Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.

Adult second language learners often show considerable individual variability in the ease with which lexical tones are learned. It is known that factors pertaining to a learner’s first language (L1; such as L1 tonal status or L1 tone type) as well as extralinguistic factors (such as musical experience and working memory) modulate tone learning facility. However, how such L1-specific and extralinguistic factors affect performance together in dynamic ways is less well understood. Therefore, to unpack the potential interactions between these factors for individual learners, we assessed the combined effects of L1 tonal status, L1 tone type, and musical experience and working memory on second language (L2) tone perception and word learning in a tonal pseudolanguage by English-L1 and Mandarin-L1 adult learners, by using a pre-lexical tone categorization task and a lexical word identification task. We found that L2 tone perception and word learning were primarily facilitated by extralinguistic factors, but that the degree to which learners rely on these factors is modulated by their L1 tonal status, as for instance musical experience facilitated perception and word learning for English, but not for Mandarin participants. We also found clear effects of L1 tone type, as Mandarin participants tended to struggle with categorizing and lexically processing level tone contrasts, which do not occur in Mandarin.

No abstract

Adults are known to have difficulties acquiring suprasegmental speech that involves pitch (f0) in a second language (L2) (Graham & Post, 2018; Hirata, 2015; Wang, Spence, Jongman & Sereno, 1999; Wong & Perrachione, 2007). Previous research has suggested that the perceived similarity between L1 and L2 phonology may influence how easily segmental speech is acquired, but this notion of ‘similarity’ may also apply to suprasegmental speech (So & Best, 2010; Wu, Munro & Wang, 2014). In this paper, the L2 acquisition of Japanese lexical pitch was assessed under a ‘Suprasegmental Similarity Account’, which is a theoretical framework inspired by previous models of segmental and suprasegmental speech (Best & Tyler, 2007; Flege, 1995; Mennen, 2015) to account for the L2 acquisition of word prosody. Eight adult native speakers of Japanese and eight adult English-native advanced learners of Japanese participated in a perception and production study of Japanese lexical pitch patterns. Both groups performed similarly in perception, but non-native speakers performed significantly worse in production, particularly for ‘unaccented’ Low–High–High patterns. These findings are discussed in light of the ‘Suprasegmental Similarity Account’.

Lexical tones are known to be a challenging aspect of speech to acquire in a second language, but several factors are known to affect tone learning facility, such as L1 tonal status (whether a learner’s L1 is tonal or not), tone type (the shape of the tones to be acquired), and individual extralinguistic factors (such as musicianship, pitch aptitude, and working memory). Crucially, most of our knowledge of the effect of these factors is based on evidence from perception. The production side of tone learning and the origins of individual variability in learning facility remain relatively understudied. To this end, this study investigated non-native tone production—both in terms of phonetic accuracy in a pseudoword imitation task and in terms of phono-lexical accuracy in a picture-naming task—by English-L1 and Mandarin-L1 speakers. Results show that L1 tonal status and tone type dynamically affected both imitation and picture-naming accuracy, as there were specific accuracy patterns for the English and Mandarin groups. Production accuracy was further facilitated by individual musical experience, working memory, and pitch aptitude. This study’s findings add to the currently limited literature on how both language-specific and individual extralinguistic factors modulate non-native tone processing in the speaking modality.