Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T03:32:29.179Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interlingual identification and the role of foreign language experience in L2 vowel perception

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Ocke-Schwen Bohn  and
James Emil Flege
Ocke-Schwen Bohn*
Affiliation:
University of Alabama, Birmingham
James Emil Flege
Affiliation:
University of Alabama, Birmingham
*
O.-S. Bohn, Englisches Seminar der Universität, Olshausenstr. 40, D-2300 Kiel 1, Federal Republic of Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the perception of four English vowels (/i, i, ε, æ/) by adult native speakers of German. From the standpoint of German, it appears that English /i, i,ε/ are perceptually similar, if not identical, to German /i, i, ε,/ whereas /ε/ is a “new” vowel for German learners of English. The role of foreign language experience in the perception of second language vowels was examined through labeling responses to members of synthetic continua (beat-bit, bet-bat) in which vowel duration and spectrum were varied factorily. The subjects were relatively experienced and inexperienced second language (L2) learners and a monolingual English control group. The results suggest that L2 experience did not affect perception for the continuum with the two “similar” vowels /i/ and /I/. However, for the continuum involving the “new” vowel /æ/, the experienced Germans more closely resembled the native English speakers than the inexperienced Germans. The predominant use of duration cues in differentiating the English /ε/–/æ/ contrast by the inexperienced Germans suggested that when spectral cues are insufficient to differentiate an L2 vowel contrast, duration will be used.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 303 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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

Arndt, H., & Careless, B. J. (1978). Zur auditiven Perzeption von amerikanischem Englisch durch deutsche Schüler. In Kelz, H. P. (Ed.), Phonetische Grundlagen der Ausspracheschulung (Vol. 2, pp. 45–62; Forum Phoneticum 5). Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Barry, W. J. (1974a). Language background and the perception of foreign accent. Journal of Phonetics, 2, 65–89.Google Scholar
Barry, W.J. (1974b). Perzeption und Produktion im sub-phonemischen Bereich. Eine kontrastive Unter suchung an intersprachlichen Minimalpaaren des Deutschen und Englischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Bennett, D. C. (1968). Spectral form and duration as cues in the recognition of English and German vowels. Language and Speech, 11, 65–85.Google Scholar
Boesch, B. (1957). Die Aussprache des Hochdeutschen in der Schweiz. Zürich: Schweizer Spiegel.Google Scholar
Bock, R. D., & Jones, L. V. (1968). The measurement and prediction of judgment and choice. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
Bohn, O.-S., & Flege, J. E. (1989). The establishment of a new phonetic category by German learners of English. Paper presented at the 117th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Syracuse, NY, May 22–26, 1989. (Abstract in Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, S84–S85).Google Scholar
Bohn, O.-S., & Flege, J. E. (forthcoming). The production of new and similar vowels by adult German learners of English.Google Scholar
Butcher, A. R. (1976). The influence of the native language on the perception of vowel quality. Arbeitsberichte, Institut für Phonetik der Universität Kiel, 6.Google Scholar
Delattre, P. (1964). Comparing the vocalic features of English, German, Spanish and French. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 2, 71–97.Google Scholar
Disner, S. F. (1983). Vowel quality: The relationship between universal and language specific factors. University of California at Los Angeles Working Papers in Phonetics, 58.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1971). Probit analysis (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University 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.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1988). The production and perception of foreign languages. In Winitz, H. (Ed.), Human communication and its disorders (pp. 224–401). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Bohn, O.-S. (1989, May). The perception of English vowels by native speakers of Spanish. Paper presented at the 117th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Syracuse, NY. (Abstract in Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, S85)Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Hillenbrand, J. (1984). Limits on phonetic accuracy in foreign language speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76, 708–721. (Repr. In G. Ioup & S. H. Weinberger [Eds.], [1987], Interlanguage phonology. The acquisition of a second language sound system, pp. 176–203. New York: Newbury House)Google Scholar
Gottfried, T. L., & Beddor, P. S. (1984). Perception of temporal versus spectral information in French vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76, S80.Google Scholar
Gottifried, T.L. (1988). Perception of temporal and spectral information in French vowels. Language and Speech, 31, 57–75.Google Scholar
Iivonen, A. K. (1987). Monophthonge des gehobenen Wienerdeutsch. Folia Linguistica, 21, 293–336.Google Scholar
Janson, T. (1979). Vowel duration, vowel quality, and perceptual compensation. Journal of Phonetics, 7, 93–103.Google Scholar
Jones, D. (1960). An outline of English phonetics (9th ed.). London: Heffer.Google Scholar
Klatt, D. H. (1980). Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 971–995.Google Scholar
Kohler, K. J. (1977). Einführung in die Phonetik des Deutschen. Berlin: Schmidt.Google Scholar
Lamminmäki, R. (1979). The discrimination and identification of English vowels, consonants, junctures and sentence stress by Finnish comprehensive school pupils. In Lehtonen, J. & Sajavaara, K. (Eds.), Papers in contrastive phonetics (pp. 165–231, Jyväskylä Cross-Language Studies 7).Google Scholar
Lieberman, P., & Kubaska, C. (1979). Intrinsic vowel duration and formant frequencies: Data from speech acquisition. In Wolf, J. J. & Klatt, D. H. (Eds.), Speech communication papers (pp. 213–215). New York: Acoustical Society of America.Google Scholar
Moulton, W. G. (1962). The sounds of English and German. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Moulton, W. G. (1987). Changing standards for Standard German pronunciation and some student reactions. Beiträge zur Phonetik und Linguistik, 52, 261–289.Google Scholar
Oakeshott-Taylor, J. (1976). Perception and production of English sounds by German speaking subjects. Hamburger Phonetische Beiträge, 17, 163–199.Google Scholar
Peterson, G. E., & Barney, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24, 175–184. (Repr. In I. Lehiste [Ed.], [1967], Readings in acoustic phonetics, pp. 118–127. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press).Google Scholar
Pilch, H. (1966). Das Lautsystem der hochdeutschen Umgangssprache. Zeitschrift für Mund artforschung, 33, 247–266.Google Scholar
Schröder, A. (1979). Aussprachefehler bei Sextanern im Englisch-Anfangsunterricht im Lichte des natürlichen L2-Erwerbs. Arbeitspapiere zum Spracherwerb, 23, Englisches Seminar der Universität Kiel.Google Scholar
Sendlmeier, W. F. (1981). Der Einfluss von Qualität und Quantität auf die Perzeption betonter Vokale des Deutschen. Phonetica, 38, 291–308.Google Scholar
Sitaras, K. M., & Gottfried, T. L. (1984). Perception of French vowel contrasts by native and non-native speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76, S80.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N. (1959a). Effect of duration upon vowel identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 31, 109.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N. (1959b). The role of duration in vowel identification. M.I.T. Research Laboratory of Electronics, Quarterly Progress Report, 52, 136–139.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N., Liberman, A. M., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Öhman, S. E. G. (1969). Cross-language study of vowel perception. Language and Speech, 12, 1–23.Google Scholar
Syrdal, A. K. (1985). Aspects of a model of the auditory representation of American English vowels. Speech Communication, 4, 121–135.Google Scholar
Syrdal, A. K., & Gopal, H. S. (1986). A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, 1086–1100.Google Scholar
Traunmüller, H. (1982). Der Vokalismus des Ostmittelbairischen. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 49, 289–333.Google Scholar
Underbakke, M., Polka, L., Gottfried, T. L., & Strange, W. (1988). Trading relations in the perception of /r/–/l/ by Japanese learners of English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 90–100.Google Scholar
Wängler, H.-H. (1967). Grundriβ einer Phonetik des Deutschen. Marburg: Elwert.Google Scholar
Wängler, H.-H., & Weiss, R. (1975). Experimental approach to the study of vowel perception in German. Phonetica, 32, 180–199.Google Scholar
Weiher, E. (1975). Lautwahrnehmung und Lautproduktion im Englischunterricht für Deutsche. Arbeitsberichte, Institut für Phonetik der Universitat Kiel, 3.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. (1972). Perceptual parameters of vowel duration and quality in German. In Rigault, A. & Charbonneau, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences Montreal 1971 (pp. 633–636). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. (1976). The perception of vowel length and quality in German. An experimental-phonetic investigation. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. (1978). The German vowel: Phonetic and phonemic considerations. Hamburger Phonetische Beiträge, 25, 461–475.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1977). The L2 acquisition of/r/. Phonetica, 34, 200–217.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1978). The beginnings of non-school room L2 phonological acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 16, 109–125.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1981). Learning a second language: Vol. 1. An integrated view of language acquisition. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Zwirner, E. (1959). Phonometrische Isophonen der Quantität der deutschen Mundarten. Phonetica, 4 (Supplement), 93–125.Google Scholar