1887
Volume 8, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2215-1931
  • E-ISSN: 2215-194X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Input is a necessary condition for language acquisition. In the language classroom, input may come from a variety of sources, including the teacher and student peers. Here we ask whether adult Lx learners are sensitive to the social roles of teachers and students such that they exhibit a preference for input from the teacher. We conducted an experiment wherein adult English speakers heard words in an artificial language. During an exposure phase, in one condition a “teacher” produced words with 25 ms of VOT on initial stop segments and a “student” produced the same words with 125 msec of VOT; in another condition the VOT durations were reversed. At test, participants judged productions by a different “student” and demonstrated a preference for the productions that matched the VOT durations of the teacher during exposure, providing evidence for an influence of social factors in differentiating input in Lx acquisition.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.21050.hay
2023-03-07
2024-04-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allen, J. S., & Miller, J. L.
    (2004) Listener sensitivity to individual talker differences in voice-onset- time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115(6), 3171–3183. 10.1121/1.1701898
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1701898 [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, J. S., Miller, J. L., & DeSteno, D.
    (2003) Individual talker differences in voice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113(1), 544–552. 10.1121/1.1528172
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1528172 [Google Scholar]
  3. Babel, M., & Munson, B.
    (2014) Producing socially meaningful linguistic variation. The Oxford Handbook of Language Production, 4921, 308–325.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Babel, M., & Russell, J.
    (2015) Expectations and speech intelligibility. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(5), 2823–2833. 10.1121/1.4919317
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4919317 [Google Scholar]
  5. Babel, M., Senior, B., & Bishop, S.
    (2019) Do social preferences matter in lexical retuning?Laboratory Phonology, 10(1). 10.5334/labphon.133
    https://doi.org/10.5334/labphon.133 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baese-Berk, M.
    (2018) Perceptual learning for native and non-native speech. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 681, 1–29. 10.1016/bs.plm.2018.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2018.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ballard, L., & Winke, P.
    (2017) The interplay of accent familiarity, comprehensibility, intelligibility, perceived native speaker status, and acceptability as a teacher. InT. Isaacs & P. Trofimovich (Eds.), Second Language Pronunciation Assessment (Vol.1071, pp.121–140). Multilingual Matters / Channel View Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Banks, B., Gowen, E., Munro, K. J., & Adank, P.
    (2015) Cognitive predictors of perceptual adaptation to accented speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(4), 2015–2024. 10.1121/1.4916265
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4916265 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 671, 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  10. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D.
    (2020) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 6.1.37) [Computer software].
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bosch, L., & Ramon-Casas, M.
    (2011) Variability in vowel production by bilingual speakers: Can input properties hinder the early stabilization of contrastive categories?Journal of Phonetics, 39(4), 514–526. 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2011.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T.
    (2008) Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition, 106(2), 707–729. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown, K. M., Dahl, K. L., Cler, G. J., & Stepp, C. E.
    (2021) Listener age and gender diversity: Effects on voice-based perception of gender. Journal of Voice: Official Journal of the Voice Foundation, 35(5), 739–745. 10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.02.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cheng, L. S. P., Burgess, D., Vernooij, N., Solís-Barroso, C., McDermott, A., & Namboodiripad, S.
    (2021) The problematic concept of native speaker in psycholinguistics: Replacing vague and harmful terminology with inclusive and accurate measures. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(1), 715843. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.715843
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.715843 [Google Scholar]
  15. Clopper, C. G., & Bradlow, A. R.
    (2008) Perception of dialect variation in noise: intelligibility and classification. Language and Speech, 51(Pt 3), 175–198. 10.1177/0023830908098539
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830908098539 [Google Scholar]
  16. Clopper, C. G., & Pisoni, D. B.
    (2004) Some acoustic cues for the perceptual categorization of American English regional dialects. Journal of Phonetics, 32(1), 111–140. 10.1016/S0095‑4470(03)00009‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00009-3 [Google Scholar]
  17. Conboy, B. T., Brooks, R., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K.
    (2015) Social interaction in infants’ learning of second-language phonetics: An exploration of brain-behavior relations. Developmental Neuropsychology, 40(4), 216–229. 10.1080/87565641.2015.1014487
    https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2015.1014487 [Google Scholar]
  18. Crosswhite, K., Antoniou, M., & Qi, Z. [Google Scholar]
  19. Dewaele, J.-M.
    (2017) Why the dichotomy “L1 versus LX user” is better than “native versus non-native speaker.” Applied Linguistics, 39(2), 236–240. 10.1093/applin/amw055
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw055 [Google Scholar]
  20. D’Onofrio, A.
    (2018) Personae and phonetic detail in sociolinguistic signs. Language in Society, 471, 513–539. 10.1017/S0047404518000581
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404518000581 [Google Scholar]
  21. Drager, K.
    (2011) Speaker age and vowel perception. Language and Speech, 54(Pt 1), 99–121. 10.1177/0023830910388017
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830910388017 [Google Scholar]
  22. Falkert, A.
    (2016) The relevance of accent in L2 pronunciation instruction: A matter of teaching cultures or language ideologies?International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 11(3), 259–270. 10.1080/22040552.2016.1272533
    https://doi.org/10.1080/22040552.2016.1272533 [Google Scholar]
  23. Fecher, N., & Johnson, E. K.
    (2018) Effects of language experience and task demands on talker recognition by children and adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143(4), 2409. 10.1121/1.5032199
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5032199 [Google Scholar]
  24. (2021) Developmental improvements in talker recognition are specific to the native language. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2021, 104991. 10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104991
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104991 [Google Scholar]
  25. Flege, J. E., & Liu, S.
    (2001) The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(4), 527–552. 10.1017/S0272263101004041
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263101004041 [Google Scholar]
  26. Flores, N., & Rosa, J.
    (2019) Bringing race into second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 1031, 145–151. 10.1111/modl.12523
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12523 [Google Scholar]
  27. Foulkes, P., & Docherty, G.
    (2006) The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 409–438. 10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Goggin, J. P., Thompson, C. P., Strube, G., & Simental, L. R.
    (1991) The role of language familiarity in voice identification. Memory & Cognition, 19(5), 448–458. 10.3758/BF03199567
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199567 [Google Scholar]
  29. Golombek, P., & Jordan, S. R.
    (2005) Becoming “black lambs” not “parrots”: A poststructuralist orientation to intelligibility and identity. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 513–533. 10.2307/3588492
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588492 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gonzales, K., Byers-Heinlein, K., & Lotto, A. J.
    (2019) How bilinguals perceive speech depends on which language they think they’re hearing. Cognition, 1821, 318–330. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.021 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hayes-Harb, R.
    (2007) Lexical and statistical evidence in the acquisition of second language phonemes. Second Language Research, 23(1), 65–94. 10.1177/0267658307071601
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307071601 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hayes-Harb, R., & Masuda, K.
    (2008) Development of the ability to lexically encode novel second language phonemic contrasts. Second Language Research, 24(1), 5–33. 10.1177/0267658307082980
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307082980 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hay, J., & Drager, K.
    (2010) Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics and Philosophy, 48(4). 10.1515/ling.2010.027
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.027 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hay, J., Warren, P., & Drager, K.
    (2006) Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 458–484. 10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  35. Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., & Westfall, P.
    (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 50(3), 346–363. 10.1002/bimj.200810425
    https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ingvalson, E. M., Lansford, K. L., Federova, V., & Fernandez, G.
    (2017) Listeners’ attitudes toward accented talkers uniquely predicts accented speech perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 141(3), EL234. 10.1121/1.4977583
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4977583 [Google Scholar]
  37. Johnson, K., Strand, E. A., & D’Imperio, M.
    (1999) Auditory–visual integration of talker gender in vowel perception. Journal of Phonetics, 27(4), 359–384. 10.1006/jpho.1999.0100
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0100 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kabel, A.
    (2009) Native-speakerism, stereotyping and the collusion of applied linguistics. System, 37(1), 12–22. 10.1016/j.system.2008.09.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kang, O., & Rubin, D.
    (2014) Listener expectations, reverse linguistic stereotyping, and individual background factors in social judgments and oral performance assessment. InJ. Levis Alene (Ed.), Social Dynamics in Second Language Accent (Vol.101, p.239). Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781614511762.239
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511762.239 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kang, O., & Rubin, D. L.
    (2009) Reverse linguistic stereotyping: Measuring the effect of listener expectations on speech evaluation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(4), 441–456. 10.1177/0261927X09341950
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09341950 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kinzler, K. D., Dupoux, E., & Spelke, E. S.
    (2012) “Native” objects and collaborators: Infants’ object choices and acts of giving reflect favor for native over foreign speakers. Journal of Cognition and Development: Official Journal of the Cognitive Development Society, 13(1), 67–81. 10.1080/15248372.2011.567200
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2011.567200 [Google Scholar]
  42. Kinzler, K. D., Shutts, K., Dejesus, J., & Spelke, E. S.
    (2009) Accent trumps race in guiding children’s social preferences. Social Cognition, 27(4), 623–634. 10.1521/soco.2009.27.4.623
    https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.4.623 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kuhl, P. K.
    (2007) Is speech learning “gated” by the social brain?Developmental Science, 10(1), 110–120. 10.1111/j.1467‑7687.2007.00572.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00572.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Lennes, M. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lev-Ari, S., Ho, E., & Keysar, B.
    (2018) The unforeseen consequences of interacting with non-native speakers. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 835–849. 10.1111/tops.12325
    https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12325 [Google Scholar]
  46. Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B.
    (2010) Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 1093–1096. 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.025
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.025 [Google Scholar]
  47. Levis, J. M.
    (2005) Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 369–377. 10.2307/3588485
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3588485 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2020) Revisiting the intelligibility and nativeness principles. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 6(3), 310–328. 10.1075/jslp.20050.lev
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.20050.lev [Google Scholar]
  49. Levis, J. M., Sonsaat, S., Link, S., & Barriuso, T. A.
    (2016) Native and nonnative teachers of L2 pronunciation: Effects on learner performance. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 894–931. 10.1002/tesq.272
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.272 [Google Scholar]
  50. Liberman, Z., Woodward, A. L., & Kinzler, K. D.
    (2017) Preverbal infants infer third-party social relationships based on language. Cognitive Science, 41 Suppl 3, 622–634. 10.1111/cogs.12403
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12403 [Google Scholar]
  51. Linck, J. A., & Cunnings, I.
    (2015) The utility and application of mixed-effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65(S1), 185–207. 10.1111/lang.12117
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12117 [Google Scholar]
  52. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S.
    (1964) A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word & World, 20(3), 384–422. 10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lively, S. E., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B.
    (1993) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94(3 Pt 1), 1242–1255. 10.1121/1.408177
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.408177 [Google Scholar]
  54. Lively, S. E., Pisoni, D. B., Yamada, R. A., Tohkura, Y., & Yamada, T.
    (1994) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. III. Long-term retention of new phonetic categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(4), 2076–2087. 10.1121/1.410149
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.410149 [Google Scholar]
  55. Llompart, M., & Reinisch, E.
    (2021) Lexical representations can rapidly be updated in the early stages of second-language word learning. Journal of Phonetics, 881, 101080. 10.1016/j.wocn.2021.101080
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2021.101080 [Google Scholar]
  56. Llurda, E.
    (2005) Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession. Springer Science & Business Media. 10.1007/b106233
    https://doi.org/10.1007/b106233 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ma, L. P. F.
    (2012) Advantages and disadvantages of native- and nonnative-English-speaking teachers: Student perceptions in Hong Kong. TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 280–305. 10.1002/tesq.21
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.21 [Google Scholar]
  58. Maslowski, M., Meyer, A. S., & Bosker, H. R.
    (2019) How the tracking of habitual rate influences speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(1), 128–138. 10.1037/xlm0000579
    https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000579 [Google Scholar]
  59. Maye, J.
    (2000) The acquisition of speech sound categories on the basis of distributional information [PhD]. University of Arizona.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. McGowan, K. B.
    (2015) Social expectation improves speech perception in noise. Language and Speech, 58(Pt 4), 502–521. 10.1177/0023830914565191
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830914565191 [Google Scholar]
  61. Morgan, S. D., & Ferguson, S. H.
    (2017) Judgments of emotion in clear and conversational speech by young adults with normal hearing and older adults with hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research: JSLHR, 60(8), 2271–2280. 10.1044/2017_JSLHR‑H‑16‑0264
    https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-H-16-0264 [Google Scholar]
  62. Moussu, L., & Llurda, E.
    (2008) Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: History and research. Language Teaching, 41(3), 315–348. 10.1017/S0261444808005028
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005028 [Google Scholar]
  63. Muench, K. L., & Creel, S. C.
    (2013) Gradient phonological inconsistency affects vocabulary learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(5), 1585–1600. 10.1037/a0032862
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032862 [Google Scholar]
  64. Niedzielski, N.
    (1999) The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62–85. 10.1177/0261927X99018001005
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001005 [Google Scholar]
  65. Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K.
    (2019) PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195–203. 10.3758/s13428‑018‑01193‑y
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y [Google Scholar]
  66. Perrachione, T. K., & Furbeck, K. T.
    (2019) Acoustic and linguistic factors affecting perceptual dissimilarity judgments of voices. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 146, 3384. 10.1121/1.5126697
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5126697 [Google Scholar]
  67. Perrachione, T. K., Lee, J., Ha, L. Y. Y., & Wong, P. C. M.
    (2011) Learning a novel phonological contrast depends on interactions between individual differences and training paradigm design. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 461–472. 10.1121/1.3593366
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3593366 [Google Scholar]
  68. Ramjattan, V. A.
    (2019a) The white native speaker and inequality regimes in the private English language school. Intercultural Education, 30(2), 126–140. 10.1080/14675986.2018.1538043
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2018.1538043 [Google Scholar]
  69. (2019b) Racist nativist microaggressions and the professional resistance of racialized English language teachers in Toronto. Race Ethnicity and Education, 22(3), 374–390. 10.1080/13613324.2017.1377171
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377171 [Google Scholar]
  70. (2019c) Raciolinguistics and the aesthetic labourer. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 61(5), 726–738. 10.1177/0022185618792990
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185618792990 [Google Scholar]
  71. Reinisch, E.
    (2016) Speaker-specific processing and local context information: The case of speaking rate. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(6), 1397–1415. 10.1017/S0142716415000612
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000612 [Google Scholar]
  72. Rost, G. C., & McMurray, B.
    (2009) Speaker variability augments phonological processing in early word learning. Developmental Science, 12(2), 339–349. 10.1111/j.1467‑7687.2008.00786.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00786.x [Google Scholar]
  73. (2010) Finding the signal by adding noise: The role of noncontrastive phonetic variability in early word learning. Infancy: The Official Journal of the International Society on Infant Studies, 15(6). 10.1111/j.1532‑7078.2010.00033.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7078.2010.00033.x [Google Scholar]
  74. Rubin, D. L.
    (1992) Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of nonnative English- speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 511–531. 10.1007/BF00973770
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00973770 [Google Scholar]
  75. Samuel, A. G., & Kraljic, T.
    (2009) Perceptual learning for speech. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 71(6), 1207–1218. 10.3758/APP.71.6.1207
    https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.6.1207 [Google Scholar]
  76. Samuel, A. G., & Larraza, S.
    (2015) Does listening to non-native speech impair speech perception?Journal of Memory and Language, 811, 51–71. 10.1016/j.jml.2015.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  77. Scharinger, M., Monahan, P. J., & Idsardi, W. J.
    (2011) You had me at “Hello”: Rapid extraction of dialect information from spoken words. NeuroImage, 56(4), 2329–2338. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.007 [Google Scholar]
  78. Schertz, J.
    (2015) Duration manipulation via PSOLA [Praat Script]. individual.utoronto.ca/jschertz/scripts.shtml
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Smiljanic, R.
    (2021) Clear speech perception. InThe Handbook of Speech Perception (pp.177–205). Wiley. 10.1002/9781119184096.ch7
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119184096.ch7 [Google Scholar]
  80. Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M.
    (1980) A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174–215. 10.1037/0278‑7393.6.2.174
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.174 [Google Scholar]
  81. Sumner, M.
    (2011) The role of variation in the perception of accented speech. Cognition, 119(1), 131–136. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.018 [Google Scholar]
  82. Sumner, M., Kim, S. K., King, E., & McGowan, K. B.
    (2013) The socially weighted encoding of spoken words: a dual-route approach to speech perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 41, 1015.
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Szakay, A., Babel, M., & King, J.
    (2016) Social categories are shared across bilinguals’ lexicons. Journal of Phonetics, 591, 92–109. 10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  84. Tripp, A., Feldman, N. H., & Idsardi, W. J.
    (2021) Social inference may guide early lexical learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 121, 1516. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645247
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645247 [Google Scholar]
  85. Tripp, A., & Munson, B.
    (2022) Perceiving gender while perceiving language: Integrating psycholinguistics and gender theory. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Cognitive Science, 13(2), e1583. 10.1002/wcs.1583
    https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1583 [Google Scholar]
  86. Tyrone, M. E., & Mauk, C. E.
    (2012) Phonetic reduction and variation in American Sign Language: A quantitative study of sign lowering. Laboratory Phonology, 3(2), 425–453. 10.1515/lp‑2012‑0019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lp-2012-0019 [Google Scholar]
  87. Von Esch, K. S., Motha, S., & Kubota, R.
    (2020) Race and language teaching. Language Teaching, 53(4), 391–421. 10.1017/S0261444820000269
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000269 [Google Scholar]
  88. Weatherhead, D., & White, K. S.
    (2018) And then I saw her race: Race-based expectations affect infants’ word processing. Cognition, 1771, 87–97. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.004 [Google Scholar]
  89. (2021) Toddlers link social and speech variation during word learning. Developmental Psychology, 57(8), 1195–1209. 10.1037/dev0001032
    https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001032 [Google Scholar]
  90. Witteman, M. J., Weber, A., & McQueen, J. M.
    (2013) Foreign accent strength and listener familiarity with an accent codetermine speed of perceptual adaptation. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 75(3), 537–556. 10.3758/s13414‑012‑0404‑y
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0404-y [Google Scholar]
  91. Xie, X., Theodore, R. M., & Myers, E. B.
    (2017) More than a boundary shift: Perceptual adaptation to foreign-accented speech reshapes the internal structure of phonetic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 43(1), 206–217. 10.1037/xhp0000285
    https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000285 [Google Scholar]
  92. Yoon, K.
    (n.d.). Normalize intensity-dB [Praat script].
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Young-Scholten, M.
    (1995) The negative effects of “positive” evidence on L2 phonology. InEubank, L., Selinker, L., & Sharwood, S. M. (Ed.), Current State of Interlanguage: Studies in Honor of William E. Rutherford (pp.107–121). John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/z.73.10you
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.73.10you [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.21050.hay
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jslp.21050.hay
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): input; phonetics; phonology; pronunciation teaching; social factors; word learning
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