Speech produced by non-native talkers deviates from native talker norms in systematic ways that reflect the interaction between the talker’s native language and the target language. These deviations result in speech that is almost always easily identified by native listeners as “foreign-accented” and that is typically less intelligible for native listeners than native-accented speech. Determining the contribution of various types of foreign-accented speech features to reductions in intelligibility for native listeners can help advance our understanding of the nature of native and target language sound structure interactions in relation to their consequences for speech communication This study related variability in segmental production accuracy of foreign-accented speech to variability in overall intelligibility across individual talkers of foreign-accented English who all came from the same native language background, but varied in their levels of English speech production proficiency. The results showed that vowel, but not consonant, production accuracy correlates with intelligibility; and, errors in word-initial position are more detrimental to intelligibility than errors in other positions. These findings provide the basis for a principled and detailed description of the phonetic nature of foreign-accented speech in relation to its communicative function.
2019. The importance of vowel formant frequencies and proximity in vowel space to the perception of foreign accent. Journal of Phonetics 77 ► pp. 100919 ff.
Cheng, Bing & Yang Zhang
2015. Syllable Structure Universals and Native Language Interference in Second Language Perception and Production: Positional Asymmetry and Perceptual Links to Accentedness. Frontiers in Psychology 6
Derwing, Tracey M., Ron I. Thomson, Jennifer A. Foote & Murray J. Munro
2012. A Longitudinal Study of Listening Perception in Adult Learners of English: Implications for Teachers. The Canadian Modern Language Review 68:3 ► pp. 247 ff.
Fuchs, Robert
2016. Conclusion and Outlook. In Speech Rhythm in Varieties of English [Prosody, Phonology and Phonetics, ], ► pp. 203 ff.
GARCÍA, PAULA B. & KAREN FROUD
2018. Perception of American English vowels by sequential Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 21:1 ► pp. 80 ff.
Georgiou, Georgios P.
2022. The Effect of Face Masks on the Acoustic Properties of Vowels. In COVID-19 and a World of Ad Hoc Geographies, ► pp. 2381 ff.
Gosselin, Leah, Clara D. Martin, Eugenia Navarra-Barindelli & Sendy Caffarra
2021. The presence of a foreign accent introduces lexical integration difficulties during late semantic processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 36:9 ► pp. 1086 ff.
Gurevich, Naomi & Heejin Kim
2022. Examination of Consonantal Phonetic Coverage in Standard Reading Passages. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 7:5 ► pp. 1573 ff.
Gurevich, Naomi & Heejin Kim
2023. Development of Novel Speech Stimuli With Phonetic Coverage and Phonemic Balance. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 8:2 ► pp. 424 ff.
2018. A Phonetic Complexity-Based Approach for Intelligibility and Articulatory Precision Testing: A Preliminary Study on Talkers With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 61:9 ► pp. 2205 ff.
2016. Effects of Different Types of Corrective Feedback on Receptive Skills in a Second Language: A Speech Perception Training Study. Language Learning 66:4 ► pp. 809 ff.
LEE, ANDREW H. & ROY LYSTER
2017. Can corrective feedback on second language speech perception errors affect production accuracy?. Applied Psycholinguistics 38:2 ► pp. 371 ff.
Pérez-Ramón, Rubén, María Luisa García Lecumberri & Martin Cooke
2023. The role of lexical context and language experience in the perception of foreign-accented segments. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 59:3 ► pp. 609 ff.
Saito, Kazuya
2011. Identifying Problematic Segmental Features to Acquire Comprehensible Pronunciation in EFL Settings: The Case of Japanese Learners of English. RELC Journal 42:3 ► pp. 363 ff.
2022. Perception in Pronunciation Training. In Second Language Pronunciation, ► pp. 42 ff.
Wang, Xue
2022. Segmental versus Suprasegmental: Which One is More Important to Teach?. RELC Journal 53:1 ► pp. 194 ff.
WHEELER, PAGE & KAZUYA SAITO
2022. Second Language Speech Intelligibility Revisited: Differential Roles of Phonological Accuracy, Visual Speech, and Iconic Gesture. The Modern Language Journal 106:2 ► pp. 429 ff.
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood, Vincent J. van Heuven & Hassan Soodmand Afshar
2023.
The efficacy of segmental/suprasegmental
vs.
holistic pronunciation instruction on the development of listening comprehension skills by EFL learners
. The Language Learning Journal 51:6 ► pp. 734 ff.
Zhang, Wei & John M. Levis
2021. The Southwestern Mandarin /n/-/l/ Merger: Effects on Production in Standard Mandarin and English. Frontiers in Communication 6
Zhou, Chao & Anabela Rato
2023. Syllable position effects in the perception of L2 Portuguese /l/ and /ɾ/ by L1-Mandarin learners. Second Language Research► pp. 026765832211377 ff.
Zielinski, Beth
2015. The Segmental/Suprasegmental Debate. In The Handbook of English Pronunciation, ► pp. 397 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 april 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.