The interaction between phonological information and pitch type at pre-attentive stage: an ERP study of lexical tones

Yu, Keke; Zhou, Yacong; Li, Li; Su, Jing’an; Wang, Ruiming; Ping, Li

doi:10.1080/23273798.2017.1310909

Cited by 22 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the MMN amplitude data, results of two‐factor ANOVAs for each group of L2 learners revealed that L2 learners with tonal L1 showed a larger MMN for the across‐category tonal contrast than for the within‐category tonal contrast, and a larger MMN for the tonal contrast with large F0 interval than that with small F0 interval. These MMN amplitude results are consistent with previous reports from studies of native Mandarin speakers (Xi et al, ; K. Yu et al, , ), and they suggest that L2 learners with tonal L1 demonstrated nativelike MMN responses in processing Mandarin lexical tonal contrasts. By comparison, L2 learners with nontonal L1 did not show any amplitude difference between across‐category versus within‐category tonal contrasts, and between tonal contrasts with large versus small F0 interval.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…It was found that Dutch speakers outperformed native Chinese speakers in discriminating among within‐category differences, whereas Chinese speakers showed heightened sensitivities to the across‐category contrasts (Liu, Chen, & Kager, ). ERP data also confirmed cross‐linguistic differences in processing acoustic versus phonological information in lexical tones at both preattentive and attentive stages (Shen & Froud, ; Xi et al, ; K. Yu et al, ). A recent eye tracking study further revealed differences in how within‐category tonal variation influences native versus nonnative listeners’ recognition of Mandarin Chinese words (Qin, Tremblay, & Zhang, ).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…It was found that Dutch speakers outperformed native Chinese speakers in discriminating among within-category differences, whereas Chinese speakers showed heightened sensitivities to the across-category contrasts (Liu, Chen, & Kager, 2017). ERP data also confirmed cross-linguistic differences in processing acoustic versus phonological information in lexical tones at both preattentive and attentive stages (Shen & Froud, 2019;Xi et al, 2010;K. Yu et al, 2017).…”

Section: Recruitment Of Two Groups Of Proficient L2 Learnersmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…A number of issues remain to be investigated in future studies. For example, although the processing of phonological information was found to interact with tonal type (level tone vs. contour tone) in native speakers (K. Yu et al, ), it remains unclear whether the interaction exists for L2 learners. Future studies should also examine how L2 learners at different proficiency levels or learning stages might process these two types of information in the course of language learning/development.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, if F0 interval and/or tonal category have similar effects on the MMN responses between the two groups of L2 learners, the L1 experience would not affect the processing of phonological and/or acoustic information in L2 lexical tones. Moreover, by comparing these L2 patterns with native speakers from previous studies (Xi et al, ; K. Yu et al, , ), we could further evaluate which group of L2 learners would perform more nativelike in processing these two types of information. If L2 learners with tonal L1 show more nativelike performance (similar effects of tonal category and/or F0 interval on MMN responses as native speakers), then native tonal experience would facilitate learning the phonological and/or acoustic information in L2 lexical tones.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effects of native language experience on Mandarin lexical tone processing in proficient second language learners

Yuan

et al. 2019

Psychophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning the acoustic and phonological information in lexical tones is significant for learners of tonal languages. Although there is a wealth of knowledge from studies of second language (L2) tone learning, it remains unclear how L2 learners process acoustic versus phonological information differently depending on whether their first language (L1) is a tonal language. In the present study, we first examined proficient L2 learners of Mandarin with tonal and nontonal L1 in a behavioral experiment (identifying a Mandarin tonal continuum) to construct tonal contrasts that could differentiate the phonological from the acoustic information in Mandarin lexical tones for the L2 learners. We then conducted an ERP experiment to investigate these learners’ automatic processing of acoustic and phonological information in Mandarin lexical tones by mismatch negativity (MMN). Although both groups of L2 learners showed similar behavioral identification features for the Mandarin tonal continuum as native speakers, L2 learners with nontonal L1, as compared with both native speakers and L2 learners with tonal L1, showed longer reaction time to the tokens of the Mandarin tonal continuum. More importantly, the MMN data further revealed distinct roles of acoustic and phonological information on the automatic processing of L2 lexical tones between the two groups of L2 learners. Taken together, the results indicate that the processing of acoustic and phonological information in L2 lexical tones may be modulated by L1 experience with a tonal language. The theoretical implications of the current study are discussed in light of models of L2 speech learning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%