Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:24:40.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The acquisition of /r/ and /l/ by Japanese learners of English: Evidence that speech production can precede speech perception

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Amy Sheldon  and
Winifred Strange
Amy Sheldon*
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Winifred Strange
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
*
Amy Sheldon, Department of Linguistics, 142 Klaeber Court, University of Minnesota, 320 16th Avenue, S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between the production and perception of English /r/ and /l/ by native Japanese adults learning English in the United States. For some subjects, production of the contrast was more accurate than their perception of it, replicating and extending a previous finding reported by Goto (1971) in Japan. The difficulty in perception of the liquid contrast varied with its position in the word. Prevocalic /r/ and /l/ in consonant clusters yielded the greatest perceptual errors, while word-final liquids were accurately perceived. This pattern of errors is not predictable on the basis of contrastive phonological analysis, but might be the result of acoustic-phonetic factors. Implications for second language pedagogy are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 1982 , pp. 243 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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

Barton, D. P. The role of perception in the acquisition of phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University College of London, 1976. (Available through Department of Linguistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.)Google Scholar
Bloch, B.Studies in colloquial Japanese IV: Phonemics. Language, 1950, 26, 86–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brière, E.An investigation of phonological interference. Language, 1966, 44, 768–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catford, J. G., & Pisoni, D. B.Auditory vs. articulatory training in exotic sounds. Modern Language Journal, 1970, 44, 477–481.Google Scholar
Chastain, K.Developing second language skills: Theory and practice. Second edition. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976.Google Scholar
Dalston, R. M.Acoustic characteristics of English /w, r, l/ spoken correctly by young children and adults. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1975, 57, 462–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delattre, P., & Freeman, D. C.A dialect study of American r's by X-ray motion picture. Linguistics, 1968, 44, 29–68.Google Scholar
Dickerson, W. B.The psycholinguistic unity of language learning and language change. Language Learning, 1976, 26.2, 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickerson, L. J., & Dickerson, W. B. Interlanguage phonology: Current research and future directions. In Corder, S. P. & Roulet, E. (Eds.), Actes du 5ème Colloque de Linguistique Appliquée de Neu Châtel, 1977, 18–29.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. L.Perception and production in child phonology: The testing of four hypotheses. Journal of Child Language, 1974, 1, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eimas, P. D.Auditory and phonetic coding of the cues for speech: Discrimination of the /r-l/ distinction by young infants. Perception and Psychophysics, 1975, 18, 341–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fucci, D., Crary, M. A., Warren, J. A., & Bond, Z. S.Interaction between auditory and oral sensory feedback in speech regulation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1977, 45, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garnica, O. K. The development of phonemic speech perception. In Moore, T. E. (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Goto, H.Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “1” and “r”. Neuropsychologia, 1971, 9, 317–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henning, W. A.Discrimination training and self-evaluation in the teaching of pronunciation. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 1966, 4, 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, D.Phonological disability in children. New York: Elsevier, 1976.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R.Child Language, aphasia, and phonological universals. The Hague: Mouton, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornfeld, J. Theoretical issues in child phonology. In Papers from the seventh regional meeting. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1971.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P.Three areas of experimental phonetics. London: Oxford University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Lane, H. & Schneider, B.Methods for self-shaping echoic behavior. Modern Language Journal, 1963, 47, 154–160.Google Scholar
MacKain, K. S., Best, C. T., & Strange, W.Categorical perception of English /r/ and /l/ by Japanese bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1981, 2, 369–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGovern, K. Approximant consonants in word-initial clusters: Experiments in speech synthesis and perception. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 1981.Google Scholar
Menyuk, P.Language and maturation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Miyawaki, K. A study of lingual articulation by use of dynamic palatography. Master's thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of Tokyo, March 1973.Google Scholar
Miyawaki, K., Strange, W., Verbrugge, R. R., Liberman, A. M., Jenkins, J. J., & Fujimura, O.An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of/r/ and /l/ by native speakers of Japanese and English. Perception and Psychophysics, 1975, 18, 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mochizuki, M.The identification of /r/ and /l/ in natural and synthesized speech. Journal of Phonetics. 1981, 9, 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moulton, W.A linguistic guide to language learning. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 1966.Google Scholar
Neufeld, G.Language learning ability in adults: A study on the acquisition of prosodic and articulatory features. Working Papers on Bilingualism. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, 1977, 12, 46–60.Google Scholar
Paulston, C. B., & Bruder, M. M.Teaching English as a second language: Techniques and procedures. Cambridge: Winthrop Publishers, Inc., 1976.Google Scholar
Postovsky, V.Effects of delay in oral practice at the beginning of second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 1974, 58, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. Interlanguage. In Richards, J. (Ed.), Error analysis. London: Longman, 1974.Google Scholar
Shvachkin, N. Kh. The development of phonemic speech perception in early childhood. In Ferguson, C. A. & Slobin, D. I. (Eds.), Studies of child language development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973.Google Scholar
Smith, N. V.The acquisition of phonology: A case study. Cambridge University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Strange, W., & Broen, P. A. Perception and production of approximant consonants by three-year-olds: A first study. In Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F., & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Child phonology: Volume 2 Perception. New York: Academic Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Strange, W., & Broen, P. A.The relationship between perception and production of /w/, /r/, and /l/ by three-year-old children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1981, 31, 81–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, W. & Dittmann, S. Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r/ and /l/ by native Japanese adults. Psychonomic Society, 1981 (abstract).Google Scholar
Williams, L. Phonetic variation as a function of second-language learning. In Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F., & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Child Phonology: Volume 2 Perception. New York: Academic Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Winitz, H.Articulatory acquisition and behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969.Google Scholar