The Role of Perception in Differential Substitution

Abstract

This article examines differential substitution of the L2 English voiceless interdental fricative, [θ]. The L1s investigated in this study—European French, Québec French, and Japanese—have been reported to substitute [s], [t], and [s] respectively in production. Two main hypotheses are explored: 1) Transfer is perceptually based; 2) Substitution involves an assessment of non-contrastive in addition to contrastive features. Results of an AXB task show that advanced learners are unable to perceive certain non-contrastive distinctions; however, unlike Japanese listeners, French listeners do perceive Strident and Mellow, features which are non-contrastive in their L1. Results indicate a clear perceptual basis for the Japanese substitute. The difference between Québec and European French is less clear; however, there is a trend which suggests a perceptual basis for the European French substitute. Another finding is that confusion of [f] and [θ] is greater for French than it is for Japanese listeners. It is proposed that the composition of the L1 phonetic inventory influences which features listeners attend to during perception.

Sink positive: Linguistic experience with th substitutions influences nonnative word recognition

“…Several studies have not only described /θ/ substitutions across various L2 learners of English, but have also tried to determine the cross-linguistic differences in /θ/ production on the basis of the dissociation between perception and production of the English /θ/ (e.g., Brannen, 2002;Hancin-Bhatt, 1994a;Teasdale, 1997). Many phoneme identification and phoneme confusion studies have shown that /θ/ is perceptually most often confused with /f/ by native as well as by various nonnative listeners, and less frequently confused with /t/ or /s/ (e.g., Brannen, 2002;Cutler, Weber, Smits, & Cooper, 2004;Hancin-Bhatt, 1994a, 1994bMiller & Nicely, 1955;Tabain, 1998). For example, Cutler et al showed that under a 0-dB signal-to-noise ratio, Dutch L2 learners of English perceive English /θ/ 12.1% of the time as /θ/, 0.4% as /s/, 6.3% as /t/, and 13.3% as /f/ (for a comparison, American participants perceive /θ/ 18.3% of the time as /θ/, 0% as /s/, 5.4% as /t/, and 13.3% as /f/).…”

“…In addition, both fricatives share articulatory properties, being produced by forming a narrow constriction at the upper teeth (either with the lower lip, for /f/, or with the tongue, for /θ/). Given this similarity of /θ/ with /f/, it is rather surprising that among the most common production substitutes in English L2 are /t/ and /s/ (for an overview, see Brannen, 2002), even when /f/ is available in the L1 phoneme inventory of the L2 speakers. In addition to linguistic factors (see also Lombardi, 2003), nonlinguistic variables (e.g., insufficient motivation, cultural habits) and formal language instruction have been shown to influence the accent-specific preference (e.g., Piske, MacKay, & Flege, 2001; for a review, see Flege 1988).…”

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

“…Many second language learners produce L2 pronunciations that are notably unlike those of native speakers, often showing a heavy influence of L1 sound inventory and sound patterning (e.g., Best, McRoberts, & Goodell, 2001;Brannen, 2002;Clements, 2001;Eckman & Iverson, 2013;Flege & Eefting, 1987;Hancin-Bhatt, 1994;Sirsa & Redford, 2013;White & Mattys, 2007). Our experimental design took advantage of the fact that ambiguities arise when non-native speakers fail to make necessary contrasts in the target language.…”

Spoken-word recognition in foreign-accented speech by L2 listeners

“…There is ample research trying to explain why certain substitutions are preferred by L2 learners, and while the phonological structure of the L1 certainly can be an important factor in explaining different substitutions, other factors such as word-dependent characteristics, social factors, varying teaching curricula, and phonetic differences have been proposed to influence the choice of L2 substitutions as well (e.g., Brannen, 2002;Picard, 2002;Teasdale, 1997).…”