Cover not available
Article published In:
Psycholinguistic approaches to production and comprehension in bilingual adults and children
Edited by Maialen Iraola Azpiroz, Shanley E.M. Allen, Kalliopi Katsika and Leigh B. Fernandez
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:4/5] 2019
► pp. 628–658

Dominance, mode, and individual variation in bilingual speech production and perception

| École normale supérieure, PSL* Research University
| University of Kent
Early Spanish-English bilinguals and English controls were tested on the production and perception of negative, short-lag, and long-lag Voice Onset Time (VOT), VOT types spanning the Spanish and English phonetic categories: phonologically, negative and short-lag VOT stops are distinct phonemes in Spanish, but realizations of voiced stops in English. Dominance was critical: more English-dominant bilinguals produced more short-lag VOT stops in response to negative VOT stimuli, and were also less accurate than more balanced bilinguals at discriminating negative from short-lag VOT. Bilinguals performed similarly to monolinguals overall, but they produced more negative VOT tokens and shorter short-lag VOT in response to negative VOT. Their productions were also less well correlated with perception and showed more variation between individuals. These results highlight the variable nature of bilingual production and perception, and demonstrate the need to consider language dominance, individual variation, as well as modalities and tasks when studying bilinguals.
Keywords: bilingualism, language dominance, language mode, voice onset time, English, Spanish
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Experiment 1: Production
    • 2.1Method
      • 2.1.1Participants
      • 2.1.2Stimuli
      • 2.1.3Procedure
      • 2.1.4Annotation and measurements
      • 2.1.5Analyses
    • 2.2Results
      • 2.2.1Bilinguals
      • 2.2.2Bilinguals vs. monolinguals
      • 2.3Interim discussion
  • 3.Experiment 2: Perception – ABX
    • 3.1Method
      • 3.1.1Participants
      • 3.1.2Stimuli
      • 3.1.3Procedure
      • 3.1.4Analyses
    • 3.2Results
      • 3.2.1Bilinguals
      • 3.2.2Bilinguals vs. monolinguals
    • 3.3Interim discussion
  • 4.Experiment 3: Perception – AX
    • 4.1Method
      • 4.1.1Participants
      • 4.1.2Stimuli
      • 4.1.3Procedure
    • 4.2Results
      • 4.2.1Bilinguals
      • 4.2.2Bilinguals vs. monolinguals
    • 4.3Interim discussion
  • 5.Production vs. perception
    • 5.1Analyses
    • 5.2Results
      • 5.2.1Production and ABX
      • 5.2.2Production and AX
    • 5.3Interim discussion
  • 6.General discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 October 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17027.pic
References (45)
References
Abramson, A. S., & Whalen, D. H. (2017). Voice Onset Time (VOT) at 50: Theoretical and practical issues in measuring voicing distinctions. Journal of Phonetics, 631, 75–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balukas, C., & Koops, C. (2014). Spanish-English bilingual voice onset time in spontaneous code-switching. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(4), 423–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beach, E. F., Burnham, D., & Kitamura, C. (2001). Bilingualism and the relationship between perception and production: Greek/English bilinguals and Thai bilabial stops. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 5(2), 221–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beddor, P. (2017). Speech perception in phonetics. Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Retrieved 2 Nov. 2017, from [URL]. DOI logo
Best, C. T., & Strange, W. (1992). Effects of phonological and phonetic factors on cross-language perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics, 20(3), 305–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bills, G. D., Chávez, E. H., & Hudson, A. (1995). The geography of language shift: Distance from the Mexican border and Spanish language claiming in the Southwestern US. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 114(1), 9–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cedrus Corporation. (2011). SuperLab 4.5. San Pedro, CA.Google Scholar
Cho, T., & Ladefoged, P. (1999). Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27(2), 207–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A., Mehler, J., Norris, D., & Segui, J. (1992). The monolingual nature of speech by bilinguals. Cognitive Psychology, 24(3), 381–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, L. (2016). Variability in the implementation of voicing in American English obstruents. Journal of Phonetics, 541, 35–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dmitrieva, O., Llanos, F., Shultz, A. A., & Francis, A. L. (2015). Phonological status, not voice onset time, determines the acoustic realization of onset f0 as a secondary voicing cue in Spanish and English. Journal of Phonetics, 491, 77–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Docherty, G. J. (1992). The timing of voicing in British English obstruents. Berlin/New York: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dum-Tragut, J. (2009). Armenian: Modern Eastern Armenian (Vol. 141). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunn, A. L., & Fox Tree, J. E. (2009). A quick, gradient Bilingual Dominance Scale. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(3), 273–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elman, J. L., Diehl, R. L., & Buchwald, S. E. (1977). Perceptual switching in bilinguals. The Journal of the acoustical Society of America, 62(4), 971–974. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–273). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Eefting, W. (1987). Production and perception of English stops by native Spanish speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 151, 67–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). Imitation of a VOT continuum by native speakers of English and Spanish: Evidence for phonetic category formation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83(2), 729–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E., MacKay, I. R. A., & Piske, T. (2002). Assessing bilingual dominance. Applied Psycholinguistics, 231, 567–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fowler, C. A., Sramko, V., Ostry, D. J., Rowland, S. A., & Hallé, P. (2008). Cross language phonetic influences on the speech of French-English bilinguals. Journal of Phonetics, 36(4), 649–663. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 67–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grijalva, C., Piccinini, P., & Arvaniti, A. (2013). The vowel spaces of Southern California English and Mexican Spanish as produced by monolinguals and bilinguals. POMA (Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics), 19(1), 060088.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 361, 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 131–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). The bilingual’s language modes. In Nicol, J. (Ed.). One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Oxford: Blackwell. Also in Li Wei (Ed.). The bilingual reader (2nd edition). London: Routledge, 2007.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. (1984). Phonetic and phonological representation of stop consonant voicing. Language, 60(2), 286–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessinger, R. H., & Blumstein, S. E. (1997). Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time in Thai, French, and English. Journal of Phonetics, 25(2), 143–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lengeris, A., & Hazan, V. (2011). The effect of native vowel processing ability and frequency discrimination acuity on the phonetic training of English vowels for native speakers of Greek. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1281, 3757–3768. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipski, J. M. (2008). Varieties of Spanish in the United States. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20(3), 384–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mack, M. (1989). Consonant and vowel perception and production: Early English-French bilinguals and English monolinguals. Perception & Psychophysics, 46(2), 187–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacKay, I. R., Flege, J. E., Piske, T., & Schirru, C. (2001). Category restructuring during second-language speech acquisition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110(1), 516–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magloire, J., & Green, K. P. (1999). A cross-language comparison of speaking rate effects on the production of Voice Onset Time in English and Spanish. Phonetica, 56(3–4), 158–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGuire, G. (2010). A brief primer on experimental designs for speech perception research. Available at [URL]
Nakai, S., & Scobbie, J. M. (2016). The VOT category boundary in word-initial stops: Counter-Evidence against rate normalization in English spontaneous speech. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 7(1), 13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olson, D. J. (2013). Bilingual language switching and selection at the phonetic level: Asymmetrical transfer in VOT production. Journal of Phonetics, 41(6), 407–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piccinini, P., & Arvaniti, A. (2015). Voice onset time in Spanish – English spontaneous code-switching. Journal of Phonetics, 521, 121–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pisoni, D. (1973). Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels. Perception and Psychophysics, 13(2), 253–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raphael, L. J., Borden, G. J., & Harris, K. S. (2007). Speech science primer: Physiology, acoustics, and perception of speech. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Stuart-Smith, J., Sonderegger, M., Rathcke, T., & Macdonald, R. (2015). The private life of stops: VOT in a real-time corpus of spontaneous Glaswegian. Laboratory Phonology, 6(3–4), 505–549.Google Scholar
Sundara, M., Polka, L., & Baum, S. (2006). Production of coronal stops by simultaneous bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(1), 97–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theodore, R. M., Miller, J. L., & DeSteno, D. (2009). Individual talker differences in voice-onset-time: Contextual influences. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(6), 3974–3982. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, L. (1977). The perception of stop consonant voicing by Spanish-English bilinguals. Perception & Psychophysics, 21(4), 289–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yu, A., Abrego-Collier, C., & Sonderegger, M. (2013). Phonetic imitation from an individual-difference perspective: Subjective attitude, personality and “autistic” traits. PLOS ONE 8(9): e74746. Published: September 30, 2013. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Duarte-Borquez, Claudia, Maxine Van Doren & Marc Garellek
2024. Utterance-Final Voice Quality in American English and Mexican Spanish Bilinguals. Languages 9:3 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
Krieger, Svenja & Miriam Geiss
2024. Intonation of polar questions in German-dominant heritage speakers of Italian. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism DOI logo
Wrembel, Magdalena, Ulrike Gut, Romana Kopečková & Anna Balas
2024. The relationship between the perception and production of L2 and L3 rhotics in young multilinguals; an exploratory cross-linguistic study. International Journal of Multilingualism 21:1 ► pp. 92 ff. DOI logo
Jabeen, Farhat & Bettina Braun
2023. How cross–linguistic influence affects the use of duration in the production and perception of corrective and non–corrective focus types. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism DOI logo
Rose, Sharon, Michael Obiri-Yeboah & Sarah Creel
2023. Perception of ATR contrasts by Akan speakers: a case of perceptual near-merger. Laboratory Phonology DOI logo
Genitrini, Matteo, Julian Fritz, Georg Zimmermann & Hermann Schwameder
2022. Downhill Sections Are Crucial for Performance in Trail Running Ultramarathons—A Pacing Strategy Analysis. Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology 7:4 ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Ji Young & Gemma Repiso-Puigdelliura
2020. Deconstructing Heritage Language Dominance: Effects of Proficiency, Use, and Input on Heritage Speakers’ Production of the Spanish Alveolar Tap. Phonetica 77:1 ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Azpiroz, Maialen Iraola, Shanley E. M. Allen, Kalliopi Katsika & Leigh Fernandez
2019. Psycholinguistic approaches to production and comprehension in bilingual adults and children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:4-5 ► pp. 505 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Bilingualism, Language Development and Processing across the Lifespan [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 15], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 september 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.