
intelligibility of Spanish regional accents in L2 English after tailored Lingua Franca Core instruction: A critical empirical
analysis. Ph.D.
dissertation. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
Jurado-Bravo, M. Á. (2021). Exploring
the Use of Levenshtein Distances to Calculate the Intelligibility of Foreignaccented
Speech. In G. Kristiansen, K. Franco, S. De Pascale, L. Rosseel & W. Zhang (Eds.), Cognitive
sociolinguistics
revisited (pp. 153–164). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Jurado-Bravo, M. Á. (2022). Identificación automática de hablantes prototípicos [Automatic
identification of prototypical speakers]. (Oral
presentation). L Simposio – IV Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Lingüística. Madrid (Spain).
Kenworthy, J. (1987). Teaching
English
pronunciation. London: Longman.
Kochančikaitė, R., & Roll, M. (2022). Phonetic
and phonological variation in vowel discrimination performance: Effect of Swedish vowel categories and
dialects. Proceedings of Fonetik 2022: Fonetik 2022-the XXXIIIrd Swedish Phonetics
Conference-Fonetik 2022-the XXXIIIrd Swedish Phonetics Conference. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
Kristiansen, G. (2003). How
to do things with allophones: Linguistic stereotypes as cognitive reference points in social
cognition. In R. Dirven, R. Frank & M. Pütz (Eds.), Cognitive
models in language and thought: Ideologies, metaphors and
meanings (pp. 69–120). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Kristiansen, G. (2008). Style-shifting
and shifting styles: A socio-cognitive approach to lectal
variation. In G. Kristiansen & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive
sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social
systems (pp. 45–90). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

Leiner, D. J. (2022). SoSci
survey (Version 3.3.17). Retrieved from [URL]
Levenshtein, V. I. (1965). Binary
codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions and reversals. Soviet Physics
Doklady,
10
1, 707–710.
Marzo, S., Zenner, E., & Van de Mieroop, D. (2018). When
third-wave sociolinguistics and prototype analysis meet: The social meaning of sibilant palatalization in a Flemish Urban
Vernacular. In E. Zenner, A. Backus & E. Winter-Froemel (Eds.), Cognitive
contact linguistics: Placing usage, meaning and mind at the core of contact-induced variation and
change (pp. 127–156). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 

McKenzie, R. M. (2008). The
role of variety recognition in Japanese university students’ attitudes towards English speech
varieties. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development,
29
(2), 139–153. 

McKenzie, R. M. (2010). The
social psychology of English as a global language: Attitudes, awareness and identity in the Japanese
context. Dordrecht: Springer. 

McKenzie, R. M. (2015). The
sociolinguistics of variety identification and categorisation: Free classification of varieties of spoken English amongst
non-linguist listeners. Language
Awareness,
24
(2), 150–168. 

McKenzie, R. M., Huang, M., Ong, T. T., & Snodin, N. (2019). Socio-psychological
salience and categorisation accuracy of speaker place of
origin. Lingua,
228
1, Article
102705. 

Mompeán-González, J. A. (2001). A
comparison between English and Spanish subjects’ typicality ratings in phoneme categories: A first
report. International Journal of English
Studies,
1
(1), 115–156.
Mompeán-González, J. A. (2004). Category
overlap and neutralization: The importance of speakers’ classifications in phonology. Cognitive
Linguistics,
15
(4), 429–469. 

Montgomery, C. (2012). The
effect of proximity in perceptual dialectology. Journal of
Sociolinguistics,
16
(5), 638–668. 

Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Morton, S. L. (2006). The
mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition; New
York,
28
(1), 111–131. 

Nerbonne, J., & Heeringa, W. J. (2001). Computational
comparison and classification of dialects. Dialectologia et
Geolinguistica, 2001(9), 69–84. 

Piske, T., MacKay, I. R. A., & Flege, J. E. (2001). Factors
affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of
Phonetics,
29
(2), 191–215. 

Polzenhagen, F., & Xia, X. (2015). Language,
culture, and prototypicality. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The
Routledge handbook of language and
culture (pp. 253–268). London: Routledge.
Rosch, E. (1973). On
the internal structure of perceptual and semantic
categories. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive
development and acquisition of
language (pp. 111–144). New York: Academic Press. 

Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive
representations of semantic categories. Journal of experimental psychology:
General,
104
(3), 192–233. 

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family
resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive
psychology,
7
(4), 573–605. 

Rosseel, L. (2017). New
approaches to measuring the social meaning of language variation: Exploring the personalized implicit association test and the
relational responding task. Ph.D.
dissertation. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Rosseel, L., Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D. (2018). Measuring
language attitudes using the personalized implicit association test: A case study on regional varieties of Dutch in
Belgium. Journal of Linguistic
Geography,
6
(1), 20–39. 

Schimke, S., Vielhauer, C., & Dittmann, J. (2004). Using
adapted Levenshtein distance for on-line signature authentication. Proceedings of the 17th
International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Cambridge,
UK, 931–934. 

Schmid, H.-J. (2010). Does
frequency in text instantiate entrenchment in the cognitive
system?. In D. Glynn & K. Fischer (Eds.), Quantitative
methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven
approaches (pp. 101–134). Berlin: Gruyter de Mouton. 

Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Rey, M. (1986). The
relationship between category typicality and concept familiarity: Evidence from Spanish- and English-speaking
monolinguals. Memory &
Cognition,
14
1, 150–163. 

Sindic, D., & Reicher, S. D. (2008). The
instrumental use of group prototypicality judgments. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology,
44
(6), 1425–1435. 

van Bezooijen, R., & Gooskens, C. (1999). Identification
of language varieties: The contribution of different linguistic levels. Journal of language and
social
psychology,
18
(1), 31–48. 

Watson, R. (2019). Language
as category: Using prototype theory to create reference points for the study of multilingual
data. Language and
Cognition,
11
(1), 125–164. 

Weinberger, S. H. (2015). Speech
accent archive. Retrieved from [URL]
Wieling, M. B. (2012). A
quantitative approach to social and geographical dialect variation. Ph.D.
dissertation. Groningen: University of Groningen.
Wieling, M. B., Bloem, J., Mignella, K., Timmermeister, M., & Nerbonne, J. (2014). Measuring
foreign accent strength in English: Validating Levenshtein Distance as a measure. Language
Dynamics and
Change,
4
(2), 253–269. 

Woehrling, C., & Boula de Mareüil, P. (2006). Identification
of regional accents in French: Perception and categorization. Proceedings of Interspeech
2006, 1511–1514. 

Yang, L., Fu, S., Luo, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhao, W. (2021). A
clustering method of encrypted video traffic based on Levenshtein Distance. 2021 17th
International Conference on Mobility, Sensing and Networking
(MSN), 1–8. 
