Domain-general auditory processing determines success in second language pronunciation learning in adulthood: A longitudinal study

Abstract

In this study, we propose a hypothesis that domain-general auditory processing, a perceptual–cognitive anchor of first language (L1) acquisition, can serve as an important deciding factor for successful postpubertal second language (L2) pronunciation learning. To examine this hypothesis, samples of spontaneous speech were elicited from a total of 30 L1 Chinese L2 English learners at two points (outset and endpoint) during an 8-month study-abroad period in the United Kingdom. The participants were tested on three different components of auditory processing ability (formant, pitch, and duration discrimination) using behavioral instruments. The auditory processing scores were then linked to the segmental, prosodic, and fluency dimensions of their L2 pronunciation proficiency development throughout the project. Overall, most learners’ speech became smoother, faster, and more fluent (fewer pauses, faster articulation rate, and more optimal perceived tempo). Certain learners with high-level auditory processing ability (more precise formant discrimination) appeared to further attain more correct pronunciation of individual sounds and words (greater segmental and word stress accuracy), leading to more advanced L2 phonological skills (fluent and accurate). The findings suggest that auditory processing abilities can be a root of language learning throughout the life span and may apply to the initial- to midphase of naturalistic L2 pronunciation learning in adulthood.

Domain‐General Auditory Processing Partially Explains Second Language Speech Learning in Classroom Settings: A Review and Generalization Study

“…The conclusion here generally concurs with the existing short‐term training literature showing auditory processing facilitates the process and product of novel language learning (e.g., Wong & Perrachione, 2007). This conclusion is in line with emerging research showing that auditory processing matters for the acquisition of the relatively difficult aspect of L2 speech acquisition in naturalistic settings (i.e., accuracy rather than fluency; Saito et al., 2020a; Saito et al., in press).…”

“…In such contexts, for the efficient and effective processing of every input opportunity, learners rely on both auditory integration (converting input into motor action) and acuity (conducting fine‐grained analyses of input). Thus, those with more precise auditory processing can demonstrate various dimensions of advanced L2 proficiency (phonology and lexicogrammar), and the trend becomes stronger as a function of increased input (e.g., Saito et al., 2020a, for the longitudinal relationship between auditory processing and L2 speech acquisition within the first 8 months of immersion; Saito, & Tierney, in press, for the first 4 months of immersion).…”

“…Research to date has shown that auditory acuity and integration are primary determinants of L1 acquisition (e.g., Tierney & Kraus, 2014) and of L2 phonological and lexicogrammar acquisition in naturalistic settings (e.g., Kachlicka et al., 2019; Saito et al., 2020a). The current study extended this line of work to a classroom foreign language setting, showing that auditory processing effects were limited to specific dimensions of auditory processing (integration) and speech (lexicogrammar).…”

“…In the context of L2 English speakers in Canada, Derwing and her colleagues conducted a series of longitudinal investigations showing that the temporal characteristics of L2 speech (fluency) continue to improve as a function of increased input and conversational experience (e.g., Derwing, Munro, Thomson, & Rossiter, 2009) but that nativelike accuracy in speech remains unchanged regardless of extensive immersion (see Derwing & Munro, 2013, for perceived accentedness; Munro, Derwing, & Saito, 2013, for vowel accuracy). As Table 3 shows, the link between auditory processing and L2 fluency in naturalistic settings has been found to be nonsignificant (Saito, Sun, & Tierney, 2020a) or minor (Saito, Kachlicka et al., 2020).…”

“…This finding is line with previous research showing that audio‐motor integration improves as a function of language and music learning experience (Tierney et al., 2008). In contrast, research has shown that auditory acuity declines as a function of chronological age (i.e., perceptual aging; Skoe et al., 2015), and that practice effects could be considered minor at best (Saito et al., 2020a). Saito et al.…”