Learning words in a new language: Orthography doesn't always help

Bilingualism

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 384-395

  Escudero, Paola ^a   Simon, Ellen ^b   Mulak, Karen E ^a  

^a WESTERN SYDNEY UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

congruence between orthographic systems; non native listeners; orthography; word learning; word recognition

Indexed keywords

EID: 84902156757     PISSN: 13667289     EISSN: 14691841     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1366728913000436     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adank, P., van Hout, & Van de Velde, H. (2007). An acoustic description of the vowels of northern and southern standard Dutch II: Regional varieties. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121, 1130-1141.
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. Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception. In Strange (ed.), pp. 171-204.
4. Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and secondlanguage speech perception: Commonalities and complementaries. In O.-S. Bohn & M. J. Munro (eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege, pp. 13-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
5. Broersma, M. (2005). Perception of familiar contrasts in unfamiliar positions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 117, 3890-3901.
6. Broersma, M., & Cutler, A. (2008). Phantom word activation in L2. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 36, 22-34.
7. Chládková, K., Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2011). Contextspecific acoustic differences between Peruvian and Iberian Spanish listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130, 416-428.
8. Cutler, A., & Broersma, M. (2005). Phonetic precision in listening. In W. J. Hardcastle & J. Mackenzie Beck (eds.), A figure of speech: A Festschrift for John Laver, pp. 63-91.Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Cutler, A., Weber, A., & Otake, T. 2006. Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 269-284.
10. Erdener, V. D., & Burnham, D. K. 2005. The role of audiovisual speech and orthographic information in nonnative speech production. Language Learning, 55, 191-228.
11. Escudero, P. (2005). Linguistic perception and second language acquisition (LOTDissertation Series 113).Utrecht: Utrecht University Press.
12. Escudero, P. (2009). Linguistic perception of "similar" L2 sounds. In P. Boersma & S. Hamann (eds.), Phonology in perception, pp. 151-190. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
13. Escudero, P., Benders, T., & Lipski, S. (2009). Native, nonnative and L2 perceptual cue weighting for Dutch vowels: The case of Dutch, German, and Spanish listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 37, 452-466.
14. Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2004). Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 551-585.
15. Escudero, P., Broersma,M.,&Simon, E. (2013). Learningwords in a third language: Effects of vowel inventory and language proficiency. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 746-761.
16. Escudero, P., Hayes-Harb, R., & Mitterer, H. (2008). Novel second-language words and asymmetric lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 345-360.
17. Escudero, P., & Wanrooij, K. (2010). The effect of L1 orthography on non-native vowel perception. Language and Speech, 53, 343-365.
18. Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange (ed.), pp. 229-273.
19. Hayes-Harb, R., & Masuda, K. (2008). Development of the ability to lexically encode novel L2 phonemic contrasts. Second Language Research, 24, 5-33.
20. Hayes-Harb, R., Nicol, J., & Barker, J. (2010). Learning the phonological forms of new words: Effects of orthographic and auditory input. Language and Speech, 53, 367-381.
21. Pallier, C., Colomé, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2001). The influence of native-language phonology on lexical access: Exemplar-based vs. abstract lexical entries. Psychological Science, 12, 445-449.
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, 700-726.
23. Perre, L., Pattamadilok, C.,Montant, M.,&Ziegler, J. C. (2009). Orthographic effects in spoken language:On-line activation or phonological restructuring Brain Research, 1275, 73-80.
24. Perre, L., & Ziegler, J. C. (2008). On-line activation of orthography in spoken word recognition. Brain Research, 1188, 132-138.
25. Shatzman, K. B., & McQueen, J. M. (2006). Prosodic knowledge affects the recognition of newly acquired words. Psychological Science, 17, 372-377.
26. Strange, W. (ed.) (1995). Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in crosslanguage research. Timonium, MD: York Press.
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. 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, 57-95.
29. Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in nonnative spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 1-25.
30. Ziegler, J. C., & Ferrand, L. (1998). Orthography shapes the perception of speech: The consistency effect in auditory word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 683-689.
31. Ziegler, J. C., Ferrand, L., & Montant, M. (2004). Visual phonology: The effects of orthographic consistency on different auditory word recognition tasks. Memory & Cognition, 32, 732-741.