Syllable Structure Effects in Word Recognition by Spanish- and German-Speaking Second Language Learners of English
AbstractPrevious findings in the literature point to the influence that speech perception has on word recognition. However, which specific aspects of the first (L1) and second language (L2) mapping play the most important role is still not fully understood. This study explores whether, and if so, how, L1-L2 syllable-structure differences affect word recognition. Spanish- and German-speaking English learners completed an AXB and a word-monitoring task in English that manipulated the presence of a vowel in words with /s/-initial consonant clusters—e.g., especially versus specially. The results show a clear effect of L1 on L2 learners’ perception and word recognition, with the German group outperforming the Spanish one. These results indicate that the similarity in the syllable structure between English and German fosters positive transfer in both perception and word recognition despite the inexact segmental mapping.
Abrahamsson, Niclas. 1999. “Vowel Epenthesis of/sC (C)/Onsets in Spanish/Swedish Interphonology: A Longitudinal Case Study.” Language Learning 49 (3): 473-508.
Anderson, Janet. 1987. “The Markedness Differential Hypothesis and Syllable Structure Difficulty.” In Ioup and Weinberger 1987, 279-91.
Baayen, Harald R. 2008. Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Best, Catherine T. 1995. “A Direct Realist View of Cross-Language Speech Perception.” In Strange 1995, 171-206.
Best, Catherine T., Gerald W. McRoberts and Nomathemba M. Sithole. 1988. “Examination of Perceptual Reorganization for Nonnative Speech Contrasts: Zulu Click Discrimination by English-speaking Adults and Infants.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 14 (3): 345-60.
Best, Catherine T. and Michael D. Tyler. 2007. “Nonnative and Second-Language Speech Perception: Commonalities and Complementarities.” In Bohn and Munro 2007, 13-34.
Bohn, Ocke-Schwen and Murray J. Munro, eds. 2007. Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honor of James Emil Flege. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Broersma, Mirjam and Anne Cutler. 2011. “Competition Dynamics of Second-Language Listening.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 64 (1): 74-95.
Broselow, Ellen and Daniel Finer. 1991. “Parameter Setting in Second Language Phonology and Syntax.” Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 7 (1): 35-59.
Brown, James Dean. 1980. “Relative Merits of Four Methods for Scoring Cloze Tests.” The Modern Language Journal 64 (3): 311-17.
Carlisle, Robert S. 1997. “The Modification of Onsets in a Markedness Relationship: Testing the Interlanguage Structural Conformity Hypothesis.” Language Learning 47 (2): 327-61.
—. 1998. “The Acquisition of Onsets in a Markedness Relationship: A Longitudinal Study.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20 (2): 245-60.
Davidson, Lisa. 2006. “Phonology, Phonetics or Frequency: Influences on the Production of Non-Native Sequences.” Journal of Phonetics 34 (1): 104-37.
Davidson, Lisa, Peter Jusczyk and Paul Smolensky. 2004. “The Initial and Final States: Theoretical Implications and Experimental Explorations of Richness of the Base.” In Kager, Pater and Zonneveld 2004, 321-68.
Dehaene-Lambertz, Ghislaine, Emmanuel Dupoux and Ariel Gout. 2000. “Electrophysiological Correlates of Phonological Processing: A Cross-Linguistic Study.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (4): 635-47.
Diccionario de la Real Academia de la Lengua Española (RAE). 2009. s.v. “Eslogan.” [Accessed February 10, 2021].
Dupoux, Emmanuel et al. 1999. “Epenthetic Vowels in Japanese: A Perceptual Illusion?” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25 (6): 1568-78.
— et al. 2001. “New Evidence for Prelexical Phonological Processing in Word Recognition.” Language and Cognitive Processes 16 (6): 491-505.
Eckman, Fred R. and Gregory K. Iverson. 1993. “Sonority and Markedness among Onset Clusters in the Interlanguage of ESL Learners.” Second Language Research 9 (3): 234-52.
Escudero, Paola. 2007 “Multilingual Sound Perception and Word Recognition.” Stem- Spraak-en Taalpathologie 15 (2): 93-103.
Flege, James Emil. 1995. “Second Language Speech Learning: Theory, Findings and Problems.” In Strange 1995, 233-77.
Flege, James Emil, Murray J. Munro and Ian R. A. MacKay. 1995. “Factors Affecting Strength of Perceived Foreign Accent in a Second Language.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97 (5): 3125-34.
Flege, James Emil, Grace H. Yeni-Komshian and Serena Liu. 1999. “Age Constraints on Second-Language Acquisition.” Journal of Memory and Language 41 (1): 78-104.
Hancin-Bhatt, Barbara and Rakesh M. Bhatt. 1997. “Optimal L2 Syllables: Interactions of Transfer and Developmental Effects.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19 (3): 331-78.
Hothorn, Torsten and Brian S. Everitt. 2014. A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using R. 3rd ed. Boca Ratón, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
Ioup, Georgette and Stephen Weinberger, eds. 1987. Interlanguage Phonology: The Acquisition of a Second Language Sound System. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Itô, Junko and Armin Mester. 2001. “Covert Generalizations in Optimality Theory: The Role of Stratal Faithfulness Constraints.” Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 7 (2): 273-99.
Kabak, Bariş and William J. Idsardi. 2007. “Perceptual Distortions in the Adaptation of English Consonant Clusters: Syllable Structure or Consonantal Contact Constraints?” Language and Speech 50 (1): 23-52.
Kager, René, Joe Pater and Wim Zonneveld, eds. 2004. Constraints in Phonological Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Kilborn, Kerry and Helen Moss. 1996. “Word Monitoring.” Language and Cognitive Processes 11 (6): 689-94.
Marslen-Wilson, William D. 1987. “Functional Parallelism in Spoken Word-Recognition.” Cognition 25 (2): 71-102.
Martinez-Garcia, Maria Teresa. 2018. “The Effect of ‘Illusory Vowels’ in Spanish-Speaking Second Language Learners of English.” Language and Linguistics 79: 147-76.
Martinez-Garcia, Maria Teresa and Annie Tremblay. 2015. “Syllable Structure Affects Second-Language Spoken Word Recognition and Production.” In Wolters et al. 2015, n.p.
Matthews, John and Cynthia Brown. 2004. “When Intake Exceeds Input: Language Specific Perceptual Illusions Induced by L1 Prosodic Constraints.” International Journal of Bilingualism 8 (1): 5-27.
McClelland, James L. and Jeffrey L. Elman. 1986. “The TRACE Model of Speech Perception.” Cognitive Psychology 18 (1): 1-86.
Myers, Emily B. and Sheila Blumstein. 2018. “The Neural Bases of the Lexical Effect: An fMRI Investigation.” Cerebral Cortex 18 (2): 278-88.
Norris, Dennis. 1994. “Shortlist: A Connectionist Model of Continuous Speech Recognition.” Cognition 52 (3): 189-234.
Pallier, Christophe, Angels Colomé and Núria Sebastián-Gallés. 2001. “The Influence of Native-Language Phonology on Lexical Access: Exemplar-Based versus Abstract Lexical Entries.” Psychological Science 12 (6): 445-49.
R Development Core Team. 2009. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Shahin, Antoine, Christopher Bishop and Lee Miller. 2009. “Neural Mechanisms for Illusory Filling-in of Degraded Speech.” NeuroImage 44 (3): 1133-43.
Strange, Winifred, ed. 1995. Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Language Research. Baltimore, MD: York Press.
Tagliaferri, Bruno. 2005. Paradigm. Perception Research Systems, Inc.
Weber, Andrea and Anne Cutler. 2004. “Lexical Competition in Non-Native Spoken-Word Recognition.” Journal of Memory and Language 50 (1): 1-25.
Wolters, Maria et al. eds. 2015. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow: The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015.
The authors retain copyright of articles. They authorise AEDEAN to publish them in its journal Atlantis and to include them in the indexing and abstracting services, academic databases and repositories the journal participates in.
Under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), for non-commercial (i.e., personal or academic) purposes only, users are free to share (i.e., copy and redistribute in any medium or format) and adapt (i.e., remix, transform and build upon) articles published in Atlantis, free of charge and without obtaining prior permission from the publisher or the author(s), as long as they give appropriate credit to the author, the journal (Atlantis) and the publisher (AEDEAN), provide the relevant URL link to the original publication and indicate if changes were made. Such attribution may be done in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the journal endorses the user or their use of the material published therein. Users who adapt (i.e., remix, transform or build upon the material) must distribute their contributions under the same licence as the original.
Self-archiving is also permitted, so that authors are allowed to deposit the published PDF version of their articles in academic and/or institutional repositories, without fee or embargo. Authors may also post their individual articles on their personal websites, again on condition that the original link to the online edition is provided.
Authors are expected to know and heed basic ground rules that preclude simultaneous submission and/or duplicate publication. Prospective contributors to Atlantis commit themselves to the following when they submit a manuscript:
- That no concurrent consideration of the same, or almost identical, work by any other journal and/or publisher is taking place.
- That the potential contribution has not appeared previously, in any form whatsoever, in another journal, electronic format or as a chapter/section of a book.
Seeking permission for the use of copyright material is the responsibility of the author.