Updates on becoming a native listener

Abstract

In previous research we and others have shown there to be a functional reorganization in speech perception toward the end of the first year of life. In this talk, we present new evidence extending and explicating this reorganization in the perception of phonetic, rhythmical, and grammatical information. We then consider the meaning of these findings for eventual word learning, and present data in support of a second functional reorganization at the onset of word learning,

The Vowel Systems of Quichua-Spanish Bilinguals

“…After about 10-12 months of age, the ability to discriminate phonetic contrasts not found in the child's linguistic environment decreases. It has been argued that this is not a loss in auditory capabilities, but rather a reorganization of perceptual space [e.g., Werker and Tees 1984;Werker, 1989;Werker and Pegg, 1992;Kuhl, 1991Kuhl, , 2000Kuhl et al, 1992]. Following work by Nosofsky [1986], Pisoni et al [1994] have proposed that the reorganization happens as perceptual dimensions are modified by experience.…”

Speech Sound Representation in the Brain

“…According to numerous psychological studies [Aslin et al, 1981;Jusczyk, 1985;Kuhl, 1987;Mehler, 1985;Treuhub, 1976;Werker, 1989;Werker and Lalonde, 1988;Werker et al, 1981], infants are born with a capacity to discriminate phonetic contrasts in any of the world's languages. This ability is affected by (long-term) experience with one's native language.…”

Acoustic Analysis of the Production of Unstressed English Vowels by Early and Late Korean and Japanese Bilinguals

“…proposed the feature hypothesis, which states that L2 phonetic features not used to signal phonological contrasts in a L1 will be more difficult to acquire than those that are~see also Gottfried & Suiter, 1997!+ McAllister et al+ reasoned that the L1 perceptual system is attuned to phonologically meaningful phonetic features and, as such, the L1 system will underattend to phonetic features that are not phonologically meaningful~see also Francis & Nusbaum, 2002;Guion & Pederson, in press;Iverson et al+, 2003!+ Furthermore, McAllister et al+, along with Flege~1995!, reasoned that the difficulty in perceiving phonetic features that are not phonologically meaningful will be reflected in low production accuracy of these features in the L2+ Thus, the production of English reduced vowels might be affected by the L2 learners' L1 prosodic system insofar as phonetic features not used in the L1 rhythmic system might be more poorly acquired+ Given the findings from previous research that acoustic features not used in the L1 phonological system are underattended~Francis & Nusbaum, 2002;Guion & Pederson, in press;Iverson et al+, 2003!, learners might not detect modulation in such features and, thus, the phonetic information might not receive the further processing that is thought to be prerequisite to learning~Schmidt, 2001;Tomlin & Villa, 1994!+ Furthermore, attentional allocation to acoustic features might be domain-specific: A feature that is not phonologically relevant to the rhythmic system might be relevant to other aspects~e+g+, segmental feature processing!+ Thus, a phonetic feature not relevant to the prosodic system, even though it might be relevant in other domains, might be underattended in prosodic processing+ This attentional, processing view of L1 effects on L2 learning does not claim that the features are unavailable to the linguistic system, as some proposals about the nonavailability of Universal Grammar in L2 learning do~see White, 2000, for a review!+ Instead, this view proposes that the processing system is tuned by the linguistic input+ Studies investigating infant development of perceptual discrimination have shown that a perceptual reorganization takes place within the first year of life+ Most segmental contrasts not found in the child's linguistic environment are better discriminated before about 10-12 months of age+ After this age, the ability to discriminate these contrasts decreases+ These studies have argued that this is not a loss in auditory capabilities but, rather, a reorganization of perceptual space~e+g+, Best, McRoberts, & Sithole, 1988;Kuhl, 1991Kuhl, , 2000Werker, 1989;Werker & Pegg, 1992!+ The reorganization of perceptual space might be affected by attentional factors+ Specifically, selective attention to particular perceptual dimensions changes similarity relationships such that differences along attended dimensions expand and differences along unattended dimensions contract~Guenther, Husain, Cohen, & ShinnCunningham, 1999;…”