L1 Vietnamese L2 English Speakers’ Cues to the Perception of Stress
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
L1 transfer affects the process of L2 acquisition in a significant way, both in perception and production, as learners have a tendency to apply phonological patterns of their native language to the target language. This study investigates the extent to which Vietnamese native speakers rely on F0 as a primary cue to perceive stress in English nonce words by manipulating the pitch contour around the stressed syllable by creating different environments where such pitch contours are realized, and subsequently measuring the differences in performance of stress location matching as a result. While the acoustic correlates of stress in English are F0, duration, intensity, and vowel quality (Fry, 1955; Libermann, 1960), the acoustic correlates of tone in Vietnamese are F0, duration, and voice quality (Pham, 2000; Nguyen & Edmonton, 1997). Despite some overlapping of acoustic correlates, English lexical stress prediction cannot be predicated on pitch alone. For example, in a rising tonal contour context such as that of a yes/no question (L*H-H%), English stressed syllable actually receives a low pitch accent (Pierrehumbert, 1980). The independent variables of this study are stress location in a nonce word, the number of syllables in the stimuli, and the type of intonation context where a statement context corresponds to a falling intonation pattern and a yes/no question context corresponds to a rising intonation pattern. The dependent variable of this study is the number or percentage of correct responses the participants give to a perceptual matching task. To avoid lexical retrieval and memorization effect, the nonce words were selected based on a search in a pronunciation corpus of American English. The nonce words have the same syllable shape as a real English word, follow English phonotactics, and are controlled for factors such as tendency of vowel reduction. Besides the nonce word items, a set of filler items was included in the test instrument, ranging from tokens that are minimal segmental contrast pairs to tokens that differ by syllable length. The experiment was repeated for a control group of L1 American English speakers. The token set was recorded by a native American English speaker, randomized during the actual experiment in blocks, and distributed to the participants in different test lists following the Latin square design. The participants listened to the stimuli with varying stress locations three times and then listened to the stimuli with either a statement or yes/no question intonation. They were asked to identify the sound that they heard previously which matches the sound they have just heard. Similar to Ou’s (2010) findings, the prediction for this study was that L1 Vietnamese L2 English speakers would show a significant difference in perceiving stress compared to the control group when the word has a yes/no intonation contour, because of Vietnamese speakers’ tendency to rely on F0 as an acoustic cue for tone perception. A mixed repeated measures ANOVA with a between subject factor was conducted. A statistically significant difference in stress matching accuracy between the control and the experimental group was found in the disyllabic-word category. Both sentence types and stress location have main effects on the stress matching accuracy, and there is an interaction between the L1 factor and sentence type, as well as between L1 and stress location. Followed-up independent samples t-tests with Bonferroni correction show that the source of the interaction is in the question condition and the word-initial stress condition across the two groups. This is fully in agreement with the prediction that we would see a difference in the stress matching accuracy between the L1 English speakers and L1 Vietnamese speakers in word-initial stress condition with a question intonation. No significant difference was found in the stress matching accuracy of trisyllabic words. The age of arrival factor was also analyzed and although there was a negative correlation between age of arrival and better performance at the stress matching task, this relationship was not statistically significant.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».