This article reports findings on the effects of processing resources and learning context on the perceptual learning of lexical pitch accent in beginning nonnative Japanese learners. Native English speakers in at-home and study-abroad contexts were tested twice during a semester of Japanese study on their ability to judge the correctness of and categorize nouns by their pitch pattern. Regression analyses indicated that the ability to store nonnative-like sound sequences in phonological short-term memory (PSTM), as well as auditory processing ability, predicted a significant degree of perceptual gains made over a 12-week interval. However, these predictors were task specific in that PSTM capacity predicted correctness judgment gains, while auditory processing accounted for variation in categorization. Furthermore, despite learners in the at-home context performing slightly better overall, processing resources adhered to the same predictive pattern when context was taken into account. The results suggest that (a) neither increased input during study-abroad nor targeted instruction is sufficient for most learners to acquire lexical accent; (b) processing resources support the acquisition of lexical prosody, but these may depend on how learning is assessed; and (c) PSTM operates across learning contexts, suggesting it to be a domain-general capacity in early-stage nonnative language acquisition.

A new formal analysis of the tonal accent contrast in Urban East Norwegian (UEN) is developed in this paper, based on Optimality Theory. Contrary to the widespread assumption that the contrast is based on privativity, this paper represents a return to the position that the contrast derives from different timing of a common underlying melody. Surface privativity, i.e. the absence vs. the presence of an H that can be observed in the contrast between accent 1 and 2 in UEN is analysed as the result of marked (accent 1) vs. unmarked (accent 2) association of a common tonal input. The marked status of accent 1 follows from lexical pre-linking, protected by high-ranking faithfulness, which overrides (unmarked) association driven by the markedness constraints alone.

Accent 1 is very much accepted in the literature as the default tonal marker in Scandinavian languages. Consequently, stems and affixes are almost always specified for accent 2. Only rarely in some analyses is accent 1 specified for affixes, but never for stems. We believe that under these conditions, the resulting morphology/phonology interaction is rather complex, having to include special rules of accent marking, floating tones, deaccenting together with inexplicable exceptions. In our analysis of the tonal systems of Swedish and Norwegian, accent 1 is the lexically specified accent and accent 2 is postlexically assigned. Words and affixes may be lexically specified for accent 1, which inevitably dominates. Consequently, if a morphologically complex word includes a lexically specified affix or stem, the entire word will bear accent 1, giving us patterns of alternations like beskriva1, skriva2. This analysis enables us to account for all the facts almost exceptionlessly, with no special tonal rules, constraints or templates.