Cover not available
Article published In:
Korean Linguistics
Vol. 16:2 (2014) ► pp.144–187

An L1 grammar-driven model of loanword adaptation

Evidence from Korean

| Hongik University, Korea
The present study proposes an L1 grammar-driven loanword-adaptation model with three intermediate steps — L1 perception, L1 lexical representations and L1 phonology — between L2 acoustic output and L1 output by examining how the distinctive features, syllable structure constraints and structural restrictions of one’s native language steer speakers in their search to replace foreign sounds with native sounds. Our main source of data in support of this model comes from differences between the Korean adaptations of English and French voicing contrasts on the basis of a recent survey of English and French loans in the year 2011. In word-initial position, for example, English voiceless plosives are borrowed as aspirated plosives, while French voiceless plosives are borrowed as either aspirated or fortis plosives in free variation. Considering the data examined here, we suggest that the different Korean adaptations of English and French voicing contrasts in plosives are based on Korean speakers’ perception of redundant phonetic variants in the donor languages (L2) and that this perception is conditioned by the acoustic cues to the laryngeal features [±spread glottis] and [±tense] of Korean, the host language (L1). In contrast to some current models, it shows that the distinctive feature composition of L1 segments plays an important role in loanword adaptations. We also suggest that not only L1 laryngeal features but also L1 syllable structure constraints and lexical restrictions influence L1 perception of the L2 voicing contrasts in word-final postvocalic plosives and that variation in vowel insertion after the plosives in our 2011 data collection is motivated by L1 phonology in both English and French loans. Variation in vowel insertion after English and French word-internal preconsonantal coda plosives is also affected by the native phonology in the 2011 data, no matter whether the plosives are released, as in French, or unreleased, as in English.
Keywords: distinctive features, lexical restrictions, syllable structure constraints, loanword adaptation, L1 perception, variation in vowel insertion.
Published online: 26 January 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/kl.16.2.03kim
References (113)
Ahn, Miyeon. 2011. Phonetics and Phonology Interplay in Loanword Adaptation: English Alveolar Fricative into Korean. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Michigan.
Ahn, Sang-Cheol & Gregory Iverson. 2004. Dimensions in Korean Laryngeal Phonology. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 131: 345–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Avery, Peter & William J. Idsardi. 2001. Laryngeal Dimensions, Completion and Enhancement. Phonology and Phonetics ed. by Tracy Hall, 41–70. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Best, Catherine T. 1995. A Direct Realist View of Cross-language Speech. Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience ed. by Winifred Strange, 171–204. Baltimore: York Press.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Silke Hamann. 2009. Loanword Adaptation as First-language Phonological Perception. Loan Phonology ed. by Andrea Calabrese & W. Leo Wetzels, 11–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broselow, Ellen & Hye-Bae Park. 1995. Mora Conservation in Second Language Prosody. Phonological Acquisition and Phonological Theory ed. by John Archibald, 151–168. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Caisse, Michelle. 1988. Modeling English Vowel Durations. Ph. D. dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
Calabrese, Andrea & W. Leo Wetzels. 2009. Loan Phonology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Catford, John Cunnison. 1977. Fundamental Problems in Phonetics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Matthew. 1970. Vowel Length Variation as a Function of the Voicing of the Consonant Environment. Phonetica 221: 129–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, Taehong, Sun-Ah Jun & Peter Ladefoged. 2002. Acoustic and Aerodynamic Correlates of Korean Stops and Fricatives. Journal of Phonetics 301: 193–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, Young-Mee Yu & Sharon Inkelas. 1994. Post-obstruent Tensification in Korean and Geminate Inalterability. Theoretical Issues in Korean Linguistics ed. by Young-Key Kim-Renaud, 45–60. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Clements, George N. 1985. The Geometry of Phonological Features. Phonology Yearbook 21: 225–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. Vowel Height Assimilation in Bantu Languages. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory51, 37–76. Ithaca, N. Y: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Coetzee, Andries & Joe Pater. 2011. The Place of Variation in Phonological Theory. The Handbook of Phonological Theory, 2nd ed. ed. by John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan Yu, 401–434. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Stuart & Mi-Hui Cho. 2006. Phonetics versus Phonology: English Word Final /s/ in Korean Loanword Phonology. Lingua 1161: 1008–1023. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dell, François. 1973. Les règles et les sons. Paris: Hermann. [1980. Generative Phonology and French Phonology Engl. trans. by Catherine Cullen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Google Scholar
. 1995. Consonant Clusters and Phonological Syllables in French. Lingua 951: 5–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, Emmanuel, Kazuhiko Kazehi, Yuki Hirose, Christophe Pallier & Jacques Mehler. 1999. Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: A Perceptual Illusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25.61: 1568–1578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eulitz, Carsten & Aditi Lahiri. 2004. Neurobiological Evidence for Abstract Phonological Representations in the Mental Lexicon during Speech Recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16.4: 577–583. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fant, Gunnar. 1973. Speech Sounds and Features. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1983. On Distinctive Features and their Articulatory Implementation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1.1: 91–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris & Kenneth N. Stevens. 1971. A Note on Laryngeal Features. Quarterly Progress Report 1011, 198–212. Cambridge, MA: Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Han, Jeong-Im. 1996. The Phonetics and Phonology of Tense and Plain Consonants in Korean. Ph. D. dissertation, Cornell University.
Hirano, Hideyuki. 1994. A Constraint-based Approach to Korean Loanwords. Language Research 301: 707–739.Google Scholar
Honda, Kiyoshi. 1995. Laryngeal and Extralaryngeal Mechanisms of F0 Control. Producing Speech: Contemporary Issues ed. by Fredericka Bell-Berti & Lawrence J. Raphael, 215–232. New York: American Institute of Physics.Google Scholar
. 1999. Interactions between Vowel Articulation and F0 Control. Proceedings of LP’98 ed. by Osamu Fujimura, Brian D. Joseph & Bohumil Palek, 517–527. Prague: The Karolinum Press.Google Scholar
Honda, Kiyoshi, Hiroyuki Hirai, Shinobu Masaki & Yasuhiro Shimada. 1999. Role of Vertical Larynx Movement and Cervical Lordosis in F0 Control. Language and Speech 421: 401–411. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, Feng-fan, Michael Kenstowicz & Xiaomin Mou. 2009. Mandarin Adaptations of Coda nasals in English Loanwords. Loan Phonology ed. by Andrea Calabrese & W. Leo Wetzels, 132–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry. 1970. The Role of Borrowing in the Justification of Phonological Grammars. Studies in African Linguistics 11: 1–48.Google Scholar
Iverson, Gregory K. 1983. Korean s. Journal of Phonetics 111: 191–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iverson, Gregory K. & Ahrong Lee. 2006. Perception of Contrast in Korean Loanword Adaptation. Korean Linguistics 131: 49–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Gunnar Fant & Morris Halle. 1952. Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: The Distinctive Features and their Correlates. Acoustics Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (Technical Report No. 13).Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman & Linda R. Waugh. 1987. The Sound Shape of Language. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jessen, Michael. 1998. Phonetics and Phonology of Tense and Lax Obstruents in German. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah. 1993. The Phonetics and Phonology of Korean Prosody. Ph. D. dissertation, The Ohio State University.
. 1994. The Status of the Lenis Stop Voicing Rule. Theoretical Issues in Korean linguistics ed. by Young-Key Kim-Renaud, 101–114. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Kang, Eunji, Ho-Young Lee & Juwon Kim. 2004. The Phonetic Realization of Syllable Codas in Korean. Malsori [Journal of the Korean Society of Phonetic Science and Speech Technology] 491: 1–30.Google Scholar
Kang, Yoonjung. 2003. Perceptual Similarity in Loanword Adaptation: English Postvocalic Word-final Stops in Korean. Phonology 201: 219–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008a. Tensification of Voiced Stops in English Loanwords in Korean. Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics XII1: 179–192.Google Scholar
. 2008b. The Adaptation of English /s/ in Korean. Inquiries into Korean Linguistics III ed. by John Whitman, Ponghyung Lee, Chang-Kook Suh, Sungdai Cho, Yeun-Jin Jung, Jae-Young Chung & Jeong-Im Han, 1–13. Seoul: Hankook Munhwasa.Google Scholar
. 2009. English /z/ in 1930s Korean. Simon Fraser University Working Papers in Linguistics Vol. 2: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on East Asian Linguistics.
. 2012. The Adaptation of English Liquids in Contemporary Korean: A Diachronic Study. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 111: 41–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 2003. The Role of Perception in Loanword Phonology. Studies in African Linguistics 32.11: 95–112.Google Scholar
Kent, Ray D. & Charles Read. 1992. The Acoustic Analysis of Speech. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Kewley-Port, Diane. 2006. Topics in Speech Perception. Presentation at ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop on Experimental Linguistics. University of Athens, Greece.
Keyser, Samuel Jay & Kenneth N. Stevens. 2001. Enhancement Revisited. Ken Hale: A Life in Language ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 271–291. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.Google Scholar
Keyser, Samuel J. & Kenneth N. Stevens. 2006. Enhancement and Overlap in the Speech Chain. Language 821: 33–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Chin-Wu. 1965. On the Autonomy of the Tensity Feature in Stop Classification (with the Special Reference to Korean Stops). Word 211: 339–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hyunsoon. 1999. The Place of Articulation of the Korean Affricates Revisited. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 81: 313–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001a. A Phonetically-Based Account of Phonological Assibilation. Phonology 181: 81–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001b. The Place of Articulation of the Korean Plain Affricate in Intervocalic Position: An Articulatory and Acoustic Study. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 31.2: 229–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Korean Tense Consonants as Singletons. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 381: 329–344. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. The Feature [tense] Revisited: The Case of Korean Consonants. The Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 341: 319–332.Google Scholar
. 2004. Stroboscopic-cine MRI Data on Korean Coronal Plosives and Affricates: Implications for their Place of Articulation as Alveolar. Phonetica 611: 234–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. The Representation of the Three-way Laryngeal Contrast in Korean Consonants. The Internal Organization of Phonological Segments ed. by Marc van Oostendorp & Jeroen van de Weijer, 287–315. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Loanword Adaptation between Japanese and Korean: Evidence for L1 Feature Driven Perception. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 171: 331–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Korean Adaptation of English Affricates and Fricatives in a Feature-driven Model of Loanword Adaptation. Loan Phonology ed. by Andrea Calabrese & W. Leo Wetzels, 155–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. What Features Underline the /s/ vs. /s’/ Contrast in Korean? Phonetic and Phonological Evidence. Where do Phonological Contrasts Come From? Cognitive, Physical and Developmental Basis of Distinctive Speech Categories ed. by G. Nick Clements & Rachid Ridouane, 99–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Gradual Tongue Movements in Korean Palatalization as Coarticulation: New Evidence from Stroboscopic cine-MRI and Acoustic Data. Journal of Phonetics 40.11: 67–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013a. The role of F0 in Seoul and Kyungsang Korean Speakers’ Categorization of Japanese Plosives: Implications for the Laryngeal Feature Specification of Korean Consonants. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
. 2013b. Korean Speakers’ Perception of Japanese Geminates: Evidence for the Role of L1 Grammar in Loanword Adaptation. Presented at the 3rd International Conference of Phonetics and Phonology held at the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, Tokyo Japan. To appear in Aspects of Geminate Consonants, Oxford University Press.
. 2014. A Two-Decade-Interval Variation in Vowel Insertion after Word-Final English and French Postvocalic Plosives in Korean Adaptation. Presented at the conference in the honor of Annie Rialland, the Sorbonne University, Paris.
Kim, Hyunsoon, Kiyoshi Honda & Shinji Maeda. 2005. Stroboscopic-cine MRI Study of the Phasing between the Tongue and the Larynx in the Korean Three-Way Phonation Contrast. Journal of Phonetics 33.1: 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hyunsoon, Shinji Maeda & Kiyoshi Honda. 2010a. Invariant Articulatory Bases of the Features [tense] and [spread glottis] in Korean Plosives: New Stroboscopic cine-MRI Data. Journal of Phonetics 38.1: 90–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hyunsoon, Shinji Maeda, Kiyoshi Honda & Stephane Hans. 2010b. The Laryngeal Characterization of Korean Fricatives: Acoustic and Aerodynamic Data. Turbulent Sounds: An Interdisciplinary Guide ed. by Susanne Fuchs, Martine Toda & Marzena Zygis, 143–166. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hyunsoon. Shinji Maeda & Kiyoshi Honda. 2011. The Laryngeal Characterization of Korean Fricatives: Stroboscopic cine-MRI Data. Journal of Phonetics 39.41: 626–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Hyunsoon & Chae-Lim Park, 2011. An Acoustic Study of the Korean Fricatives /s, s’/: Implications for the Features [spread glottis] and [tense]. Tones and Features ed. by John Goldsmith, Beth Hume & W. Leo Wetzels, 176–194. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Soohee. 1999. Subphonemic Duration Difference in English /s/ and Few-to-many Borrowing from English to Korean. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Washington.
Kim, Soohee & Emily Curtis. 2002. Phonetic Duration of English /s/ and its Borrowing into Korean. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 101: 406–419.Google Scholar
Kingston, John & Randy L. Diehl. 1994. Phonetic Knowledge. Language 70.3: 419–454. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982. Lexical Morphology and Phonology. Linguistics in the Morning Calm, vol. 21 ed. by In-Seok Yang, 3–91. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Klatt, Dennis. 1974. The Duration of [s] in English Words. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 171: 51–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1976. The Linguistic uses of Segmental Duration in English: Acoustic and Perceptual Evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 591: 1208–1221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaCharité, D Darlene & Carole Paradis. 2005. Category Preservation and Proximity Versus Phonetic Approximation in Loanword Adaptation. Linguistic Inquiry 36.21: 223–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1999. American English. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A Guide to the Use of the International Phonetic Alphabet ed. by International Phonetic Association, 41–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. A Course in Phonetics. Fort Worth, TX: Hartcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
Lahiri, Aditi & Henning Reetz. 2002. Underspecified Recognition. Laboratory Phonology 7 ed. by Carlos Gussenhoven & Natasha Warner, 637–676. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laver, John. 1994. Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Ahrong & Gregory K. Iverson. 2006. Variation in Korean Integration of English Word-Final /s/. Euhakyenkwu [Language Research] 421: 239–251.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh, Alvin M. Liberman, Donna M. Erickson, David Dechovitz & Roland Mandler. 1977. On Pushing the Voice-Onset-Time (VOT) Boundary About. Language and Speech 201: 209–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, Samuel E. 1982. Features, Markedness, and Order in Korean Phonology. Linguistics in the Morning Calm, vol. 21 ed. by In-Seok Yang, 601–618. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1988. Feature Geometry and Dependency: A Review. Phonetica 451: 84–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mohanan, Karuvannur P. 1986. The Theory of Lexical Phonology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing Co.Google Scholar
NIKL (The National Academy Institute of the Korean Language). 2011. Woylayephyokipeyp [How to borrow foreign sounds]. Seoul.
Nam, Ji-Young & Bruce Southard. 1994. Orthographic Representation and Resyllabification of English Loan words in Korean. Language and Speech 37.3: 259–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odden, David. 2005. Introducing Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1981a. Speech Timing as a Tool in Phonology. Phonetica 381: 204–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981b. Articulatory Constraints on the Cognitive Representation of Speech. The Cognitive Representation of Speech ed. by Terry Myers, John Laver & John Anderson, 111–122. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Shaughnessy, Douglas. 1981. A Study of French Vowel and Consonant Durations. Journal of Phonetics 91: 385–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Carole & Darlene LaCharité. 1997. Preservation and Minimality in Loanword Adaptation. Journal of Linguistics 331: 379–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Carole & Antoine Tremblay. 2009. Nondistinctive Features in Loanword Adaptation: The Unimportance of English Aspiration in Mandarin Chinese Phoneme Categoraization. Loan Phonology ed. by Andrea Calabrese & W. Leo Wetzels, 211–224. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peperkamp, Sharon. 2005. A Psycholinguistic Theory of Loanword Adaptations. BLS 301: 341–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peperkamp, Sharon & Emmanuel Dupoux. 2003. Reinterpreting Loanword Adaptations: The Role of Perception. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences ed. by Maria-Josep Solé, Daniel Recasens & Joaquin Romero, 367–370. Barcelona: Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Peperkamp, Sharon, Inga Vendelin & Kimihiro Nakamura. 2008. On the Perceptual Origin of Loanword Adaptations: Experimental Evidence from Japanese. Phonology 25.1: 129–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polivanov, Evgenij D. 1931. La perception des sons d’une langue étrangère [The perception of non-native language sounds]. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 41: 79–96.Google Scholar
. 1974. The Subjective Nature of the Perceptions of Language Sounds. Selected Works: Articles on General Linguistics ed. by Evgenij D. Polivanov, 223–237. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rhee, Seok-Chae & Yoo-Kyung Choi. 2001. Yengechayongeuy moumsapipey tayhan thongkyeycek kwanchalkwa ku uyuy. [A statistical observation of vowel insertion in English loanwords in Korean and its significance.] Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 71: 153–176. Seoul: Hankwukmunhwasa.Google Scholar
Sagey, Elizabeth C. 1986. The Representation of Features and Relations in Nonlinear Phonology. Ph. D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Shinohara, Shigeko, Seong-Rim Ji, Tomohiko Ooigawa & Takahito Shinya. 2011. The Limited Role of Perception in Korean Loanword Adaptation: The Korean Three-Way Laryngeal Categorization of Japanese, French, English and Chinese Plosives. Lingua 121.9: 1461–1484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva, David J. 1992. The Phonetics and Phonology of Stop Lenition in Korean. Ph. D. dissertation, Cornell University.
Silverman, Daniel. 1992. Multiple Scansions in Loanword Phonology: Evidence from Cantonese. Phonology 91: 289–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skaličková, Alena. 1960. The Korean Consonants. Prague: Rozpravy ČSAV.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 2001. Directional Asymmetries in Place Assimilation: A Perceptual Account. The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology ed. by Elizabeth Hume & Keith Johnson, 219–250. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. 1998. Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Features in Speech Perception and Lexical Access. The Handbook of Speech Perception ed. by David B. Pisoni & Robert E. Remez, 125–155. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N., Samuel J. Keyser & Haruko Kawasaki. 1986. Toward a Phonetic and Phonological Theory of Redundant Features. Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes ed. by Joseph S. Perkell & Dennis H. Klatt, 426–449. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tranel, Bernard. 1987. The Sounds of French: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1939. Grundzüge der Phonologie. Goöttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. (English edition: 1969. Principles of Phonology Engl. trans. by Christiane A. M. Baltaxe. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.)Google Scholar
Wells, John C. 1982. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wetzels, W. Leo & Joan Mascaró. 2001. The Typology of Voicing and Devoicing. Language 77.2: 207–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yip, Moira. 2006. The Symbiosis between Perception and Grammar in Loanword Phonology. Lingua 116.7: 950–975. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Kim, Hyunsoon
2017. A two-decade-interval variation in vowel insertion after word-final English and French postvocalic plosives in Korean adaptation: A sociolinguistic account. Linguistics Vanguard 3:1 DOI logo
Kim, Hyunsoon, Shinji Maeda, Kiyoshi Honda & Lise Crevier-Buchman
2017. The Mechanism and Representation of Korean Three-Way Phonation Contrast: External Photoglottography, Intra-Oral Air Pressure, Airflow, and Acoustic Data. Phonetica 75:1 ► pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Hyunsoon, Shinji Maeda, Kiyoshi Honda & Lise Crevier-Buchman
2022. External photoglottography, intra-oral air pressure, airflow and acoustic data on the Korean fricatives /s’, s/. Phonetics and Speech Sciences 14:3 ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Jacobs, Haike
2016. French loanwords in Korean. In Romance Linguistics 2013 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 9], ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.