Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2215-1478
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1486
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This paper describes a corpus of task-based conversational speech produced by English and Spanish native talkers speaking English and Spanish as both a first and a second language. For cross-language comparability, speech material was elicited using a picture-based task common to each native language group. The bi-directionality of the corpus, stemming from the use of the same speakers and the same language pairing, makes it possible to separate native language factors from the influence of speaking in a first or second language. The potential for studying first language influences and non-native speech using the corpus is illustrated by means of a series of explorations of acoustic, segmental, suprasegmental, and conversational phenomena. These analyses demonstrate the breadth of factors that are amenable to investigation in a conversational corpus and reveal different types of interactions between the first language, the second language, and non-nativeness.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baker, R. , & Hazan, V.
    2011 “DiapixUK: task materials for the elicitation of multiple spontaneous speech dialogs”. Behavior Research Methods43(3), 761–770. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑011‑0075‑y
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0075-y [Google Scholar]
  2. Best, C. T.
    1995 “A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception”. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Cross-language Speech Research. Timonium, MD: York Press, 167–200.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Blaauw, E.
    1994 “The contribution of prosodic boundary markers to the perceptual difference between read and spontaneous speech”. Speech Communication14(4), 359–375. doi: 10.1016/0167‑6393(94)90028‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6393(94)90028-0 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boersma, P. , & Weenink, D.
    2016: online. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. Version 5.3.51. Available at: www.praat.org/ (accessedMay 2017).
  5. Bolinger, D.
    1989Intonation and Its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cooke, M. , King, S. , Garnier, M. , & Aubanel, V.
    2014 “The listening talker: a review of human and algorithmic context-induced modifications of speech”. Computer Speech and Language28, 543–571. doi: 10.1016/j.csl.2013.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2013.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  7. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe 2001Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Derwing, T. M. , Munro, M. J. , Thomson, R. I. , & Rossiter, M. J. 2009 “The relationship between L1 fluency and L2 fluency development”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition31(4), 533–557. doi: 10.1017/S0272263109990015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990015 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ernestus, M. , Hanique, M. , & Verboom, E.
    2015 “The effect of speech situation on the occurrence of reduced word pronunciation variants”. Journal of Phonetics48, 60–75. doi: 10.1016/j.wocn.2014.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2014.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Flege, J.
    1987 “The production of ‘new’ and ‘similar’ phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification”. Journal of Phonetics15, 47–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Flege, J. E.
    1995 “Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems”. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Cross-language Speech Research. Timonium, MD: York Press, 233–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Flege, J. E. , & Eefting, W.
    1987 “The production and perception of English stops by Spanish speakers of English”. Journal of Phonetics15, 67–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gimson, A. C.
    1964An Introduction to the Pronunciation of English. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Granlund, S. , Hazan, V. , & Baker, R.
    2012 “An acoustic – phonetic comparison of the clear speaking styles of Finnish – English late bilinguals”. Journal of Phonetics40(3), 509–520. doi: 10.1016/j.wocn.2012.02.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.02.006 [Google Scholar]
  15. Guion, S. G. , Flege, J. E. , Liu, S. H. , & Yeni-Komshian, G. H.
    2000 “Age of learning effects on the duration of sentences produced in a second language”. Applied Psycholinguistics21(2), 205–228. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400002034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400002034 [Google Scholar]
  16. Harrington, J. , Kleber, F. , & Reubold, U.
    2008 “Compensation for coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in standard southern British: An acoustic and perceptual study”. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America123(5), 2825–2835. doi: 10.1121/1.2897042
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2897042 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hawkins, S. , & Midgley, J.
    2005 “Formant frequencies of RP monophthongs in four age groups of speakers”. Journal of the International Phonetic Association35(2), 183–199. doi: 10.1017/S0025100305002124
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100305002124 [Google Scholar]
  18. Howell, P. , & Kadi-Hanifi, K.
    1991 “Comparison of prosodic properties between read and spontaneous speech material”. Speech Communication10(2), 163–169. doi: 10.1016/0167‑6393(91)90039‑V
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6393(91)90039-V [Google Scholar]
  19. Kang, O. , Rubin, D. , & Pickering, L.
    2010 “Suprasegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English”. The Modern Language Journal94(4), 554–566. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2010.01091.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01091.x [Google Scholar]
  20. Kormos, J. , & Dénes, M.
    2004 “Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners”. System32(2), 145–164. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuhl, P. K.
    1993 “Early linguistic experience and phonetic perception: implications for theories of developmental speech production”. Journal of Phonetics21, 125–139.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Laan, G. P.
    1997 “The contribution of intonation, segmental durations, and spectral features to the perception of a spontaneous and a read speaking style”. Speech Communication22(1), 43–65. doi: 10.1016/S0167‑6393(97)00012‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(97)00012-5 [Google Scholar]
  23. Munro, M. J. , & Derwing, T. M.
    1998 “The effects of speaking rate on listener evaluations of native and foreign-accented speech”. Language Learning48(2), 159–182. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9922.00038
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00038 [Google Scholar]
  24. Munro, M. J. , Derwing, T. M. , & Burgess, C. S.
    2010 “Detection of nonnative speaker status from content-masked speech”. Speech Communication52(7), 626–637. doi: 10.1016/j.specom.2010.02.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2010.02.013 [Google Scholar]
  25. Nakamura, M. , Iwano, K. , & Furui, S.
    2008 “Differences between acoustic characteristics of spontaneous and read speech and their effects on speech recognition performance”. Computer Speech & Language22(2), 171–184. doi: 10.1016/j.csl.2007.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2007.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  26. Riazantseva, A. 2001 “Second language proficiency and pausing: A study of Russian speakers of English”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition23, 497–526. doi: 10.1017/S027226310100403X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310100403X [Google Scholar]
  27. Rose, R. L.
    2013 “Crosslinguistic corpus of hesitation phenomena: A corpus for investigating first and second language speech performance”. Proc. Interspeech, Lyon, 992–996.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Scobbie, J. M. , Lawson, E. , & Stuart-Smith, J.
    2012 “Back to front: a socially-stratified ultrasound tongue imaging study of Scottish English /u/”. Italian Journal of Linguistics24(1), 103–148.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Trouvain, J. , Bonneau, A. , Colotte, V. , Fauth, C. , Fohr, D. , Jouvet, D. , Jügler, J. , Laprie, Y. , Mella, O. , Möbius, B. , & Zimmerer, F.
    2016 “The IFCASL corpus of French and German non-native and native read speech”. Proc. 9th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), Portorož, 1333–1338.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Vaissière, J.
    2008 “Perception of intonation”. In D. B. Pisoni , & R. E. Remez (Eds.), The Handbook of Speech Perception. Blackwell, 236–263.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Van Engen, K. J. , Baese-Berk, M. , Baker, A. , Choi, R. E. , Kim, M. , & Bradlow, A. R.
    2010 “The Wildcat Corpus of native-and foreign-accented English: Communicative efficiency across conversational dyads with varying language alignment profiles”. Language and Speech53, 510–540. doi: 10.1177/0023830910372495
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830910372495 [Google Scholar]
  32. Villegas, J. , Cooke, M. , Aubanel, V. , & Piccolino-Boniforti, M.
    2011 “MTRANS: a multi-channel, multi-tier speech annotation tool”. Proc. Interspeech, Florence, 3237–3236.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Wells, J. C.
    1962A Study of the Formants of the Pure Vowels of British English. Master’s thesis. London: University of London.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 1982Accents of English (Volumes1 & 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511611759
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611759 [Google Scholar]
  35. Wester, M. , García Lecumberri, M. L. , & Cooke, M.
    2014 “DIAPIX-FL: A symmetric corpus of conversations in first and second languages”. Proc. Interspeech, Singapore, 509–513.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2015 “/u/-fronting in English speakers’ L1 but not in their L2”. Proc. 18th International Congress on Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation; Diapix corpus; L2 speech; picture task; vowels
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error