L1 phonological effects on L2 (non-)naïve perception: A cross-language investigation of the oral–nasal vowel contrast in Brazilian Portuguese

Abstract

Feature-based approaches to acquisition principally focus on second language (L2) learners’ ability to perceive non-native consonants when the features required are either contrastively present or entirely absent from the first language (L1) grammar. As features may function contrastively or allophonically in the consonant and/or vowel systems of a language, we expand the scope of this research to address whether features that function contrastively in the L1 vowel system can be recombined to yield new vowels in the L2; whether features that play a contrastive role in the L1 consonant system can be reassigned to build new vowels in the L2; and whether L1 allophonic features can be ‘elevated’ to contrastive status in the L2. We examine perception of the oral–nasal contrast in Brazilian Portuguese listeners from French, English, Caribbean Spanish, and non-Caribbean Spanish backgrounds, languages that differ in the status assigned to [nasal] in their vowel systems. An AXB discrimination task revealed that, although all language groups succeeded in perceiving the non-naïve contrast /e/–/ẽ/ due to their previous exposure to Québec French while living in Montréal, Canada, only French and Caribbean Spanish speakers succeeded in discriminating the naïve contrast /i/–/ĩ/. These findings suggest that feature redeployment at first exposure is only possible if the feature is contrastive in the L1 vowel system (French) or if the feature is allophonic but variably occurs in contrastive contexts in the L1 vowel system (Caribbean Spanish). With more exposure to a non-native contrast, however, feature redeployment from consonant to vowel systems was also supported, as was the possibility that allophonic features may be elevated to contrastive status in the L2.

Full Transfer and Segmental Emergence in the L2 Acquisition of Phonology: A Case Study

“…In the sections below, we address these theoretical proposals in light of the L2 phonological development of Nura, a Kazakh child who began to acquire English around the turn of her fourth birthday. As we will see, the general approach set by Brown (1998) and Martinez et al (2021) makes robust predictions concerning Nura's recombinations of L1 phonological features as part of her developing phonological productions in English. However, this approach at times fails to predict how Nura acquired the sounds of her L2.…”

“…Building on Brown's original proposal, Martinez et al (2021) expand the scope of feature-based approaches to L2 acquisition by showing that L2 learners have the possibility to recombine features that already exist in the L1, whether these features function contrastively or allophonically within the L1. Further, Martinez et al show that recombinations involving allophonic features involves more difficulty than those based on phonologically contrastive features only.…”

“…Indeed, within the current literature, issues in the L2 acquisition of speech sounds have been considered predominantly within phonetically oriented frameworks such as the Speech Learning Model (e.g., Flege et al 1995). This is in contrast with a smaller yet significant body of literature that focuses on formal aspects of L2 segmental development, in particular that of phonological units such as the segment and the phonological feature (e.g., Hancin-Bhatt 1994;Brown and Matthews 1993;Brown 1998;Martinez et al 2021), in addition to prosody. Finally, in explorations of relationships between speech phonetics and more formal aspects of phonological systems, the literature also offers discussions of formal models in light of perceptual and articulatory aspects of speech (e.g., Brannen 2002;Teasdale 1997; see also Martinez et al 2021 for recent discussion).…”

“…This proposal thus extends and modulates the original proposal by Brown (1998), especially through an incorporation of the L2 learner's knowledge of features that may be active allophonically. Finally, in their discussion of some of the variation observed within their results, Martinez et al (2021) hint at the potential for phonetic conditioning to influence the L2 learner, given that different features and feature combinations may carry different acoustic cues across different languages, or involve different speech articulations. For example, rhotic liquids may be represented phonologically in similar ways across languages, for example through the feature [rhotic], yet different types of rhotics (e.g., taps, trills, approximants) can be phonetically very different from one another, a fact that eludes their featural representations.…”

The inter-relationship between word learning, native phonology and production practice through cross-situational statistics

“…The nonnative sound under investigation is vocalic nasalisation in European Portuguese, as the nasal vowels are non-native phonemes for English native speakers. Few studies have examined how nasalisation is acquired as a non-native phonological feature (Inceoglu, 2015;Inceoglu, 2016;Martinez et al, 2021), even though it is a fundamental part of the European Portuguese phonology (Andrade, 2020). No studies have before shown how this can be acquired implicitly via a CSL paradigm, more importantly, integrating the role of production within the task itself.…”