Kan man måle opfattelsen af andetsprogets lyde?
Andetsprogsfonologiske test og generaliseringer om præleksikalsk perception
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/nys.v1i64.141692Nøgleord:
fonetik og fonologi, andetsprogslæring, sprogtest, ordgenkendelse, præleksikalsk perceptionResumé
At lære et andetsprogs udtale er svært. Ifølge det dominerende paradigme i andetsprogsfonologien er årsagen til dette, at lørnere forveksler lyde fra andetsproget med lyde fra modersmålet, også selvom disse er forskellige. Dette fænomen undersøges ofte i fonologiske test, hvor lørnere bedes identificere eller skelne mellem ord, der indeholder de problematiske sproglyde. Formålet med sådanne tests er at generalisere om opfattelsen af selve lydene, også selvom det ofte faktisk er ord, deltagerne lytter til. Men kan man adskille opfattelsen af enkelte lyde fra genkendelsen af de ord, de indgår i? Denne diskussionsartikel argumenterer for, at eksisterende fonologiske test står over for tre udfordringer: (1) at ekskludere ordgenkendelse fra testen; (2) at ekskludere skriftsproglige indflydelser i testen; (3) at balancere 1 og 2 med, hvor meget testens procedure afspejler normal taleopfattelse. Der argumenteres for, at alment anvendte test, eksemplificeret med studier af danske lørnere af engelsk, opfylder disse tre krav dårligt, hvilket kan lede til fejlfortolkninger, der kan skævvride vores forståelse af lørneres processering af andetsprogets lyde.
Referencer
Best, C.T. 1995. A Direct Realist View of Cross-language Speech Perception. W. Strange (red.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Language Research, 171–204. Timonium, MD: York Press.
Best, C.T. & M.D. Tyler. 2007. Nonnative and Second-Language Speech Perception: Commonalities and Complementarities. M.J. Munro & O.-S. Bohn (red.), Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honor of James Emil Flege, 13–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Boersma, P. 2011. A Programme for Bidirectional Phonology and Phonetics and Their Acquisition and Evolution. A. Benz & J. Mattausch (red.), Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today (180), 33–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.180.02boe.
Boersma, P. 2012. Modelling Phonological Category Learning. A.C. Cohn, C. Fougeron, & M.K. Huffman (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Laboratory Phonology, 207–218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bohn, O.-S. & R.L. Bundgaard-Nielsen. 2008. Second Language Speech Learning with Diverse Inputs. T. Piske & M. Young-Scholten (red.), Input Matters in SLA, 207–218. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Bohn, O.-S. & A.K. Steinlen. 2003. Consonantal Context Affects Cross-Language Perception of Vowels. M.-J. Solé (red.), Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS, Barcelona August 3-9).
Bradlow, A.R., D.B. Pisoni, R. Akahane-Yamada & Y. Tohkura. 1997. Training Japanese Listeners to Identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some Effects of Perceptual Learning on Speech Production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101(4), 2299–2310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.418276.
Chomsky, N. & M. Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
Cole, J. & J.I. Hualde. 2011. Underlying Rrepresentations. M. van Oostendorp m.fl. (red.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, 1–26. Chichester: Wiley- Blackwell.
Coltheart, M. m.fl.. 1993. Models of Reading Aloud: Dual-Route and Parallel-Distributed- Processing Approaches. Psychological Review 100(4), 589–608. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.589.
Coltheart, M. m.fl. 2001. DRC: A Dual Route Cascaded Model of Visual Word Recognition and Reading Aloud. Psychological Review 108(1), 204–256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204.
Connine, C. m.fl. (1990). Word familiarity and frequency in visual and auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(6), 1084–1096. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.6.1084.
Connine, C.M., D. Titone & J. Wang. 1993. Auditory Word Recognition: Extrinsic and Intrinsic Effects of Word Frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19(1), 81–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.1.81.
Crystal, D. 2008. Two Thousand Million? English Today 24(1), 3–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078408000023.
Derwing, T.M. & M.J. Munro. 2005. Second Language Accent and Pronunciation Teaching: A Research-Based Approach. TESOL Quarterly 39(3), 379–397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588486.
Díaz, B. m.fl. 2012. Individual Differences in Late Bilinguals’ L2 Phonological Processes: From Acoustic-Phonetic Analysis to Lexical Access. Learning and Individual Differences 22(6), 680–689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.05.005.
“Dut, n.” n.d. OED Online. Oxford University Press (tilgået 19. december 2022). http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/64799089.
Eger, N.A. & O.-S. Bohn. 2015. Picking up the Cues to a New Consonant Contrast: Danish Learners’ Production and Perception of English Word-Final /s/-/z/. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
Elbro, C. 2005. Literacy Acquisition in Danish: A Deep Orthography in Cross-Linguistic Light. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203824719-9.
Escudero, P., R. Hayes-Harb & H. Mitterer. 2008. Novel Second-Language Words and Asymmetric Lexical Access. Journal of Phonetics 36(2), 345–360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2007.11.002.
Escudero, P., E. Simon & K.E. Mulak. 2014. Learning Words in a New Language: Orthography Doesn’t Always Help. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 17(2), 384–395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728913000436.
Faris, M.M., C.T. Best & M.D. Tyler. 2018. Discrimination of uncategorised non-native vowel contrasts is modulated by perceived overlap with native phonological categories. Journal of Phonetics 70, 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2018.05.003.
Flege, J.E. 1995. Second Language Speech Learning: Theory, Findings, and Problems. Winifred Strange (red.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Language Research, 233–277. Timonium, MD: York Press.
Flege, J.E., O.-S. Bohn & S. Jang. 1997. Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 25(4), 437–470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1997.0052
Flege, J.E. & O.-S. Bohn. 2021. The Revised Speech Learning Model (SLM-r). Ratree Wayland (red.), Second Language Speech Learning: Theoretical and Empirical Progress, 3–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108886901.002.
Flege, J.E. & W. Eefting. 1988. Imitation of a VOT Continuum by Native Speakers of English and Spanish: Evidence for Phonetic Category Formation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83(2), 729–740. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.396115.
Flege, J.E., M.J. Munro & I.R.A. MacKay. 1995. Factors Affecting Strength of Perceived Foreign Accent in a Second Language. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97(5), 3125–3134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.413041.
Ganong, W.F. 1980. Phonetic Categorization in Auditory Word Perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 6(1). 110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.6.1.110.
Gianakas, S.P. & M. Winn. 2016. Exploiting the Ganong Effect to Probe for Phonetic Uncertainty Resulting from Hearing Loss. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 140(4), 3440–3441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4971092.
Guenther, F.H. 1994. A Neural Network Model of Speech Acquisition and Motor Equivalent Speech Production. Biological Cybernetics 72(1), 43–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00206237.
Gussenhoven, C. & A. (Ton) Broeders. 1976. The Pronunciation of English. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff-Longman.
van Heuven, W.J. B. m.fl. 2014. Subtlex-UK: A New and Improved Word Frequency Database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 67(6), 1176–1190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.850521.
Hickok, G. 2014. The Architecture of Speech Production and the Role of the Phoneme in Speech Processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 29(1), 2–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.834370.
Hienz, R.D., C.M. Aleszczyk & B.J. May. 1996. Vowel discrimination in cats: Acquisition, effects of stimulus level, and performance in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99(6), 3656–3668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.414980.
Hienz, R.D., M.B. Sachs & J.M. Sinnott. 1981. Discrimination of steady-state vowels by blackbirds and pigeons. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 70(3), 699–706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.386933.
Horslund, C.S. & O.-S. Bohn. 2022. Assimilation Patterns Predict L2 Identification Accuracy of English Initial Consonants. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, September. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.21024.hor.
Juul, H. 2010. K-a-tt-e-p-i-n-er. NyS – Nydanske Sprogstudier 39, 10–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7146/nys.v39i39.13528.
Katz, L. & R. Frost. 1992. The Reading Process Is Different for Different Orthographies: The Orthographic Depth Hypothesis. Advances in Psychology (94), 67–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62789-2.
Kihlstrom, J.F. 2021. Ecological Validity and ‘Ecological Validity’. Perspectives on Psychological Science 16(2), 466–471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966791.
Lively, S.E., J.S. Logan & D.B. Pisoni. 1993. Training Japanese Listeners to Identify English /r/ and /l/: II. The Role of Phonetic Environment and Talker Variability in Learning New Perceptual Categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 94(3), 1242–1255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.408177.
Lively, S.E. m.fl. 1994. Training Japanese Listeners to Identify English /r/ and /l/: III. Long-term Retention of New Phonetic Categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 96(4), 2076–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.410149.
Logan, J.S., S.E. Lively & D.B. Pisoni. 1991. Training Japanese Listeners to Identify English /r/ and /l/: A First Report. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 89(2), 874–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1894649.
McClelland, J.L., & J.L. Elman. 1986. The TRACE Model of Speech Perception. Cognitive Psychology 18(1), 1–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(86)90015-0.
Norris, D. 1994. Shortlist: A Connectionist Model of Continuous Speech Recognition. Cognition 52(3), 189–234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90043-4.
Norris, D. & J.M. McQueen. 2008. Shortlist B: A Bayesian Model of Continuous Speech Recognition. Psychological Review 115(2), 357–395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.357.
Orne, M.T. 1962. On the Social Psychology of the Psychological Experiment: With Particular Reference to Demand Characteristics and Their Implications. American Psychologist 17, 776–783. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043424.
Perre, L. m.fl. 2009. Orthographic Effects in Spoken Language: On-Line Activation or Phonological Restructuring? Brain Research 1275 (June), 73–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.04.018.
Polka, L. & O.-S. Bohn. 1996. A cross-language comparison of vowel perception in English-learning and German-learning infants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100(1), 577–592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.415884.
Polka, L. & O.-S. Bohn. 2003. Asymmetries in vowel perception. Speech Communication 41(1), 221–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00105-X.
Polka, L. & O.-S. Bohn. 2011. Natural Referent Vowel (NRV) Framework: An Emerging View of Early Phonetic Development. Journal of Phonetics 39(4), 467–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.007.
Polka, L. & J.F. Werker. 1994. Developmental changes in perception of nonnative vowel contrasts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 20(2), 421–435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.2.421.
Prince, A. & P. Smolensky. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. John Wiley & Sons.
Proverbio, A.M. & R. Adorni. 2008. Orthographic familiarity, phonological legality and number of orthographic neighbours affect the onset of ERP lexical effects. Behavioral and Brain Functions 4(27). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-4-27
Ridley, D.R., L.G. Ridley & C.B. Walker. 1999. English Letter Frequencies as Found in Whissell’s Parsimonious Sampling of English Words. Perceptual and Motor Skills 88(2), 607–614. DOI: https://doi-org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.2466/pms.1999.88.2.607
Sakai, M. & C. Moorman. 2017. Can perception training improve the production of second language phonemes? A meta-analytic review of 25 years of perception training research. Applied Psycholinguistics 39(1), 1–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000418.
Sheldon, A. & W. Strange. 1982. The Acquisition of /r/ and /l/ by Japanese Learners of English: Evidence That Speech Production Can Precede Speech Perception. Applied Psycholinguistics 3(3), 243–261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400001417.
Trapp, N. L. & O.-S. Bohn. 2000. Training Danish Listeners to Identify English Word-Final /s/ and /z/: Generalization of Training and Its Effect on Production Accuracy. A. James & J. Leather (red.), New Sounds 2000: Fourth International Symposium on the Acquisition of Second-Language Speech, 343–350. University of Klagenfurt.
Tyler, M.D. m.fl. 2014. Perceptual Assimilation and Discrimination of Non-Native Vowel Contrasts. Phonetica 71(1), 4–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000356237.
Zamuner, T.S. m.fl. 2016. Spoken Word Recognition of Novel Words, Either Produced or Only Heard During Learning. Journal of Memory and Language 89 (August), 55–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.003.
Zeguers, M.H.T. m.fl. 2014. Time Course Analyses of Orthographic and Phonological Priming Effects During Word Recognition in a Transparent Orthography. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 67(10), 1925–1943. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.879192.
Ziegler, J.C., L. Ferrand, & M. Montant. 2004. Visual Phonology: The Effects of Orthographic Consistency on Different Auditory Word Recognition Tasks. Memory & Cognition 32(5), 732–741. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195863.
Ziegler, J.C., A. Petrova, & L. Ferrand. 2008. Feedback Consistency Effects in Visual and Auditory Word Recognition: Where Do We Stand After More Than a Decade? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 34(3), 643–661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.643.
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Forfatteren/forfatterne og NyS har ophavsret til de artikler og anmeldelser der bringes i tidsskriftet. NyS har ophavsretten til den udgivne version af tidsskriftet. Forfatteren har ophavsretten til sin egen tekst. Forfattere kan arkivere den publicerede artikel på deres institutions forskningsarkiv (Institutional Repository) eller en privat hjemmeside, når forfatteren samtidig linker til artiklen med den officielle DOI.
For artikler publiceret i NyS tillades at læsere kan downloade, kopiere, udskrive, søge eller linke til og citere fra artikler til ethvert lovligt formål. Artikler kan frit deles og linkes til på forsknings- og undervisningsnetværk (så som Blackboard, Moodle, Canvas o.a.). Link foretrækkes fordi det giver oplysning om brug af tidsskriftets artikler, og fordi det anerkender tidsskriftets redaktionelle arbejde. NyS tillader ikke at læsere bruger artikler eller dele af dem i egne artikler uden at citere, eller at læsere på anden vis anvender dem til kommercielle formål.
