Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism: Online-First ArticlesSecond language learners acquire reduced word forms just like they acquire full forms
From exposure
We investigated the effect of auditory exposure on the recognition of full (i.e., canonical) and reduced (i.e., with weakened or deleted sounds) word forms by beginner second language (L2) learners. We taught three participant groups the same French schwa words. One group was trained only on the full (i.e., with schwa) forms, one group on the reduced forms (i.e., without schwa) only, and one group on both the full and reduced forms of each word. We then tested participants’ recognition of both forms in an auditory lexical decision task. We found that participants’ accuracy for a form was proportional to the exposure they received at training for that form. Both participants’ groups trained on one form recognized the untrained form in about a third of the trials. We conclude that exposure is a crucial factor in learning L2 reduced forms and that listeners use both retrieval from storage and goodness of fit (including reconstruction) mechanisms, in the same way for full as for reduced forms.
Keywords: exposure, reduction, L2 acquisition, speech recognition, pronunciation variation
Article outline
- Introduction
- The current study
- Methods
- Participants
- Materials
- Training materials
- Testing materials
- Recordings and speakers
- Test trials
- Procedure
- Results
- Real and pseudo words accuracies
- Statistical analysis of the Trained Schwas
- First occurrences
- Second occurrences
- General discussion
- Data availability
- Notes
-
References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].
References (50)
Ahmadian, M., & Matour, R. (2014). The Effect of Explicit Instruction of Connected Speech Features on Iranian EFL Learners’ Listening Comprehension Skill. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature,
3
(
2
), 227–236. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Askildson, V. (2008). What do Teachers and Students Want from a Foreign Language Textbook?, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.
Blees, G. J., Mak, W. M., & ten Thije, J. D. (2014). English as a lingua franca versus lingua receptiva in problem-solving conversations between Dutch and German students. Applied Linguistics Review,
5
(
1
), 173–193. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boersma, P., Weenink, D. (2001). Praat, a System for Doing Phonetics by Computer. Glot International,
5
1, 341–345.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brand, S., & Ernestus, M. (2018). Listeners’ processing of a given reduced word pronunciation variant directly reflects their exposure to this variant: evidence from native listeners and learners of French. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
71
(
5
), 1240–1259. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, J. D., & Hilferty, A. (1986). The effectiveness of teaching reduced forms of listening comprehension. Relc Journal,
17
(
2
), 59–70. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brysbaert, M. (2013). Lextale_fr a fast, free, and efficient test to measure language proficiency in french. Psychologica Belgica,
53
(
1
), 23–23. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bürki, A., Ernestus, M., Gendrot, C., Fougeron, C., Frauenfelder, U. (2011). What affects the presence versus absence of schwa and its duration: A corpus analysis of connected speech? The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
130
(
6
), 3980–3991. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bürki, A., & Frauenfelder, U. H. (2012). Producing and recognizing words with two pronunciation variants: evidence from novel schwa words. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
65
(
4
), 796–824. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bürki, A., Viebahn, M. C., Racine, I., Mabut, C., & Spinelli, E. (2018). Intrinsic advantage for canonical forms in spoken word recognition: myth or reality? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience,
33
(
4
), 494–511. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1995). Grammar and the spoken language. Applied Linguistics,
16
(
2
), 141–158. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chan, R. K. W. C., & Leung, J. H. C. L. (2014). Implicit learning of L2 word stress regularities. Second Language Research,
30
(
4
), 463–484. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Côté, M.-H., & Morrisson, G. S. (2007). The nature of the schwa/zero alternation in French clitics: experimental and non-experimental evidence. Journal of French Language Studies,
17
(
2
), 159–186. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Content, A., Mousty, P., & Radeau, M. (1990). BRULEX. Une base de données lexicales informatisée pour le français écrit et parlé. L’Année Psychologique,
90
(4), 551–566. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dumay, N., Gaskell, M. G., & Feng, X. (2004). A day in the life of a spoken word. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 339–344). Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gaskell, M. G., & Dumay, N. (2003). Lexical competition and the acquisition of novel words. Cognition,
89
1, 105–132. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M. (2009). The roles of reconstruction and lexical storage in the comprehension of regular pronunciation variants. Proceedings of the 10th annual conference of the international speech communication association (Interspeech 2009). (pp. 1875–1878). Brighton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M., Baayen, H., & Schreuder, R. (2002). The recognition of reduced word forms. Brain and Language,
81
(
1–3
), 162–173. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M., Dikmans, M. E., & Giezenaar, G. (2017). Advanced second language learners experience difficulties processing reduced word pronunciation variants. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics,
6
(
1
), 1–20. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M., & Warner, N. (2011). An introduction to reduced pronunciation variants. Journal of Phonetics,
39
1, 253–260. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fonseca-Greber, B., & Waugh, L. R. (2003). The Subject Clitics of Conversational European French: Morphologization, Grammatical Change, Semantic Change, and Change in Progress. In R. Núñez-Cedeño, L. López, & R. Cameron (Eds.), A romance perspective on language knowledge and use (pp. 99–117). Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
22
(
5
), 1166–83. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hansen, A. B. (1994). Etude du E caduc – stabilisation en cours et variations lexicales. Journal of French Language Studies,
4
1, 25–54. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Johnson, K. 2004. Massive reduction in conversational American English. Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spontaneous speech: data and analysis (pp. 29–54). Tokyo.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kennedy, S., & Blanchet, J. (2014). Language awareness and perception of connected speech in a second language. Language Awareness,
23
(
1–2
), 92–106. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). Lmer test package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software,
82
(
13
), 1–26. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.15–42). Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Matter, J. F. (1986). À la recherche des frontières perdues. Étude sur la perception de la parole en français. De Werelt.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morano, L., Ernestus, M., & ten Bosch, L. (2015). Schwa reduction in low-proficiency L2 speakers: Learning and generalization. In M. Wolters, J. Livingstone, B. Beattie, R. Smith, M. MacMahon, J. Stuart-Smith, & J. Scobbie (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th international congress of phonetic sciences (ICPhS 2015). University of Glasgow.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nouveau, D. (2012). Limites perceptives de l’e caduc chez des apprenants néerlandophones. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics,
15
(
1
), 60–78.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Oostendorp, M. (2012). Quantity and the three-syllable window in Dutch word stress. Language and Linguistics Compass,
6
(
6
), 343–358. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Peirce, J. W. (2007). Psychopy – psychophysics software in python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods,
162
(
1–2
), 8–13. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pierrehumbert, J. (2002). Word-specific phonetics. In C. Gussenhoven, & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory Phonology 7. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pitt, M. A. (1998). Phonological processes and the perception of phonotactically illegal consonant clusters. Perception & Psychophysics,
60
1, 941–951. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
(2009). How are pronunciation variants of spoken words recognized? A test of generalization to newly learned words. Journal of Memory and Language,
61
(
1
), 19–36. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pitt, M. A., Dilley, L., & Tat, M. (2011). Exploring the role of exposure frequency in recognizing pronunciation variants. Journal of Phonetics,
39
(
3
), 304–311. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Powell, M. J. (2009). The BOBYQA algorithm for bound constrained optimization without derivatives. Report DAMTP 2009/NA06 (pp. 26–46). University of Cambridge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Development Core Team. 2007. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna. [URL]
Racine, I. (2008). Les effets de l’effacement du Schwa sur la production et la perception de la parole en français. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Geneva. [URL]
Racine, I., Bürki, A., & Spinelli, E. (2014). The implication of spelling and frequency in the recognition of phonological variants: evidence from pre-readers and readers. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience,
29
(
7
), 893–898. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Racine, I., & Grosjean, F. (2000). Influence de l’effacement du schwa sur la reconnaissance des mots en parole continue. L’année psychologique,
100
(
3
), 393–417. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
(2002). La production du e caduc facultatif est-elle prévisible ? un début de réponse. Journal of French Language Studies,
12
(
3
), 307–326. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ranbom, L. J., & Connine, C. M. (2007). Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language,
57
(
2
), 273–298. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rastle, K., McCormick, S. F., Bayliss, L., & Davis, C. J. (2011). Orthography influences the perception and production of speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
37
(
6
), 1588–94. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Seyfarth, S. (2014). Word informativity influences acoustic duration: effects of contextual predictability on lexical representation. Cognition,
133
(
1
), 140–155. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shockey, L., & Bond, D. (2015). Casual speech phonology and perception of further languages: The case of Latvian. In M. Wolters, J. Livingstone, B. Beattie, R. Smith, M. MacMahon, J. Stuart-Smith, & J. Scobbie (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th international congress of phonetic sciences (ICPhS 2015). University of Glasgow.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)