Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T14:19:22.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrating articulatory constraints into models of second language phonological acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2008

LAURA COLANTONI  and
JEFFREY STEELE
LAURA COLANTONI*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
JEFFREY STEELE
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Laura Colantoni, Department of Spanish and Portuguese, Northrop Frye Hall, Room 304, Victoria College, University of Toronto, 73 Queen's Park Crescent East, Toronto, ON M5S 1K7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Models such as Eckman's markedness differential hypothesis, Flege's speech learning model, and Brown's feature-based theory of perception seek to explain and predict the relative difficulty second language (L2) learners face when acquiring new or similar sounds. In this paper, we test their predictive adequacy as concerns native English speakers’ mastery of French /ʁ/ and Spanish /ɾ/. Based on an acoustic analysis of the learner data, we demonstrate that these three models do not account for the full range of variability nor for the developmental sequences attested, because they do not consider the degree of difficulty involved in the simultaneous mastery of multiple phonetic parameters across prosodic positions. Consequently, models of L2 phonological acquisition must not only integrate findings from markedness theory and speech perception but also incorporate phonetic constraints on production.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 489 - 534
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aoyama, K., Flege, J., Guion, S., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Yamada, T. (2004). Perceived phonetic dissimilarity and L2 speech learning: The case of Japanese /r/ and English /l/ and /r/. Journal of Phonetics, 32, 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archibald, J., & Young-Scholten, M. (2003). The second language segment revisited. Second Language Research, 19, 163–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batistella, E. (1990). Markedness: The evaluative superstructure of language. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Bayley, R., & Preston, D. R. (1996). Preface. In Bayley, R. & Preston, D. R. (Eds.), Second language ac-quisition and linguistic variation (pp. xiii–xviii). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, P., & Gottfried, T. (1995). Methodological issues in cross-language speech perception research with adults. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience. Issues in cross-language research (pp. 207–231). Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Béland, R., Paradis, C., & Bois, M. (1993). Constraints and repairs in aphasic speech: A group study. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 38, 279–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berri, A. (1998). Contribution a l'etude de la sonorité du / R/ français réalisé par des étudiants brésiliens [Contribution to the study of the voicing of French /R/ by Brazilian students]. Travaux de l'Institut de Phonétique de Strasbourg, 28, 1–17.Google Scholar
Best, C. (1994). The emergence of native language phonological influence in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. In Goodman, J. & Nusbaum, H. (Eds.), The development of speech perception: Transition from speech sounds to spoken words (pp. 167–264). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Best, C. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistics experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171–204). Timonimum, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2003). Authenticité de la prononciation en français L2 chez des apprenants tardifs anglophones: Analyses segmentales et globales [Late English learners’ L2 French pronunciation accuracy: Segmental and overall evaluation]. Acquisition et Instruction en Langue Étrangère, 18, 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blecua, B. (2001). Las vibrantes del español: Manifestaciones acústicas y procesos fonéticos [Spanish rhotic consonants: Acoustic characteristics and phonetic processes]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary phonology. The emergence of sound patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Mennen, S., & Slik, F. van der (2000). Authenticity of pronunciation in naturalistic second language acquisition: The case of very advanced late learners of Dutch as a second language. Studia Linguistica, 54, 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. (1998). The role of the L1 grammar in the L2 acquisition of segmental structure. Second Language Research, 14, 136–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. (2000). The interrelation between speech perception and phonological acquisition from infant to adult. In Archibald, J. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 4–63). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Carlisle, R. (1998). The acquisition of onsets in a markedness relationship: A longitudinal study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cichocki, W., House, A. B., Kinloch, A. M., & Lister, A. C. (1999). Cantonese speakers and the acquisition of French consonants. Language Learning, 49, 95–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colantoni, L. (2001). Mergers, chain shifts, and dissimilatory processes: Palatals and rhotics in Argentine Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L., & Steele, J. (2005). Phonetically-driven epenthesis asymmetries in French and Spanish obstruent-liquid clusters. In Gess, R. S. & Rubin, E. J. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (pp. 77–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L., & Steele, J. (2006). Native-like attainment in the L2 acquisition of Spanish stop-liquid clusters. In Klee, C. A. & Face, T. L. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 59–73). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L., & Steele, J. (2007). Acquiring /R/ in context. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 381–406.Google Scholar
Curtin, S., Goad, H., & Pater, J. (1998). Phonological transfer and levels of representation: The perceptual acquisition of Thai voice and aspiration by English and French speakers. Second Language Research, 14, 389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diehl, R., & Lindblom, B. (2000). Explaining the structure of feature and phoneme inventories: The role of auditory distinctiveness. In Greenberg, A. & Popper, F. (Eds.), Speech processing in the auditory system (pp. 101–162). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Eckman, F. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning, 27, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1991). The structural conformity hypothesis and the acquisition of consonant clusters in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (2004). From phonemic differences to constraint rankings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 513–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F., Elreyes, A., & Iverson, G. (2003). Some principles of second language phonology. Second Language Research, 19, 169–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Face, T. (2006). Intervocalic rhotic pronunciation by adult learners of Spanish as a second language. In Klee, C. A. & Face, T. L. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 47–58). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1987). The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics, 15, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., MaKay, I., & Meador, D. (1999). Native Italian speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2973–2987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gili y Gaya, S. (1921). La r simple en la pronunciación española [The tap in Spanish pronunciation]. Revista de Filologıa Española, 8, 271–280.Google Scholar
González, A. (2007). The acquisition of Yucatec Maya ejectives by native Spanish speakers. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Goad, H., & Rose, Y. (2004). Input elaboration, head faithfulness and evidence for representation in the acquisition of left-edge clusters in West Germanic. In Kager, R., Pater, J., & Zonneveld, W. (Eds.), Constraints in phonological acquisition (pp. 109–157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guirao, M., & Garcıa Jurado, M. A. (1991). Los perfiles acústicos y la identificación de /l/ y /r/ [Acoustic profiles and the identification of /l/ and /r/]. Revista Argentina de Lingüıstica, 7, 21–42.Google Scholar
Hammerly, H. (1982). Contrastive phonology and error analysis. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancin-Bhatt, B. (2000). Optimality in second-language phonology: Codas in Thai ESL. Second Language Research, 16, 201–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancin-Bhatt, B., & Bhatt, R. M. (1997). Optimal L2 syllables: Interactions of transfer and developmental effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 331–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardison, D. (2006). The visual element in phonological perception and learning. In Pennington, M. (Ed.), Phonology in context (pp. 135–158). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1983). Autosegmental phonology and liquid assimilation in Havana Spanish. In King, L. & Maley, C. (Eds.), Selected papers from the XIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (pp. 127–148). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Honikman, B. (1964). Articulatory settings. In Abercrombie, D., D. Fry, MacCarthy, P., Scott, N. C., & Trim, J. (Eds.), In honour of Daniel Jones (pp. 73–84). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hoole, P. (1999). Laryngeal coarticulation. In Hardcastle, W. & Hewlett, N. (Eds.), Coarticulation. Theory, data and techniques (pp. 105–143). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inouye, S. (1995). Trills, taps and stops in variation and contrast. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Kelso, J. A. S., Saltzman, E. L., & Tuller, B. (1986). The dynamical perspective on speech production: Data and theory. Journal of Phonetics, 14, 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyser, S. J., & Stevens, K. N. (2006). Enhancement and overlap in the speech chain. Language, 82, 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaCharité, D., & Prévost, P. (1999). The role of the L1 and of teaching in the acquisition of English sounds by francophones. In Greenhill, H., Littlefield, H., & Tano, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 23, pp. 373–385). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. (2001). Vowels and consonants. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1996). The sounds of the world's languages. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2004). Predicting perceptual success with segments: A test of Japanese speakers of Russian. Second Language Research, 20, 33–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Léon, P. R. (1992). Phonétisme et prononciations du français [Phonetism and pronunciations of French]. Paris: Nathan.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. (1989). Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. In Hardcastle, W. & Marchal, A. (Eds.), Speech production and speech modelling (pp. 403–439). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. (1990). Spanish taps and trills: Phonological structure of an isolated opposition. Folia Linguistica, 24, 153–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, I. (1984). Patterns of sound. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mah, J. (2003). The acquisition of phonological features in a second language. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Major, R. (1986). The ontogeny model: Evidence from L2 acquisition of Spanish r. Language Learning, 36, 453–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, B. (1965). Estudios de fonética hispánica [Studies in Spanish phonetics]. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientıficas.Google Scholar
Monroy Cassas, R. (2001). Profiling the phonological processes shaping the fossilised IL of adult Spanish learners of English as foreign language. Some theoretical implications. International Journal of English Studies, 1, 157–217.Google Scholar
Muñoz Sánchez, A. (2003). The effect of phonological status on the acquisition of new contrasts: Evidence from Spanish and Japanese L2 learners of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Navarro Tomás, T. (1970). Manual de pronunciación española [Manual of Spanish pronunciation]. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientıficas.Google Scholar
Nittrouer, S. (2002). Learning to perceive speech: How fricative perception changes, and how it stays the same. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 711–719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Núñez Cedeño, R. (1989). El estado fonémico de la vibrante lıquida española [The phonemic status of the Spanish liquid vibrant]. Paper presented at the Purdue University Conference on Romance Languages, Purdue Research Foundation, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
O'Shaughnessy, D. (1982). A study of French spectral patterns for synthesis. Journal of Phonetics, 10, 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, J. (1989). Sound change is drawn from a pool of synchronic variation. In Breivik, L. & Ernst, J. (Eds.), Language change: Contribution to the study of its causes (pp. 173–198). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, J. (1993). The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. In MacNeilage, P. (Ed.), The production of speech (pp. 189–216). New York: Springer–Verlag.Google Scholar
Ohala, J. (1997). Aerodynamics of phonology. Paper presented at the 4th Seoul International Conference in Linguistics, Linguistic Society of Korea, Seoul.Google Scholar
Ohala, J., & Kawasaki, H. (1984). Prosodic phonology and phonetics. Phonology Yearbook, 1, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkell, J., Guenther, F., Lane, H., Marrone, N., Matthies, M., Stockmann, E., et al. (2006). Production and perception of phoneme contrasts covary across speakers. In Harrington, J. & Tabain, M. (Eds.), Speech production: Models, phonetic processes and techniques (pp. 69–84). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Pickett, J. M. (1999). The acoustic study of speech communication. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Piggott, G. (1992). Variability in feature dependency: The case of nasal harmony. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 10, 33–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quilis, A. (1993). Tratado de fonologıa y fonética españolas [Manual of Spanish phonetics and phonology]. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Recasens, D., & Pallarès, M. D. (1999). A study of /r/ and /y/ in the light of the “DAC” coarticulation model. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 143–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. (1992). On deriving sonority: A structural account of sonority relationships. Phonology, 9, 61–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K., & Avery, P. (1989). On the interaction between sonorancy and voicing. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 65–82.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G., & Blondeau, H. (2007). Language change across the lifespan /r/ in Montreal French. Language, 83, 560–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. (1997). The devoicing of /z/ in American English: Effects of local and prosodic context. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 471–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. (2000). Dependency theory meets OT: A proposal for a new approach to segmental structure. In Dekkers, J., van der Leeuw, F., & van de Weijer, J. (Eds.), Optimality theory: Phonology, syntax, and acquisition (pp. 234–276). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solé, M.-J. (2002a). Aerodynamic characteristics of trills and phonological patterning. Journal of Phonetics, 30, 655–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solé, M.-J. (2002b). Assimilatory processes and aerodynamic factors. In Gussenhoven, C. & Warner, N. (Eds.), Laboratory phonology (Vol. 7, pp. 351–386). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Steele, J. (2001). Phonetic cues to phonological acquisition: Evidence from L2 syllabification. In Do, A. H.-J., Dominguez, L., & Johansen, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 732–743). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Steele, J. (2006). Perceptually-driven deletion and the positive role of orthographic input in L2 phonological acquisition. Unpublished manuscript, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Steriade, D. (1999). The phonology of perceptibility effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Stockman, I. J., & Pluut, E. (1992). Segment composition as a factor in the syllabification errors of second-language speakers. Language Learning, 42, 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straka, G. (1979). Contribution à l'histoire de la consonne R en français [A contribution to the history of French R]. In Straka, G. (Ed.), Les sons et les mots (pp. 465–499). Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Strange, W. (1992). Learning non-native phoneme contrasts: Interactions among subject, stimulus, and task variables. In Tohkura, Y., Vatikiotis-Bateson, E., & Sagisaka, Y. (Eds.), Speech perception, production and linguistic structure (pp. 197–219). Tokyo: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Strange, W. (1995). Cross-language studies of speech perception: A historical review. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 3–45). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Tobin, Y. (1997). Phonology as human behavior: Theoretical implications and clinical applications. London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Tousignant, C. (1987). Les variantes du /R/ montréalais: Contextes phonologiques favorisant leur apparition [The variants of Montreal /R/: Phonological contexts favoring their realization]. Revue Québécoise de Linguistique Théorique et Appliquée, 6, 73–113.Google Scholar
Tranel, B. (1987). The sounds of French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, D. (2001). French sound structure. Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
van der Torre, E. J. (2001). Asymmetries within obstruent-liquid clusters. Paper presented at the Montreal–Ottawa–Toronto Workshop on Phonology, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Walsh-Dickey, L. (1997). The phonology of liquids. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Waltmunson, J. (2005). The relative degree of difficulty of Spanish /t, d/, trill and tap by L1 English speakers: Auditory and acoustic methods of defining pronunciation accuracy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar
Wenk, B. J. (1979). Articulatory setting and de-fossilization. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 4, 202–220.Google Scholar
Wenk, B. J. (1983). Articulatory setting and the acquisition of second language phonology. Revue de Phonétique Appliquée, 65, 51–65.Google Scholar
Wilson, I. (2006). Articulatory settings of French and English monolingual and bilingual speakers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Wright, R. (2004). A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In Bruce, B., Kirchner, R., & Steriade, D. (Eds.), Phonetically based phonology (pp. 34–57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar