Production of English lexical stress by Mandarin speakers: Acoustics and kinematics

This study aims to understand if Mandarin late learners of English can successfully manipulate acoustic and kinematic cues to deliver English stress contrast in production. Mandarin ( N = 8) and English ( N = 8) speakers were recorded producing English trochaic (initial stress) and iambic (final stress) items during a nonword repetition task. Speakers’ jaw movement for the utterances was tracked and analysed. Acoustic and kinematic cues were measured for each syllable, including acoustic duration, fundamental frequency (F0), and intensity, as well as jaw movement duration, displacement, peak velocity, and stiffness. Stress ratios (syllable 1 / syllable 2) were calculated for each cue and compared between groups. Results showed that English and Mandarin speakers had generally comparable performance in differentiating trochaic from iambic patterns, as well as in the degree of between-syllable contrast within each pattern. Between-group differences were only observed in acoustic duration and jaw movement velocity/stiffness. These results suggest that the experience with Mandarin stress contributes to Mandarin speakers’ overall successful production of English stress but also results in nonnative use of some acoustic/kinematic cues.

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

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 Southwestern Mandarin /n/-/l/ Merger: Effects on Production in Standard Mandarin and English

Southwestern Mandarin is one of the most important modern Chinese dialects, with over 270 million speakers. One of its most noticeable phonological features is an inconsistent distinction between the pronunciation of (n) and (l), a feature shared with Cantonese. However, while /n/-/l/ in Cantonese has been studied extensively, especially in its effect upon English pronunciation, the /l/-/n/ distinction has not been widely studied for Southwestern Mandarin speakers. Many speakers of Southwestern Mandarin learn Standard Mandarin as a second language when they begin formal schooling, and English as a third language later. Their lack of /l/-/n/ distinction is largely a marker of regional accent. In English, however, the lack of a distinction risks loss of intelligibility because of the high functional load of /l/-/n/. This study is a phonetic investigation of initial and medial (n) and (l) production in English and Standard Mandarin by speakers of Southwestern Mandarin. Our goal is to identify how Southwestern Mandarin speakers produce (n) and (l) in their additional languages, thus providing evidence for variations within Southwestern Mandarin and identifying likely difficulties for L2 learning. Twenty-five Southwestern Mandarin speakers recorded English words with word initial (n) and (l), medial <ll> or <nn> spellings (e.g., swallow, winner), and word-medial (nl) combinations (e.g., only) and (ln) combinations (e.g., walnut). They also read Standard Mandarin monosyllabic words with initial (l) and (n), and Standard Mandarin disyllabic words with (l) or (n). Of the 25 subjects, 18 showed difficulties producing (n) and (l) consistently where required, while seven (all part of the same regional variety) showed no such difficulty. The results indicate that SWM speakers had more difficulty with initial nasal sounds in Standard Mandarin, which was similar to their performance in producing Standard Mandarin monosyllabic words. For English, production of (l) was significantly less accurate than (n), and (l) production in English was significantly worse than in Standard Mandarin. When both sounds occurred next to each other, there was a tendency toward producing only one sound, suggesting that the speakers assimilated production toward one phonological target. The results suggest that L1 influence may differ for the L2 and L3.

Phonetically Grounded Structural Bias in Learning Tonal Alternations

This study investigates the hypothesis that tone alternation directionality becomes a basis of structural bias for tone alternation learning, where “structural bias” refers to a tendency to prefer uni-directional tone deletions to bi-directional ones. Two experiments were conducted. In the first, Mandarin speakers learned three artificial languages, with bi-directional tone deletions, uni-directional, left-dominant deletions, and uni-directional, right-dominant deletions, respectively. The results showed a learning bias toward uni-directional, right-dominant patterns. As Mandarin tone sandhi is right-dominant while Cantonese tone change is lexically restricted and does not have directionality asymmetry, a follow-up experiment trained Cantonese speakers either on left- or right-dominant deletions to see whether the right-dominant preference was due to L1 transfer from Mandarin. The results of the experiment also showed a learning bias toward right-dominant patterns. We argue that structural simplicity affects tone deletion learning but the simplicity should be grounded on phonetics factors, such as syllables’ contour-tone bearing ability. The experimental results are consistent with the findings of a survey on other types of tone alternation’s directionality, i.e., tone sandhi across 17 Chinese varieties. This suggests that the directionality asymmetry found across different tone alternations reflects a phonetically grounded structural learning bias.

L2 Processing of Words Containing English /æ/-/ɛ/ and /l/-/ɹ/ Contrasts, and the Uses and Limits of the Auditory Lexical Decision Task for Understanding the Locus of Difficulty

Second language (L2) learners often exhibit difficulty perceiving novel phonological contrasts and/or using them to distinguish similar-sounding words. The auditory lexical decision (LD) task has emerged as a promising method to elicit the asymmetries in lexical processing performance that help to identify the locus of learners’ difficulty. However, LD tasks have been implemented and interpreted variably in the literature, complicating their utility in distinguishing between cases where learners’ difficulty lies at the level of perceptual and/or lexical coding. Building on previous work, we elaborate a set of LD ordinal accuracy predictions associated with various logically possible scenarios concerning the locus of learner difficulty, and provide new LD data involving multiple contrasts and native language (L1) groups. The inclusion of a native speaker control group allows us to isolate which patterns are unique to L2 learners, and the combination of multiple contrasts and L1 groups allows us to elicit evidence of various scenarios. We present findings of an experiment where native English, Korean, and Mandarin speakers completed an LD task that probed the robustness of listeners’ phonological representations of the English /æ/-/ɛ/ and /l/-/ɹ/ contrasts. Words contained the target phonemes, and nonwords were created by replacing the target phoneme with its counterpart (e.g., lecture/*[ɹ]ecture, battle/*b[ɛ]ttle). For the /æ/-/ɛ/ contrast, all three groups exhibited the same pattern of accuracy: near-ceiling acceptance of words and an asymmetric pattern of responses to nonwords, with higher accuracy for nonwords containing [æ] than [ɛ]. For the /l/-/ɹ/ contrast, we found three distinct accuracy patterns: native English speakers’ performance was highly accurate and symmetric for words and nonwords, native Mandarin speakers exhibited asymmetries favoring [l] items for words and nonwords (interpreted as evidence that they experienced difficulty at the perceptual coding level), and native Korean speakers exhibited asymmetries in opposite directions for words (favoring [l]) and nonwords (favoring [ɹ]; evidence of difficulty at the lexical coding level). Our findings suggest that the auditory LD task holds promise for determining the locus of learners’ difficulty with L2 contrasts; however, we raise several issues requiring attention to maximize its utility in investigating L2 phonolexical processing.

Perception of gesturally different Mandarin retroflexes by Taiwan Mandarin speakers

This paper reports results from a study investigating whether there is a perceptual difference between gesturally different Mandarin retroflexes. Previous studies have suggested that there are two articulatory manners for Mandarin retroflexes: One involves the tongue tip being “curled-up,” and the other the tongue body being “bunched-up.” Thus, by implementing a perception test on Taiwan Mandarin listeners and an acoustic analysis, the research determines whether retroflexes produced with these gestures will be perceived differently. The resultsdings then show that “curled-up” and “bunched-up” retroflexes are not perceptually contrastive at a phonological level. However, the latter are perceived to be phonetically more retroflexed, with such property of stronger retroflexion reflected in their lower M1 (first moment) values. These findings yield one pedagogical implication. The teaching of retroflex articulations can be made reference to the gesture with which Mandarin learners can produce with more ease.

Abdominal enhancement techniques for L2 English phoneme pronunciation: Comparing the effectiveness of the techniques for Mandarin and Cantonese speakers

Production of certain English phonemes relies heavily on effort from the abdominal region, and under-utilization of this region by second language English speakers can create difficulties pronouncing these sounds. In particular, production of long vowel/diphthong sounds requires sustained abdominal contraction to maintain the length of these phonemes, and production of voiced fricative consonants requires a sharp burst of abdominal effort to expel air from the lungs to adequately voice the consonant. Both Cantonese and Mandarin speakers have particular problems producing these phonemes, and this study compared how instruction in the abdominal techniques effected production of these sounds by these two learner groups. The study focused on the vowel and diphthong sounds, /iː/, /uː/ and /eɪ/, and the voiced fricative consonants, /z/,/ð/, /v/ and /ʒ/. A previous study by the author had found the abdominal techniques improved Chinese learners’ production of these phonemes. The learners in that study were evenly divided between Mandarin and Cantonese speakers, and this study reanalysed the data to examine which speaker group benefited more from these abdominal techniques. Results showed that the Mandarin speakers were the major beneficiaries of the techniques. Importantly, the study also explored, in depth, likely reasons for this.