Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:43:54.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological Similarity, Markedness, and Rate of L2 Acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Roy C. Major
Roy C. Major
Affiliation:
Washington State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the interrelationship of phonological similarity between L1 and L2, transfer, and markedness as they relate to the acquisition of English /ε/ and /æ/ by native speakers of Brazilian Portuguese. Transfer and markedness adequately account for the behavior of poorer learners, but these factors do not explain the rate of acquisition of the two sounds as assessed by global foreign accent: Whereas /æ/ accuracy increased as global accent improved, /ε/ accuracy decreased. It is suggested that phonetic and phonological similarity between L1 and L2 are important factors which motivated overgeneralization or interaction of /ε/ and /æ/ within the inter-language.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , February 1987 , pp. 63 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Altenberg, E. P., & Vago, R. M. (1983). Theoretical implications of an error analysis of second language phonology production. Language Learning, 33, 427–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. W. (1983). Transfer to somewhere. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer and language learning (pp. 177–201). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Caramazza, A., Yeni-Komshian, G., Zurif, E., & Carbone, E. (1973). The acquisition of a new phonological contrast: The case of stop consonants in French-English bilinguals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 54, 421–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Crothers, J. (1978). Typology and universali of vowel systems. In Greenberg, J. H. (Ed.), Universals of human language (Vol. 2: Phonology) (pp. 93–152). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Dušková, L. (1969). On sources of errors in foreign language learning. IRAL, 7, 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. R. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. Language Learning, 27, 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. R. (1981a). On the naturalness of interlanguage phonological rules. Language Learning, 31, 195–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. R. (1981b). On predicting phonological difficulty in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 4, 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. R. (1985). Some theoretical and pedagogical implications of the markedness differential hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (in press). The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Davidian, R. B. (1984). Transfer and developmental processes in adult foreign language speech production. Applied Psycholinguistics, 5, 323–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Hillenbrand, J. E. (1984). Limits on pronunciation accuracy in adult foreign language speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76, 708–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (1966). Language universals. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. (Ed.). (1978). Universals of human language (Vol. 2: Phonology). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, P. (1984). Introducing phonology. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. (1975). Phonology: Theory and analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Irwin, J. H., & Wong, S. P. (1983). Phonological developmental in children 18 to 72 months. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1941). Kindersprache, Aphasie, und Allgemeine Lautgesetze. Upsala. (Translated by Keiler, A. R. as Child language, aphasia, and phonological universals. The Hague: Mouton, 1968).Google Scholar
Johansson, F. A. (1973). Immigrant Swedish phonology: A study of multiple contact analysis. Lund, Sweden: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Lass, R. (1984). Phonology: An introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (1977). Phonological differentiation of a bilingual child. Papers in Psycholinguistics and Sociolinguistics. ERIC ED 149 644.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (1986). Paragoge and degree of foreign accent in Brazilian English. Second Language Research. 2, 53–71.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (in press a). A model for interlanguage phonology. In Ioup, G. L. & Weinberger, S. H. (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (in press b). The ontogeny model: Evidence from L2 acquisition of Spanish r. Language Learning.Google Scholar
Mulford, R., & Hecht, B. F. (1980). Learning to speak without an accent: Acquisition of a second-language phonology. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 18, 16–74.Google Scholar
Oller, J. W., & Ziahosseiny, S. M. (1970). The contrastive analysis and spelling errors. Language Learning, 20; 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. J. (1968). Southeast Ambryn phonology. Oceanic Linguistics, 7, 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E. E. (1978). The phonology of interlanguage. In Richards, J. C. (Ed.), Understanding second and foreign language learning: Issues and approaches (pp. 15–33). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. E. (1980). Some influences on the syllable structure of interlanguage. IRAL, 18, 139–152.Google Scholar
Topping, D. (1968). Chamorrow vowel harmony. Oceanic Linguistics, 7, 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1981). Learning a second Language, I: An integrated view of language acquisition. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1980a). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning, 30, 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1980b). Developmental errors: Their common bases and (possibly) differential effects on subsequent learning. TESOL Quarterly, 14, 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1983a). L1 acquisition, age of L2 acquisition, and the learning of word order. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer and language learning (pp. 177–201). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1983b). Contact-induced language change, learner language, and the potentials of a modified contrastive analysis. In Bailey, K. M., Long, M. H., & Peck, S. (Eds.), Second language acquisition studies (pp. 104–112). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar