Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:35:48.622Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning to Parse Second Language Consonant Clusters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

John Archibald
John Archibald*
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, a number of broad questions related to the acquisition of consonant clusters in a second language are investigated. Drawing on the structural relations and phonological principles of Government Phonology, it is argued that the behaviour of second language learners can be accounted for by a top-down, left-to-right phonological parser. Appealing to a model of cognitive architecture, it is demonstrated that one can account for the different behaviours of speakers of languages that share the trait of lacking tautosyllabic clusters (Korean and Finnish) when learning a language which allows such clusters (English). Properties of the LI segmental inventory and a licensing strength scale are proposed to explain why Finnish learners have less trouble than Korean learners when acquiring English clusters.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article aborde certaines questions générales relatives à l’acquisition de groupes consonantiques en langue seconde. Sur la base des relations structurelles et des principes phonologiques de la théorie du gouvernement, il y est soutenu que le comportement des apprenants en langue seconde peut s’expliquer par l’entremise d’un analyseur phonologique opérant de haut en bas et de gauche à droite. En faisant appel à un modèle d’architecture cognitive, il est possible de rendre compte des comportements divergents d’apprenants ayant en commun l’absence de groupes tautosyllabiques dans leur langue maternelle (le coréen et le finnois) lors de l’apprentissage d’une langue qui possède de tels groupes (l’anglais). Les propriétés de l’inventaire segmentai de la Ll de même qu’une échelle de pouvoir de légitimation sont invoquées pour expliquer pourquoi les locuteurs du finnois ont moins de difficulté que les locuteurs du coréen à acquérir les groupes consonantiques de l’anglais.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 48 , Issue 3-4 , December 2003 , pp. 149 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2003

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

Abrahamsson, Niclas. 1999. Vowel epenthesis of /sC(C)/ onsets in Spanish/Swedish interphonology: A longitudinal case study. Language Learning 49:473–508.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, Niclas. 2003. Development and recoverability of L2 codas. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25:313–349.Google Scholar
Archibald, John. 1998. Second language phonetics, phonology, and typology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20:189–211.Google Scholar
Archibald, John. In press. Interfaces in the prosodic hierarchy: New structures and the phonological parser. International Journal of Bilingualism.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Lilias. 1940. The phonetic and tonal structure of Kikuyu. London: International African Institute.Google Scholar
Baldi, Philip, ed. 1991. Patterns of change, change of patterns: Linguistic changes and reconstruction methodology. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Borgman, Donald. 1990. Sanuma. In Handbook of Amazonian Languages, ed. Derbyshire, Desmond and Pullum, Geoffrey, 15–248. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Broselow, Ellen. 1992. Transfer and universals in second language epenthesis. In Language transfer in language learning, ed. Gass, Susan and Selinker, Larry, 71–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Broselow, Ellen, Chen, Su-I, and Wang, Chilin. 1998. The emergence of the unmarked in second language phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20:261–280.Google Scholar
Broselow, Ellen, and Finer, Daniel. 1991. Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research 7:35–60.Google Scholar
Carlisle, Robert. 1991. The influence of environment on vowel epenthesis in Spanish/English interphonology. Applied Linguistics 12:76–95.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susanne. 2001. Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susanne. 2002. Induction in a modular learner. Second Language Research 18:224–249.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1977. Accent and related phenomena in the Five Nations Iroquois languages. In Studies in stress and accent, ed. Hyman, Larry, 169–181. Los Angeles: UCLA Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Desmond Thome. 1967. Some features of Ganda linguistic structure. Johannesburg: Witwatersand Press.Google Scholar
Côté, Marie-Hélène. 2000. Consonant cluster phonotactics. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Dehaene-Lambertz, Ghislaine, Dupoux, Emmanuel, and Gout, Ariel. 2000. Electrophysiological correlates of phonological processing: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12:635–647.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan. 1999. Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting. Linguistic Inquiry 30:27–67.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, and Hulst, Harry van der. 1995. Global determinacy and learnability in phonology. In Phonological acquisition and phonological theory, ed. Archibald, John, 1–22. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, and Hulst, Harry van der. 1998. Head-dependent asymmetries in phonology: Complexity and visibility. Phonology 15:317–352.Google Scholar
Dresher, B. Elan, and Kaye, Jonathan. 1991. A computational learning model for metrical phonology. Cognition 34:137–195.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred. 1991. The structural conformity hypothesis and the acquisition of consonantal clusters in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13:23–42.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred, and Iverson, Gregory. 1993. Sonority and markedness among onset clusters in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Second Language Research 9:234–252.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred, and Iverson, Gregory. 1994. Pronunciation difficulties in ESL: Coda consonants in English Interlangauge. In First and second language phonology, ed. Yavas, Mehmet, 251–265. San Diego: Singleton Press.Google Scholar
Edge, Beverly. 1991. The production of word-final voiced obstruents in English by LI speakers of Japanese and Cantonese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13:377–393.Google Scholar
Fodor, Janet. 1999. Learnability theory: triggers for parsing with. In The development of second language grammars: A generative approach, ed. Klein, Elaine and Martohardjono, Gita, 363–406. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gierut, Judith, and O’Connor, Kathleen. 2002. Precursors to onset clusters in acquisition. Journal of Child Language 29:495–517.Google Scholar
Goad, Heather, and Rose, Y van. In press. Input elaboration, head faithfulness and evidence for representation in the acquisition of left-edge clusters in West Germanic. In Constraints in phonological acquisition, ed. Kager, René, Pater, Joe, and Zonneveld, Wim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Lauri. 1961. The structure and development of the Finnish language. Translated by Atkinson, John. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hancin-Bhatt, Barbara. 2000. Optimality in second language phonology: Codas in Thai ESL. Second Language Research 16:201–232.Google Scholar
Hancin-Bhatt, Barbara, and Hancin-Bhatt, Rakesh. 1997. Optimal L2 syllables. Studies in Second Language Acquistition 19:331–378.Google Scholar
Harris, John. 1997. Licensing inheritance: An integrated theory of neutralisatiion. Phonology 14:315–370.Google Scholar
Holland, John, Holyoak, Keith, Nisbett, Richard, and Thagard, Paul. 1986. Induction: Processes of inference, learning and discovery. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Itô, Junko. 1986. Syllable theory in prosodic phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaye, Jonathan, ed. 1990. Phonology 7(2): Phonological government.Google Scholar
Kaye, Jonathan. 1992. Do you believe in Magic? The story of S + C sequences. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics 2:293–313.Google Scholar
Kaye, Jonathan, Lowenstamm, Jean, and Vergnaud, Jean-Roger. 1990. Constituent structure and government in phonology. Phonology 7:193–231.Google Scholar
Lee, Duck-Young. 1998. Korean phonology: A principle-based approach. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Morelli, Frida. 1999. The phonotactics and phonology of obstruent clusters in Optimality Theory. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.Google Scholar
Osburne, Andrea. 1996. Final cluster reduction in English L2 speech: A case study of a Vietnamese speaker. Applied Linguistics 17:164–181.Google Scholar
Padgett, Jaye. 1997. Perceptual distance of contrast: Vowel height and nasality. In Phonology at Santa Cruz 5, ed. Walker, Rachel, Katayama, Motoko, and Karvonen, Dan, 63–78.Google Scholar
Phillips, Colin. 1996. Order and structure. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Piggott, Glyne. 1999. At the right edge of words. The Linguistic Review 16:143–185.Google Scholar
Piggott, Glyne. 2000. Against featural alignment. Journal of Linguistics 36:85–129.Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 1992. On deriving sonority: A structural account of sonority relationships. Phonology 9:61–99.Google Scholar
Ringen, Catherine, and Heinämäki, Orvokki. 1999. Variation in Finnish vowel harmony: An OT account. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17:303–337.Google Scholar
Rose, Yvan. 2002. Relations between segmental and prosodic structure in first language acquisition. In Annual review of language acquisition, ed. Santelmann, Lynn, Verrips, Maaike, and Wijnen, Frank, 117–155. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1982. Syllables. In The structure of phonological represeantations 2, ed. Hulst, Harry van der and Smith, Norval, 337–383. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1881. Grunzüge der Phonetik. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Hartel.Google Scholar
Steele, Jeffrey. 2002. Representation and phonological licensing in the L2 acquisition of prosodic structure. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1982. Greek prosodies and the nature of syllabification. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1999. The phonology of perceptability effects: The P-map and its consequences for constraint organization. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Strange, Winifred. 1995. Cross-language studies of speech perception: A historical review. In Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research, ed. Strange, Winifred, 30–45. Baltimore: York Press.Google Scholar
Suárez, Jorge. 1983. The Mesoamerican Indian languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1985. Nkore-Kiga, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Tropf, Herbert. 1987. Sonority as a variability factor in second language phonology. In Sound patterns in second language acquisition, ed. James, Allan and Leather, Jonathan, 173–191. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry, and Ritter, Nancy. 1999. Head-driven phonology. In The syllable: Views and facts, ed. van der Hulst, Harry and Ritter, Nancy, 113–167. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vanderweide, Teresa. 2002. Perceptually-based onset constraints: Evidence from the acquisition of Dutch. Poster presented at the Second International Conference on Contrast in Phonology, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Weinberger, Steven. 1988. Theoretical foundations of second language phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Wolfram, Walt. 1969. A sociolinguistic description of Detroit Negro speech. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wright, Richard. 1996. Consonant clusters and cue preservation in Tsou. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Young-Scholten, Martha, and Archibald, John. 2000. Second language syllable structure. In Second language acquisition and linguistic theory, ed. Archibald, John, 64–101. Maiden: Blackwell.Google Scholar