Influence of L2 proficiency on speech movement variability: Production of prosodic contrasts by Bengali–English speakers

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
RAHUL CHAKRABORTY
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Stress Pattern ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Movement Variability ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
Motor Systems ◽  
Lip Movement ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Speech Motor ◽  
Novel Words

This paper examines the influence of age of immersion and proficiency in a second language on speech movement consistency in both a first and a second language. Ten monolingual speakers of English and 20 Bengali–English bilinguals (10 with low L2 proficiency and 10 with high L2 proficiency) participated. Lip movement variability was assessed based on bilingual participants’ production of four real and four novel words embedded in Bengali (L1) and English (L2) sentences. Lip movement variability was evaluated across L1 and L2 contexts for the production of real and novel words with trochaic and iambic stress pattern. Adult bilinguals produced equally consistent speech movement patterns in their production of L1 and L2 targets. Overall, speakers’ L2 proficiency did not influence their movement variability. Unlike children, the speech motor systems of adult L2 speakers exhibit a lack of flexibility which could contribute to their increased difficulties in acquiring native-like pronunciation in L2.

SOURCES OF VARIATION IN SECOND AND NATIVE LANGUAGE SPEAKING PROFICIENCY AMONG COLLEGE-AGED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Mona Roxana Botezatu ◽  
Taomei Guo ◽  
Judith F. Kroll ◽  
Sarah Peterson ◽  
Dalia L. Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Second Language ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Language ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
Speaking Proficiency ◽  
Sources Of Variation ◽  
Internal Sources ◽  
L1 And L2

Abstract We evaluated external and internal sources of variation in second language (L2) and native language (L1) proficiency among college students. One hundred and twelve native-English L2 learners completed measures of L1 and L2 speaking proficiency, working memory, and cognitive control and provided self-ratings of language exposure and use. When considering learner-external variation, we found that more frequent L2 exposure predicted higher L2 and L1 proficiency, while earlier L2 exposure predicted higher L2 proficiency, but poorer L1 maintenance. L1–L2 distance limited crosslinguistic transfer of print-to-sound mappings. When considering learner-internal variation, we found that L1 and L2 proficiency were highly correlated and that better working memory, but not cognitive control, accounted for additional variance in L2 and L1 proficiency. More frequent L2 exposure was associated with better cognitive control.

scholarly journals From “No, she does” to “Yes, she does”: Negation processing in negative yes–no questions by Mandarin speakers of English

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Haoruo Zhang ◽  
Norbert Vanek
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Production Experiment ◽  
Mandarin Speakers ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Negative Questions

Abstract In response to negative yes–no questions (e.g., Doesn’t she like cats?), typical English answers (Yes, she does/No, she doesn’t) peculiarly vary from those in Mandarin (No, she does/Yes, she doesn’t). What are the processing consequences of these markedly different conventionalized linguistic responses to achieve the same communicative goals? And if English and Mandarin speakers process negative questions differently, to what extent does processing change in Mandarin–English sequential bilinguals? Two experiments addressed these questions. Mandarin–English bilinguals, English and Mandarin monolinguals (N = 40/group) were tested in a production experiment (Expt. 1). The task was to formulate answers to positive/negative yes–no questions. The same participants were also tested in a comprehension experiment (Expt. 2), in which they had to answer positive/negative questions with time-measured yes/no button presses. In both Expt. 1 and Expt. 2, English and Mandarin speakers showed language-specific yes/no answers to negative questions. Also, in both experiments, English speakers showed a reaction-time advantage over Mandarin speakers in negation conditions. Bilingual’s performance was in-between that of the L1 and L2 baseline. These findings are suggestive of language-specific processing of negative questions. They also signal that the ways in which bilinguals process negative questions are susceptible to restructuring driven by the second language.

Development of sensitivity to phonological context in learning to spell in English

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadya Dich
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Common Factor ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
English Word ◽  
Context Sensitivity ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Russian Speakers ◽  
Word Spelling ◽  
L1 And L2

The study attempts to investigate factors underlying the development of spellers’ sensitivity to phonological context in English. Native English speakers and Russian speakers of English as a second language (ESL) were tested on their ability to use information about the coda to predict the spelling of vowels in English monosyllabic nonwords. In addition, the study assessed the participants’ spelling proficiency as their ability to correctly spell commonly misspelled words (Russian participants were assessed in both Russian and English). Both native and non-native English speakers were found to rely on the information about the coda when spelling vowels in nonwords. In both native and non-native speakers, context sensitivity was predicted by English word spelling; in Russian ESL speakers this relationship was mediated by English proficiency. L1 spelling proficiency did not facilitate L2 context sensitivity in Russian speakers. The results speak against a common factor underlying different aspects of spelling proficiency in L1 and L2 and in favor of the idea that spelling competence comprises different skills in different languages.

scholarly journals (Not) acquiring meaning in a second language: Are input deficits key?

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 204
Author(s):  
Barbara C. Malt ◽  
Xingjian Yang ◽  
Jessica Joseph
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
The Other ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Learning Problem ◽  
Word Meanings ◽  
Learning Contexts ◽  
Choice Performance ◽  
Novel Words

Word meanings are not always parallel across languages, and second language (L2) learners often use words in non-native ways. Is the learning problem inherent in maintaining conflicting word-to-meaning mappings within an integrated lexical network, or is it due to insufficient attention to and input for acquiring L2 mappings? To help discriminate between these possibilities, we gave English speakers repeated exposures to 40 brief videos of actions, labeled with five novel words that cross-cut English labeling patterns. Half the participants were told only to learn the labels for the actions. The other half were told to figure out their meanings, which might differ from English. The Figure Out Meanings group made test choices faster and were also slightly more likely to produce definitions capturing the intended meanings. However, both groups performed well above chance in generalizing the novel words. High levels of choice performance for both groups point to insufficient input, rather than inherent properties of lexical networks, as the critical limiting factor in more typical L2 learning contexts. Speed and definition performance hint at some advantage to explicit attention in sorting out L1-L2 differences.

scholarly journals From ‘No, she does’ to ‘Yes, she does’: Negation processing in negative yes–no questions by Chinese users of English

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haoruo Zhang ◽  
Norbert Vanek
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Production Experiment ◽  
Mandarin Speakers ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Negative Questions

In response to negative yes–no questions (e.g., Doesn’t she like cats?), typical English answers (Yes, she does/No, she doesn’t) peculiarly vary from those in Mandarin (No, she does/Yes, she doesn’t). What are the processing consequences of these markedly different conventionalized linguistic responses to achieve the same communicative goals? And if English and Mandarin speakers process negative questions differently, to what extent does processing change in Mandarin–English sequential bilinguals? Two experiments addressed these questions. Mandarin–English bilinguals, English and Mandarin monolinguals (N = 40/group) were tested in a production experiment (Expt. 1). The task was to formulate answers to positive/negative yes–no questions. The same participants were also tested in a comprehension experiment (Expt. 2), in which they had to answer positive/negative questions with time-measured yes/no button presses. In both Expt. 1 and Expt. 2, English and Mandarin speakers showed language-specific yes/no answers to negative questions. Also, in both experiments, English speakers showed a reaction-time advantage over Mandarin speakers in negation conditions. Bilingual’s performance was in-between that of the L1 and L2 baseline. These findings are suggestive of language-specific processing of negative questions. They also signal that the ways in which bilinguals process negative questions are susceptible to restructuring driven by the second language.

The storage and composition of inflected forms in adult-learned second language: A study of the influence of length of residence, age of arrival, sex, and other factors

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 820-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA BABCOCK ◽  
JOHN C. STOWE ◽  
CHRISTOPHER J. MALOOF ◽  
CLAUDIA BROVETTO ◽  
MICHAEL T. ULLMAN
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Length Of Residence ◽  
Frequency Effects ◽  
Irregular Verbs ◽  
Past Tenses ◽  
L1 And L2

It remains unclear whether adult-learned second language (L2) depends on similar or different neurocognitive mechanisms as those involved in first language (L1). We examined whether English past tense forms are computed similarly or differently by L1 and L2 English speakers, and what factors might affect this: regularity (regular vs. irregular verbs), length of L2 exposure (length of residence), age of L2 acquisition (age of arrival), L2 learners’ native language (Chinese vs. Spanish), and sex (male vs. female). Past tense frequency effects were used to examine the type of computation (composition vs. storage/retrieval). The results suggest that irregular past tenses are always stored. Regular past tenses, however, are either composed or stored, as a function of various factors: both sexes store regulars in L2, but only females in L1; greater lengths of residence lead to less dependence on storage, but only in females; higher adult ages of arrival lead to more reliance on storage. The findings suggest that inflected forms can rely on either the same or different mechanisms in L2 as they do in L1, and that this varies as a function of multiple interacting factors.

Development of speech motor control: Lip movement variability

2011 ◽  
Vol 130 (4) ◽  
pp. 2548-2548
Author(s):  
Anders Lfqvist ◽  
Johan Frid ◽  
Susanne Schötz
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Speech Motor Control ◽  
Movement Variability ◽  
Lip Movement ◽  
Speech Motor

Structural and conceptual equivalence in the acquisition and use of emotion words in a second language

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aneta Pavlenko
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Mental Lexicon ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Lexical Borrowing ◽  
Emotion Words ◽  
Russian Speakers ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Conceptual Equivalence ◽  
L1 And L2

The purpose of the study presented here is to examine the importance of structural and conceptual (non-)equivalence in the acquisition and use of emotion words in a second language (L2). The use of these words is examined in a corpus of 206 narratives collected with two stimuli from first language (L1) speakers of Russian and English, and L2 learners of Russian and English. The results of the quantitative and qualitative analyses of lexical choices made by the participants show that in the case of structural non-equivalence L2 learners can shift patterns of structural selection in the mental lexicon. Thus, L2 learners of English pattern with L1 English speakers in favoring adjectival constructions in the same context where L1 and L2 Russian speakers favor verbs. Conceptual non-equivalence, on the other hand, was shown to complicate acquisition of emotion words and lead to negative transfer, lexical borrowing, and avoidance. Implications are offered for models of the bilingual mental lexicon and for L2 instruction.

PROCESSING FOCUS STRUCTURE IN L1 AND L2 FRENCH

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert V. Reichle ◽  
David Birdsong
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
Contrastive Focus ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Focus Condition ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
Focus Marking ◽  
L1 And L2

This study examined the event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by focus processing among first language (L1) speakers and second language (L2) learners of French. Participants read wh-questions containing explicit focus marking, followed by responses instantiating contrastive and informational focus. We hypothesized that L2 proficiency would modulate nativelikeness in L2 processing. For the L1 and L2 groups, widespread word-long positive shifts reflected the processing of nouns receiving informational and contrastive focus. Nouns receiving contrastive focus showed an increased anterior negativity compared to informational focus for both groups. Second language proficiency modulated the amplitude of this negativity effect, and subgroup analyses of low- and high-proficiency L2 learners showed no significant effect of focus condition among low-proficiency learners. This modulatory relationship between L2 proficiency and nativelikeness of processing is consistent with the dynamic sequence of L2 ERPs observed for morphosyntactic processing and extends those findings to the syntax-pragmatics interface phenomenon of focus processing.

scholarly journals Speech movement variability in people who stutter: A vocal tract MRI study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie E E Wiltshire ◽  
Mark Chiew ◽  
Jennifer Chesters ◽  
Mairead Healy ◽  
Kate E Watkins
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Vocal Tract ◽  
Movement Variability ◽  
Motor Systems ◽  
Fluent Speech ◽  
Trait Level ◽  
Mri Study ◽  
Phonological Complexity ◽  
Speech Motor

Purpose: People who stutter (PWS) have more unstable speech motor systems than people who are typically fluent (PWTF). Here, we used real-time MRI of the vocal tract to assess variability and duration of movements of different articulators in PWS and PWTF during fluent speech production.Method: The vocal tracts of 28 adults with moderate to severe stuttering and 20 PWTF were scanned using MRI while repeating simple and complex pseudowords. Mid-sagittal images of the vocal tract from lips to larynx were reconstructed at 33.3 frames per second. For each participant, we measured the variability and duration of movements across multiple repetitions of the pseudowords in three selected articulators: the lips, tongue body, and velum. Results: PWS showed significantly greater speech movement variability than PWTF during fluent repetitions of pseudowords. The group difference was most evident for measurements of lip aperture, as reported previously, but here we report that movements of the tongue body and velum were also affected during the same utterances. Variability was highest in both PWS and PWTF for repetitions of the monosyllabic pseudowords and was not affected by phonological complexity. Speech movement variability was unrelated to stuttering severity with the PWS group. PWS also showed longer speech movement durations relative to PWTF for fluent repetitions of multisyllabic pseudowords and this group difference was even more evident when repeating the phonologically complex pseudowords. Conclusions: Using real-time MRI of the vocal tract, we found that PWS produced more variable movements than PWTF even during fluent productions of simple pseudowords. This indicates general, trait-level differences in the control of the articulators between PWS and PWTF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document