Competition dynamics of second-language listening

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 74-95

  Broersma, Mirjam ^a,b   Cutler, Anne ^a,b,c  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Competition; First language; Listening; Second language; Word recognition

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MULTILINGUALISM; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SPEECH ACOUSTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOCABULARY;

EID: 78651354941     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2010.499174     Document Type: Article

References (48)

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. Baayen, H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
3. Best, C. T. (1994). The emergence of native-language phonological influences in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. In J. C. Goodman & H. C. Nusbaum (Eds.), The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words (pp. 167-224). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
4. Bohn, O.-S., & Munro, M.J. (Eds.). (2007). Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
5. Booij, G. (1995). The phonology of Dutch. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6. Bradlow, A. R., & Pisoni, D. B. (1999). Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: Talker-, listener-, and item-related factors. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2074-2085.
7. Broersma, M. (2002). Comprehension of non-native speech: Inaccurate phoneme processing and activation of lexical competitors. In J. H. L. Hansen & B. Pellom (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 261-264). [CD-ROM]. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado, Center for Spoken Language Research.
8. Broersma, M. (2005a). Perception of familiar contrasts in unfamiliar positions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 117, 3890-3901.
9. Broersma, M. (2005b). Phonetic and lexical processing in a second language (MPI Series in Psycholinguistics No. 34). Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
10. Broersma, M. (2007). Why the 'president' does not excite the 'press': The limits of spurious lexical activation in L2 listening. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2007), Saarbrucken, Germany [CD-ROM], pp. 1909-1912.
11. Broersma, M. (2008). Flexible cue use in nonnative phonetic categorization. Journal of the Acoustical 37,141-170.
12. Broersma, M., & Cutler, A. (2008). Phantom word activation in L2. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 36, 22-34.
13. Cutler, A. (2005). The lexical statistics of word recognition problems caused by L2 phonetic confusion. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology. Bonn, Germany: International Speech Communication Association.
14. th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, New York.
15. Cutler, A., Smits, R., & Cooper, N. (2005). Vowel perception: Effects of non-native language vs. nonnative dialect. Speech Communication, 47, 32-42.
16. Cutler, A., Weber, A., & Otake, T. (2006). Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 269-284.
17. Cutler, A., Weber, A., Smits, R., & Cooper, N. (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusion by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 3668-3678.
18. Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Gaskell, M. G. (2002). Leading up the lexical garden path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 218-244.
19. Deterding, D. (1997). The formants of monophthong vowels in Standard Southern British English pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 27, 47-55.
20. Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 345-360.
21. Goto, H. (1971). Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds "l" and "r". Neuropsychologia, 9, 317-323.
22. Gow, D. W., & Gordon, P. C. (1995). Lexical and prelexical influences on word segmentation: Evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 344-359.
23. Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H., & Boukrina, O. (2008). Sensitivity to phonological similarity within and across languages. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37, 141-170.
24. Marslen-Wilson, W., Nix, A., & Gaskell, G. (1995). Phonological variation in lexical access: Abstractness, inference and English place assimilation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 285-308.
25. Mayo, L. H., Florentine, M., & Buus, S. (1997). Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 40, 686-693.
26. McQueen, J. M. (2005). Speech perception. In K. Lamberts & R. Goldstone (Eds.), The handbook of cognition (pp. 255-275). London: Sage Publications.
27. McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Cutler, A. (1994). Competition in spoken word recognition: Spotting words in other words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 621-638.
28. Newman, R. S., Sawusch, J. R., & Luce, P. A. (1997). Lexical neighborhood effects in phonetic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 873-889.
29. Norris, D. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition, 52, 189-234.
30. Norris, D., Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., & Butterfield, S. (2006). Phonological and conceptual activation in speech comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 146-193.
31. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (1995). Competition and segmentation in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1209-1228.
32. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., Cutler, A., & Butterfield, S. (1997). The possible-word constraint in the segmentation of continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 34, 191-243.
33. Pallier, C., Colomé, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2001). The influence of native-language phonology on lexical access: Exemplar-based versus abstract lexical entries. Psychological Science, 12, 445-449.
34. Rüschemeyer, S.-A., Nojack, A., & Limbach, M. (2008). A mouse with a roof? Effects of phonological neighbors on processing of words in sentences in a non-native language. Brain and Language, 104, 132-144.
35. Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90, 51-89.
36. Schouten, M. E. H. (1975). Native-language interference in the perception of second-language vowels: An investigation of certain aspects of the acquisition of a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
37. Sebastián-Gallés, N., Echeverría, S., & Bosch, L. (2005). The influence of initial exposure on lexical representation: Comparing early and simultaneous bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 52,240-255.
38. Shatzman, K. B., & McQueen, J. M. (2006). Segment duration as a cue to word boundaries in spoken-word recognition. Perception and Psychophysics, 68, 1-16.
39. Soto-Faraco, S., Sebastián-Gallés, N., & Cutler, A. (2001). Segmental and suprasegmental mismatch in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 412-432.
40. Strange, W. (Ed.). (1995). Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research. Baltimore: York Press.
41. Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.
42. Tabossi, P., Burani, C., & Scott, D. (1995). Word identification in fluent speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 440-467.
43. Taft, M. (1986). Lexical access codes in visual and auditory word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 297-308.
44. Van Wijngaarden, S. J., Steeneken, H. J. M., & Houtgast, T. (2002). Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111, 1906-1916.
45. Vroomen, J., & De Gelder, B. (1995). Metrical segmentation and lexical inhibition in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 98-108.
46. Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 1-25.
47. Zwitserlood, P. (1989). The locus of the effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing. Cognition, 32, 25-64.
48. Zwitserlood, P. (1996). Form priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 589-596.