On the lexical source of variable L2 phoneme production
The current study investigates two lexical explanations for variation in L2 production: approximate (‘fuzzy’) representations vs dual URs. The focus is on Quebec francophone (QF) production of English /θ ð/ and /h/, which a reading-aloud task shows to be highly variable. Variation is problematic for the assumption that, due to perceptual illusions, URs are inaccurate. How is accurate output generated from inaccurate URs? Approximate representations employ diacritics rather than distinctive features. Arguably, these representations do not consistently generate accurate output. Under dual URs, lexical entries contain both inaccurate URs due to initial misperceptions and accurate URs generated when learners become capable of perceiving L2 phonemes. These URs compete for selection, leading to variation. Perception findings from oddball and semantic incongruity tasks provide conflicting support for the explanations: perception is variable, as predicted under approximate representations; but typical L2→L1 substitutions are harder to detect than atypical L1→L2 substitutions, an asymmetry expected under dual URs. To resolve the contradiction, we reinterpret the latter findings as revealing an implicit strategy of corrective adjustment acquired through experience with L2 errors. While we conclude that the L2 lexicon employs approximate representations, an enduring enigma concerns the considerably higher rates of hypercorrect [h] than [θ ð].
Article outline
- Introduction
- Background
- Method
- Participants
- Data collection
- Task 1 (production – reading aloud)
- Task 2 (perception – oddball paradigm)
- Task 3 (perception – semantic incongruity)
- Data analysis
- Results
- Task 1 (production – reading aloud)
- Task 2 (perception – oddball paradigm)
- Task 3 (perception – semantic incongruity)
- Discussion
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (47)
References
Anttila, A. (2002). Variation and phonological theory. In J. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), Handbook of language variation and change (pp. 206–43). Oxford: Blackwell.
Best, C. T. (1994). The emergence of native-language phonological influences in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. In J. C. Goodman & H. C. Nusbaum (Eds.), The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words (pp. 167–224). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Boersma, P. (1997). How we learn variation, optionality, and probability. In: Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences 21. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, 43–58.
Bohn, O.-S. (1995). Cross language speech perception in adults: First language transfer doesn’t tell it all. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 279–304). Timonium, MD: York Press.
Bradley, T. G. (2006). Spanish rhotics and Dominican hypercorrect /s/. Probus,
18
(1), 1–33.
Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition,
106
1, 707–729.
Brannen, K. (2011). The perception and production of interdental fricatives in second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University.
Broselow, E., Chen, S.-I., & Wang, C. (1998). The emergence of the unmarked in second language phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
20
1, 261–280.
Brown, C. (1998). The role of the L1 grammar in the acquisition of L2 segmental structure. Second Language Research,
14
(2), 136–193.
Bybee, J. (2007). Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cardoso, W. (2007). The variable development of English word-final stops by Brazilian Portuguese speakers: A stochastic optimality theoretic account. Language Variation and Change,
19
1, 219–48.
Cardoso, W. (2011). The development of coda perception in second language phonology: A variationist perspective. Second Language Research,
27
(4), 433–465.
Cedergren, H. J., & Sankoff, D. (1974). Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language,
50
(2), 333–55.
Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clarke, C. M. (2002). Perceptual adjustment to foreign-accented English with short term exposure. In the proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 2002), 253–256.
Cutler, A., Weber, A., & Otake, T. (2006). Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening. Journal of Phonetics,
34
1, 269–84.
Davis, M. H., Johnsrude, I. S., Hervais-Adelman, A., Taylor, K., & McGettigan, C. (2005). Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: Evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology General,
134
(2), 222–241.
Davis, S. (2011). Geminates. In M. van Oostendorp, C. J. Ewen, E. Hume E., & K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology, Volume 2 (pp. 837–859). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Dickerson, L. J. (1975). The learner’s interlanguage as a system of variable rules. TESOL Quarterly,
9
(4), 401–408.
Dupoux, E., Kakehi, K., Hirose, Y., Pallier, C., & Mehler, J. (1999). Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: A perceptual illusion? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,
25
1, 1568–1578.
Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2004). Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
26
(4), 551–585.
Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics,
36
(2), 345–360.
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. 229–273). Timonium, MD: York Press.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1984). The effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Language Learning,
34
1, 65–89.
Guy, G. R. (2007). Lexical exceptions in variable phonology. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics,
13
(2), 109–119.
Janda, R. D., & Auger, J. (1992). Quantitative evidence, qualitative hypercorrection, sociolinguistic variables – and French speakers’ ‘eadhaches with English h/Ø. Language & Communication,
12
(3/4), 195–236.
John, P. (2006). Variable h-epenthesis in the interlanguage of francophone ESL learners. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Concordia University.
John, P., & Cardoso, W. (2009). Francophone ESL learners’ difficulties with English /h/. In M. A. Watkins, A. S. Rauber, & B. O. Baptista (Eds.), Recent research in second language phonetics/phonology: Perception and production (pp. 118–140). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
John, P., & Cardoso, W. (2017). Medial coda and final stops in Brazilian Portuguese-English contact. In Yavaş, M., Kehoe, M. & Cardoso, W. (Eds.), Romance-Germanic bilingual phonology (pp. 181–199). Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.
Kennedy, S., & Trofimovich, P. (2008). Intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness of L2 speech: the role of listener experience and semantic context. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes,
64
(3), 459–489.
Kroch, A. (1989). Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change,
1
1, 199–244.
LaCharité, D., & Prévost, P. (1999). The role of L1 and of teaching in the acquisition of English sounds by francophones. In A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Taro (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 373–385). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Mah, J. (2011). Segmental representations in interlanguage grammars: the case of francophones and English /h/. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University.
Mah, J., Goad, H., & Steinhauer, K. (2016). Using event-related brain potentials to assess perceptibility: the case of French speakers and English [h]. Frontiers in Psychology,
7
1, 1–14.
Maye, J., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). The Weckud Wetch of the Wast: Lexical adaptation to a novel accent. Cognitive Science,
32
1, 543–562.
Melnik, G. A., & Pepercamp, S. (2019). Perceptual deletion and asymmetric lexical access in second language learners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
145
(13).
Preston, D. R. (1989). Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ross, S. (1994). The ins and outs of paragoge and apocope in Japanese-English interphonology. Second Language Research,
10
(1), 1–24.
Trofimovich, P., Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2007). A dynamic look at L2 phonological learning: Seeking processing explanations for implicational phenomena. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
29
1, 407–448.
Trude, A. M., Tremblay, A., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2013). Limitations on adaptation to foreign accents. Journal of Memory and Language,
69
(3), 349–367.
Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language,
50
1, 1–25.
White, E. J., Titone, D., Genesee, F., & Steinhauer, K. (2015). Phonological processing in late second language learners: The effects of proficiency and task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–22.
Winford, D. (1978). Phonological hypercorrection in the process of decreolization – the case of Trinidadian English. Journal of Linguistics,
14
(2), 277–291.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Archibald, John
2023.
Differential substitution: a contrastive hierarchy account.
Frontiers in Language Sciences 2
John, Paul & Simon Rigoulot
2023.
On the representation of /h/ by Quebec francophone learners of English.
Frontiers in Language Sciences 2
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.