MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W168172695

When your native language sounds foreign : a phonetic investigation into first language attrition

2008· dissertation· en· W168172695 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Esther de Leeuw

Bibliographic record

VenueQueen Margaret University Publications Repository (Queen Margaret University) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersForeign Affairs and International Trade CanadaInternational Council for Canadian StudiesDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstQueen Margaret University
KeywordsGermanStress (linguistics)LinguisticsContext (archaeology)Foreign languageFirst languageAttritionPsychologyPhoneticsLanguage contactNeuroscience of multilingualismHistoryMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research presented in this thesis comprises two experiments which investigated\nwhether the domain of phonetics can undergo first language attrition, or be lost, when a\nsecond language is acquired in adulthood in a migrant context.\nExperiment I investigated the native speech of 57 German migrants to Anglophone\nCanada and the Dutch Netherlands. The bilingual migrants had grown up in a monolingual\nGerman environment and moved abroad in adolescence or adulthood. Their semispontaneous\nGerman speech was globally assessed for foreign accent by native German\nspeakers in Germany. It was revealed that 14 bilingual migrants were perceived to be\nnon-native speakers of German. Age of arrival to Canada or the Netherlands and contact\nwith one’s native language played the most significant roles in determining whether the\nGerman speech of the migrants was assessed to be foreign accented. Crucially, it was not\nonly the amount of contact, but also the type of contact which influenced foreign accented\nnative speech. Monolingual settings, in which little language mixing was assumed to occur,\nwere most conducive to maintaining non-foreign accented native German speech.\nThese findings prompted Experiment II, in which the speech of 10 German migrants\nto Anglophone Canada was examined in fine phonetic detail. The participants in this\nexperiment had similarly grown up in a German speaking environment and migrated to\nCanada in late adolescence or adulthood. Segmental and prosodic elements of speech,\nwhich generally differ between German and English, were selected for acoustic analyses.\nGiven that each phonetic element was measured according to two dimensions, it was possible\nto determine that in the lateral phoneme /l/, the frequency of F1 was more likely to\nevidence first language attrition than the frequency of F2; and that in the prenuclear rise,\nthe alignment of the start of the rise was more likely to display first language attrition than\nthe alignment of the end. In addition to intrapersonal variation within the same phonetic\nvariable, interpersonal variation was observed. Two participants evidenced no first language\nattrition, whilst one participant realised both dimensions of the lateral phoneme /l/\nand prenuclear tonal alignment according to the Englishmonolingual norm in his German.\nWhen extralinguistic variables were investigated, age of arrival (and neither amount nor\ntype of language contact) had a significant impact on determining first language attrition,\nalthough this effect was only observed in the alignment of the prenuclear rise.\nWhile the experiments revealed stability in the native speech of late consecutive bilingual\nmigrants, first language attrition in the domain of phonetics was observed at both the\nlevel of perception and performance. Taken together, these findings challenge the traditional\nconcept of native speech by revealing that indeed native speakers diverge from the\nnorms of native (monolingual) speech.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQueen Margaret University Publications Repository (Queen Margaret University)Same topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207