The Effect of L1 Orthography on Non-native Vowel Perception

Language and Speech

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 343-365

  Escudero, Paola ^a   Wanrooij, Karin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

L2 learners; non native listeners; orthography; vowel perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955860696     PISSN: 00238309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0023830910371447     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adank, P., Van Hout, R., & Smits, R. (2004). An acoustic description of the vowels of Northern and Southern standard Dutch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 1729-1738.
2. Alderson, J.C., & Huhta, A. (2005). The development of a suite of computer-based diagnostic tests based on the Common European Framework. Language Testing, 22, 301-320.
3. Benders, T., & Escudero, P. (under review). The effect of stimulus range and the number of response categories on vowel perception.
4. Best, C.T. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Theoretical and methodological issues (pp.171-203). Baltimore, MD: York Press.
5. Best, C.T., McRoberts, G.W., & Goodell, E. (2001). Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener's native phonological system. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 775-794.
6. Best, C.T., & Tyler, M.D. (2007). Non-native and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In O.-S. Bohn & M. Munro (Eds.), Language experience in second-language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp.13-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
7. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2001). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer≃ Version 4.02. Computer program, http://www.praat.org/.
8. Brown, G.D., & Deavers, R.P. (1999). Units of analysis in nonword reading: Evidence from children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 208-242.
9. Cervera, T., Miralles, J.L., & González-Àlvarez, J. (2001). Acoustical analysis of Spanish vowels produced by laryngectomized subjects. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 44, 988-996.
10. Cutler, A., Weber, A., & Otake, T. (2006). Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 269-284.
11. Escudero, P. (2005). Linguistic perception and second language acquisition. LOT Dissertation series, 113, Utrecht University.
12. Escudero, P., Benders, T., & Lipski, S. (2009). Native, non-native and L2 perceptual cue weighting for Dutch vowels: The case of Dutch, German, and Spanish listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 37, 452-466.
13. Escudero, P., Duinmeijer, I., VAN den VELDE, H., & Adank, P. (in preparation). Predicting and explaining problems in L2 vowel perception: The case of Spanish learners of Dutch.
14. Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 345-360.
15. Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 71-99.
16. Ganong, W.F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 110-125.
17. Goswami, U. (2001). Early phonological development and the acquisition of literacy. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of research in early literacy for the 21 st century (pp.111-125). New York: The Guilford Press.
18. Goswami, U., Ziegler, J.C., Dalton, L., & Schneider, W. (2003). Nonword reading across orthographies: How flexible is the choice of reading units? Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 235-247.
19. Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The Orthographic Depth Hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp.67-84). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
20. Nearey, T.M., Assmann, P.F., & Hillenbrand, J.M. (2002). Evaluation of a strategy for automatic formant tracking. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 2323.
21. Norris, D., McQueen, J., & Cutler, A. (2000). Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 299-370.
22. Pattamadilok, C., Morais, J., Ventura, P., & Kolinsky, R. (2007). The locus of the orthographic consistency effect in auditory word recognition: Further evidence from French. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(5), 700-726.
23. Perre, L., & Ziegler, J. (2008). On-line activation of orthography in spoken word recognition. Brain Research, 1188, 132-138.
24. Pols, L.C.W., Tromp, H.R.C., & Plomp, R. (1973). Frequency analysis of Dutch vowels from 50 male speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 53, 1093-1101.
25. Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Masked phonological priming effects in English: Are they real? Do they matter? Cognitive Psychology, 53, 97-145.
26. Simon, G., Bernard, C., Lalonde, R., & Rebaï, M. (2006). Orthographic transparency and grapheme-phoneme conversion: An ERP study in Arabic and French readers. Brain Research, 1104, 141-152.
27. Taft, M., Castles, A., Davis, C., Lazendic, G., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2008). Automatic activation of orthography in spoken word recognition: Pseudohomograph priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 366-379.
28. Van Hesse, A.J., & Schouten, M.E.H. (1999). Categorical perception as a function of stimulus quality. Phonetica, 56, 56-72.
29. Ventura, P., Morais, J., Pattamadilok, C., & Kolinsky, R. (2004). The locus of the orthographic consistency effect in auditory word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(1), 57-95.
30. Vitevitch, M.S., & Luce, P.A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 374-408.
31. Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 1-25.
32. Werker, J.F., & Logan, J.S. (1985). Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 37, 35-44.
33. Ziegler, J.C., & Ferrand, L. (1998). Orthography shapes the perception of speech: The consistency effect in auditory word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(4), 683-689.
34. Ziegler, J.C., Ferrand, L., & Montant, M. (2004). Visual phonology: The effects of orthographic consistency on different auditory word recognition tasks. Memory & Cognition, 32(5), 732-741.
35. Ziegler, J.C., Perry, C., Jacobs, A.M., & Braun, M. (2001). Identical words are read differently in different languages. Psychological Science, 12, 379-384.