Phonetic adaptation in non-native spoken dialogue: Effects of priming and audience design

Hwang, Joonsik; Brennan, Susan E.; Huffman, Marie K.

doi:10.1016/j.jml.2015.01.001

Cited by 27 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Hwang et al (2015) examined whether Korean-English bilinguals would adjust their speech when speaking with a monolingual American-English speaker and a Korean-English bilingual. They found that, when speaking English with a monolingual English speaker, Korean-English bilinguals adjusted their speech in order to sound more English-like.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of language background and exposure on phonetic accommodation

Enzinna

2018

Proc Ling Soc Amer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines whether language background, short-term exposure to monolingual and bilingual speech, and long-term exposure to monolingual and bilingual speech influences speech accommodation. To address this question, I examine whether English monolinguals and Spanish-English bilinguals, either from a predominately monolingual community or a predominately bilingual community, vary their speech when interacting with a monolingual English speaker versus a Spanish-English bilingual speaker. Additionally, I examine whether speakers are more likely to converge after being primed with monolingual English or Spanish-English bilingual speech. To test this, participants complete an interactive communication task, where they are presented with a 6x6 board on a computer screen and asked questions about the words on the board, which contain variables that differ in English and Spanish. Results show that both language background and long-term exposure to monolingual or bilingual speech in a speaker’s speech community influence accommodation.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of language background and exposure on phonetic accommodation

Enzinna

2018

Proc Ling Soc Amer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Adaptation occurs at many levels of linguistic structure, from speech rate (Staum Casasanto et al, 2010;Giles & Coupland, 1991) and phonetic realisations (Hwang et al, 2015;Kim et al, 2011) to speakers' choice of words (Brennan & Clark, 1996;Branigan et al, 2011) and syntactic forms (Cleland & Pickering, 2003). Syntactic adaptation, which is our focus here, has been shown to extend across different types of sentences (Savage et al, 2003;Trofimovich et al, 2013;Reitter & Moore, 2006;Gries, 2005), and even occurs between languages in bilinguals (Loebell & Bock, 2003;Hartsuiker et al, 2004).…”

Section: Mechanisms For Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 93%

Syntactic adaptation depends on perceived linguistic knowledge: Native English speakers differentially adapt to native and non-native confederates in dialogue

Loy¹,

Smith²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the degree to which speakers adapt to the syntactic structures used by their interlocutor, comparing interaction between native speakers of English and a partner who was a native or nonnative speaker. In three experiments, naive participants took turns to describe and match pictures with a confederate who was a native or nonnative speaker of English. In Experiment 1, confederates produced both Prepositional Object (PO) and Double Object (DO) sentences to describe ditransitive events. We found no difference in the degree of adaptation with native and nonnative confederates. Experiment 2 explored the effect of interacting with a less flexible confederate who only produced DO sentences, some of which were ungrammatical (e.g. ''The wizard donates the golfer the cake''). We found greater adaptation towards nonnative confederates for both grammatical and ungrammatical descriptions. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 1's design, looking at interaction with a nonnative confederate who spoke with a stronger nonnative accent. We found no difference in the degree of adaptation between Experiments 1 and 3, confirming that the greater adaptation with nonnatives in Experiment 2 was driven by the confederates' syntactic behaviour, rather than the strength of their accent. Together, our results provide evidence that adaptation is at least partly driven by listener-oriented mechanisms; speakers take into account their partner's linguistic knowledge and communicative needs when these needs are foregrounded by the communicative context.

show abstract

“…Hwang et al. () focused on phonetic alignment of Korean‐English bilinguals. It was found that participants pronounce nonnative phonemes in a more native‐English manner after having spoken with a native speaker as opposed to a nonnative speaker.…”

Section: The Role Of Self‐monitoring On Language Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When L2 speakers converse with native speakers, they adjust their speech to that of their conversation partner (Hwang, Brennan, & Huffman, 2015;Kim, Horton, & Bradlow, 2011;Kim, 2012). L2 speakers hear nativelike pronunciation of phonemes that do not exist in their L1 that might make them create new phonemic categories depending on the proficiency of the speaker and the similarity of the new phoneme with other similar phonemes in the L1 inventory of the speaker (Best & Tyler, 2007;Flege, 1995).…”

Section: The Role Of Self-monitoring On Language Learning L2 Pronuncimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Speech alignment is not only seen when one's own feedback is perceived but also when a speaker has a conversation with another speaker. Hwang et al (2015) focused on phonetic alignment of Korean-English bilinguals. It was found that participants pronounce nonnative phonemes in a more native-English manner after having spoken with a native speaker as opposed to a nonnative speaker.…”

Section: The Role Of Self-monitoring On Language Learning L2 Pronuncimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Verbal Self‐Monitoring in the Second Language

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speakers monitor their own speech for errors. To do so, they may rely on perception of their own speech (external monitoring) but also on an internal speech representation (internal monitoring). While there are detailed accounts of monitoring in first language (L1) processing, it is not clear if and how monitoring is different in a second language (L2). Here, we ask whether L1 and L2 monitoring differ and if so, where the differences lie. L1 and L2 might differ in the speed with which monitoring is performed but also in their monitoring foci. We discuss studies on bilingual language control and suggest that self-monitoring might function as a last-resort control process. We conclude with speculation on the role self-monitoring might play in L2 learning and suggestions for future research.

show abstract

Phonetic adaptation in non-native spoken dialogue: Effects of priming and audience design

Cited by 27 publications

References 60 publications

The influence of language background and exposure on phonetic accommodation

The influence of language background and exposure on phonetic accommodation

Syntactic adaptation depends on perceived linguistic knowledge: Native English speakers differentially adapt to native and non-native confederates in dialogue

Verbal Self‐Monitoring in the Second Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About