scholarly journals Linguistic correlates of comprehensibility in second language Japanese speech

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuya Saito ◽  
Yuka Akiyama
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Mixed Models ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Pitch Accent ◽  
English Studies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Lexical Variation ◽  
Actual Usage ◽  
Picture Description

This study examined phonological, temporal, lexical and grammatical correlates of native speakers’ perception of second language (L2) comprehensibility (i.e., ease of understanding). L2 learners of Japanese with various proficiency levels engaged in oral picture description tasks which were judged by native speaking raters for comprehensibility, and then submitted to pronunciation, fluency, and lexicogrammar analyses. According to correlation analyses and linear mixed-models, the native speaking judges’ comprehensibility ratings were significantly linked not only with actual usage of words in context (lexical appropriateness) but also with the surface details of words (pitch accent, speech rate, lexical variation). Similar to previous L2 English studies (e.g., Isaacs & Trofimovich, 2012), the influence of segmental and morphological errors in the comprehensibility of L2 Japanese speech appeared to be minor.

First language effects on the identification and evaluation of second language speech

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-194
Author(s):  
Anne-France Pinget
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Environmental Factors ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Language Aptitude ◽  
Content Type ◽  
It Impacts ◽  
Language Effects

Abstract In Belgium, Dutch as spoken by Francophone learners is relatively frequent in political, commercial or educational contexts. While the characteristics of this second language (L2) variety have been studied extensively, there is to date no systematic report of how it is evaluated by either native speakers of Dutch or non-natives. Previous studies conducted in other language contexts have found that non-natives tend to be very critical towards L2 accents similar to their own. The main goal of the present study is to investigate the extent to which the listener’s first language (L1) impacts ratings of the fluency, accentedness and comprehensibility of L2 Dutch as spoken by Francophone learners and how it impacts the identification of the speakers’ L1. Specifically, we compared ratings by three groups of listeners: Francophone learners of Dutch, native speakers of Belgian Dutch and native speakers of Netherlandic Dutch. Moreover, the extent to which three additional cognitive and environmental factors influence L2 ratings is examined: listeners’ familiarity with the L2 variety, their language aptitude and language proficiency. The results show that the majority of native and non-native listeners recognized the speakers’ L1 (French). Non-native listeners perceived L2 speech as less fluent, less comprehensible and more accented than natives did, which corroborates the previously reported critical attitudes towards a shared L2 accent. Moreover, subtle differences in accent and fluency ratings were found between the Netherlandic Dutch and the Belgian Dutch listeners. No clear effects of other cognitive and environmental factors appeared in the ratings.

Verstaanbaarheid als interactioneel en contextgebonden fenomeen

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-170
Author(s):  
Ellen Simon ◽  
Chloé Lybaert
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Language Teaching ◽  
Language Education ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
Second Language Education ◽  
Communicative Success ◽  
And Migration

Abstract As a result of growing mobility and migration flows, the number of non-native speakers of Dutch in Belgium and the Netherlands have gradually increased over the past decades and so have the number of people enrolled in Dutch as a Second Language education. While there is huge variation in the profiles of these non-native speakers, they almost exclusively have in common that their Dutch sounds, in some way and at some stage, accented. In line with worldwide trends in foreign language teaching, the pronunciation goal in Dutch as a Second Language education has shifted from native-like to intelligible. Indeed, the notion of intelligibility has become prominent in language teaching and assessment. In this paper, we discuss the complexity of this notion and set it off against related terms like ‘comprehensibility’ and ‘foreign accent’. Through a literature review, we argue that intelligibility is an interactional and context-sensitive phenomenon: it is as much a responsibility of the speaker as it is of the listener or conversational partner(s) in general, whose attitudes will have an impact on the intelligibility and thus on the conversational flow and communicative success. After reviewing literature on the intelligibility of Dutch as a Second Language, we end by formulating some promising lines for future research.

Native language influences on the production of second-language prosody

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evia Kainada ◽  
Angelos Lengeris
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Language ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Prosodic Feature ◽  
Pitch Level ◽  
F0 Contour

This study examined native language (L1) transfer effects on the production of second-language (L2) prosody by intermediate Greek learners of English, specifically the set of tonal events and their alignment, speech rate, pitch span and pitch level in English polar questions. Greek uses an L* L+H- L% melody giving rise to a low–high–low f0 contour at the end of the polar question that does not resemble any of the contours used by native speakers in English polar questions. The results showed that the Greek speakers transferred the full set of Greek tonal events into English associating them with stressed syllables, and consistently placed the focus on the verb. The Greek speakers also anchored the peak of the phrase accent in polar questions around the midpoint of the stressed vowel across L1/L2 despite using longer vowel durations in L2. At the same time, their productions deviated from L1 forms in terms of speech rate (slower in L2), pitch span (narrower in L2) and pitch level (lower in L2), indicating that even when learners adopt an L1 prosodic feature in their L2, they still produce interlanguage forms that deviate from L1.

Factors driving lexical variation in L2 French: A variationist study of automobile, auto, voiture, char and machine

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
TERRY NADASDI ◽  
RAYMOND MOUGEON ◽  
KATHERINE REHNER
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
External Factors ◽  
Home Language ◽  
Lexical Variation ◽  
Neutral Variant ◽  
The Prestige

ABSTRACTOur paper examines lexical variation in the spoken French of second language learners and focuses on words referring to the notion of ‘automobile’ (i.e., automobile, auto, voiture, char and machine). Results reveal that while students do follow the native speaker pattern of using the neutral variant auto in most instances, they diverge from native speakers by making no use of the vernacular form char and relatively high use of the prestige variant voiture. The principal external factors that influence variant choice are students' home language and the representation of variants in the input to which students are exposed.

The Dynamics of Linguistic Systems and the Acquisition of French as a Second Language

1986 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Chaudenson ◽  
André Valli ◽  
Daniel Véronique
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Actual Usage ◽  
Regional Dialects ◽  
Linguistic System ◽  
Common Area

It has been observed that learners of French as a second language at different stages of the acquisition process tend to use forms and rules that are comparable to those of French-based creoles or pid-ginized French. The more advanced learners employ rules and forms akin to dialectal variants of French or to French as spoken in isolated areas such as Old Mines, Missouri. The learners produce non-standard forms considered unacceptable by the purist tradition of French grammarians. It has been noted that the observed similarities between interlanguage, regional dialects, etc., occur in given “sensitive” zones of French morphology and syntax such as the use of verbs and auxiliaries, morphology and placement of clitic pronouns, over-generalization of given prepositions, those very areas which are problematic in the acquisition of French as L1. Since the 17th century, these have been the object of a strict codification by purist grammarians who disregard actual usage in various dialects. It is hypothesized that such similarities between the interlanguage forms at various stages of development, French regional dialects, and areas of conflict over the elaboration of norms in standard French can be partly accounted for if one considers the dynamics of the target language. To explain the functioning of this process, we posit a “system” comprising the learner-speaker, the specific linguistic system itself (including pressure to conform to the norm), and the interactions with native speakers. Through self-regulation, this system devises solutions which perforce pertain to that common area which in any language is at the crossroads of variation, language change, and acquisition. This hypothetical zone (called français zéro by Chaudenson, 1984) is the point of convergence of the self-regulating processes which are responsible for the formal and functional similarities between French-based interlanguages, language change, norm conflicts in the standardization of French, and the creolization process.

A note on native and non-native accentedness judgements

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-105
Author(s):  
Dzintra Bond ◽  
◽  
Verna Stockmal ◽  
Dace Markus ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Lexical Selection ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
National Research Programme ◽  
Many Sources

Talkers in a second language can readily be identified as speaking with a foreign accent, characterized by both specific and more general deviations from the phonology of a target language. In this study, we examined the identifications of native and non-native talkers by listeners with various amounts of knowledge of the target language. Native and non-native speakers of Latvian provided materials. All the non-native talkers spoke Russian as their first language and were long-term residents of Latvia. We used Latvian as the target second language and speech samples produced either by native speakers or by ethnic Russians for whom Latvian is a second language. The text for reading was identical, talkers could not be distinguished by lexical selection or morphological and syntactic errors. A listening test, consisting of identical sentences excerpted from a short recorded passage, was presented to three groups of listeners: native speakers of Latvian, Russians for whom Latvian was a second language, and Americans with no knowledge of either language. The listeners were asked to judge whether each utterance was produced by a native or non-native talker and then evaluate the talker’s proficiency. The Latvians identified the non-native talkers accurately (88%) while the Russians were somewhat less accurate (79%). The American listeners were least accurate but still identified the non-native talkers at above chance levels, 63%. Sentence durations correlated with the judgments provided by the American listeners but not with the judgments provided by the native or L2 listeners. Interesting that there were no significant correlations between utterance duration and correct identification for Russian and Latvian listeners. Because these listeners knew the target language, they had many sources of information available to them rather than a relatively obvious characteristic such as fluency or speech rate. Research for portions of this project was provided by a grant from the International Research & Exchanges Board, with funds provided by the US Department of State (Title VII program) and the National Endowment for the Humanities. The final conclusions of the study, organisation and publication of the article were supported by the National Research Programme “Latvian language” Nr. VPP-IZM-2018/2-0002.

scholarly journals Relative Salience of Speech Rhythm and Speech Rate on Perceived Foreign Accent in a Second Language

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 333-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leona Polyanskaya ◽  
Mikhail Ordin ◽  
Maria Grazia Busa
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Foreign Accent ◽  
Speech Rhythm ◽  
Independent Contribution ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Perceptual Salience ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Relative Salience

We investigated the independent contribution of speech rate and speech rhythm to perceived foreign accent. To address this issue we used a resynthesis technique that allows neutralizing segmental and tonal idiosyncrasies between identical sentences produced by French learners of English at different proficiency levels and maintaining the idiosyncrasies pertaining to prosodic timing patterns. We created stimuli that (1) preserved the idiosyncrasies in speech rhythm while controlling for the differences in speech rate between the utterances; (2) preserved the idiosyncrasies in speech rate while controlling for the differences in speech rhythm between the utterances; and (3) preserved the idiosyncrasies both in speech rate and speech rhythm. All the stimuli were created in intoned (with imposed intonational contour) and flat (with monotonized, constant F0) conditions. The original and the resynthesized sentences were rated by native speakers of English for degree of foreign accent. We found that both speech rate and speech rhythm influence the degree of perceived foreign accent, but the effect of speech rhythm is larger than that of speech rate. We also found that intonation enhances the perception of fine differences in rhythmic patterns but reduces the perceptual salience of fine differences in speech rate.

scholarly journals Prosodic and lexical marking of contrast in L2 Italian

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppina Turco ◽  
Christine Dimroth ◽  
Bettina Braun
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Pitch Accent ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Linguistic Markers ◽  
Organizational Principles ◽  
Polarity Contrast

We investigated the second language (L2) acquisition of pragmatic categories that are not as consistently and frequently encoded in the L2 than in the first language (L1). Experiment 1 showed that Italian speakers linguistically highlighted affirmative polarity contrast (e.g. The child ate the candies following after The child did not eat the candies) in 34.3% of the cases, by producing a nuclear pitch accent on the finite verb (i.e. verum focus accent). Experiment 2 revealed that high-proficient German and Dutch non-native speakers of Italian linguistically encoded polarity contrast more frequently, either using a verum focus accent (German) or lexical markers (Dutch). This corresponds closely to the patterns preferred in their native languages. Our results show L1 transfer on three levels: (1) the relevance of the pragmatic category (i.e. marking polarity contrast on the assertion component), (2) the linguistic markers to encode polarity contrast and (3) the phonetic implementation of the intonational marking. These three levels of transfer have implications for how non-native speakers acquire the L2 discourse organizational principles and the linguistic markers to encode them.

Dynamic localization in second language English and German

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 400-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARY GRANTHAM O’BRIEN ◽  
CAROLINE FÉRY
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Pitch Accent ◽  
The Other ◽  
Final Position ◽  
Dynamic Localization ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Grammatical Structures ◽  
Pitch Accents

Marking new and given constituents requires speakers to use morphosyntactic and phonological cues within a discourse context. The current study uses a dynamic localization paradigm whereby German and English native speakers, with the other language as a second language (L2), describe constellations of pictures. In each picture a new or reintroduced animal is localized relative to other animals, thereby allowing for control of newness vs. givenness of animals. Participants completed the task in their native language (L1) and L2. English native speakers use predominantly canonical word order and often mark the new object with a falling pitch accent. German native speakers use a given-before-new word order, even when this is non-canonical, and they use a rising pitch accent in non-final position. The results indicate that speakers easily transfer unmarked grammatical structures – both word order and pitch accents – from their L1 to their L2.

Rethinking perceptions of fluency

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-280
Author(s):  
Anja Marie Dressler ◽  
Mary Grantham O’Brien
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Filled Pauses ◽  
Specific Time Point ◽  
Temporal Measures ◽  
Time Point

AbstractThe term “fluency” is used in two different ways in relation to second language speech. Whereas laypeople often equate fluency with proficiency in a given language, researchers define fluency as a speaker’s ease or fluidity in producing spoken language at a specific time point. This discrepancy in definitions has been problematic, especially when relying on ratings provided by naïve raters. This study seeks to determine whether “fluency” ratings differ from “fluidity” ratings assigned to 48 speech stimuli produced by native and non-native speakers of German. Samples were rated by participants from three distinct listener groups: native German listeners, second language (L2) German listeners, and non-speakers of German. On the surface, results reveal no significant differences along the two continua (“fluency” or “fluidity”). All groups rated native speakers as more fluent, and second language listeners were harshest in their ratings. Nonetheless, L2 listeners who rated speech samples along the “fluency” scale relied upon speech measures not associated with ease of speaking when compared with L2 listeners who rated the same samples for “fluidity.” Although listeners in all groups were most sensitive to speakers’ speech rate and use of filled pauses, native listeners and non-speakers relied more on temporal measures when they rated speech along the “fluidity” scale. These combined results thus indicate that “fluidity” may be the better term to use in future research relying on naïve listeners’ ratings of perceived fluency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document