1887
image of Focus prosody by Korean learners of English
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study examined whether Korean learners of English attained native-like performance in English focus prosody by conducting production and perception experiments using digit strings. Language learners were classified into advanced-, intermediate-, and low-level groups according to their proficiency and compared with native speakers. Native speakers’ focus prosody was clearly prominent in the focus positions, and their post-focus positions were considerably compressed. Their focused digits were easy to detect, resulting in a 97% identification rate. Although advanced-level speakers produced acoustic cues quite similar to those of native speakers, their post-focus production did not resemble that of native speakers. Their identification rate was 81%, 16% lower than that of native speakers. Neither intermediate- nor low-level speakers’ focus-cueing changes were distinguished whatsoever in the focus and post-focus positions. Their identification rates were just over 10%, similar to the level of chance in a 10-digit string, implying that their focus productions were not sufficiently salient to be recognized in the experiment. The results suggest that second language acquisition is hindered by a negative transfer between English and Korean. The acquisition of second language focus prosody proceeds slowly; second language learners approach native-like proficiency once they become advanced.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20031.liu
2021-03-04
2021-05-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Archibald, J.
    (1998) Second language phonology, phonetics, and typology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(2), 189–211. doi:  10.1017/S0272263198002046
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198002046 [Google Scholar]
  2. Boersma, P., & Weenik, D.
    (2020) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer software]. Retrieved fromwww.praat.org/
  3. Bolinger, D.
    (1958) A theory of pitch accent in English. Word, 14(2–3), 109–149. 10.1080/00437956.1958.11659660
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1958.11659660 [Google Scholar]
  4. Chen, Y., Guion-Anderson, S., & Xu, Y.
    (2012) Post-focus compression in second language Mandarin. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2012, 410–413.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Corder, S.
    (1981) Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. de Jong, K.
    (2004) Stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus in English: Patterns of variation in vowel duration. Journal of Phonetics, 32(4), 493–516. 10.1016/j.wocn.2004.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2004.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  7. Donaldson, B.
    (2012) Syntax and discourse in near-native French: Clefts and focus. Language Learning, 62(3), 902–930. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00701.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00701.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Fiedler, I., & Jannedy, S.
    (2013) Prosody of focus marking in Ewe. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 34(1), 1–46. 10.1515/jall‑2013‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jall-2013-0001 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gardner, M. K., Rothkopf, E. Z., Lapan, R., & Lafferty, T.
    (1987) The word frequency effect in lexical decision: Finding a frequency-based component. Memory & Cognition, 15(1), 24–28. 10.3758/BF03197709
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197709 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gussenhoven, C.
    (1983) Focus, mode and the nucleus. Journal of Linguistics, 19(2), 377–417. 10.1017/S0022226700007799
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700007799 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., & Westfall, P.
    (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal, 50(3), 346–363. doi:  10.1002/bimj.200810425
    https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425 [Google Scholar]
  12. House, A. S., & Fairbanks, G.
    (1953) The influence of consonant environment upon the secondary acoustical characteristics of vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25, 105–113. 10.1121/1.1906982
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1906982 [Google Scholar]
  13. Huss, V.
    (1978) English word stress in the post-nuclear position. Phonetica, 35(2), 86–105. doi:  10.1159/000259924
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000259924 [Google Scholar]
  14. Jun, S.-A.
    (1998) The Accentual Phrase in the Korean prosodic hierarchy. Phonology, 15, 189–226. doi:  10.1017/S0952675798003571
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675798003571 [Google Scholar]
  15. Jun, S.-A., & Oh, M.
    (2000) Acquisition of second language intonation. Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing Vol 4, 76–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kang, S., Ahn, H., & Hong, M.
    (2012) The acquisition of L2 English focus by Korean learners. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 37(1), 1–23. doi:  10.18855/lisoko.2012.37.1.001
    https://doi.org/10.18855/lisoko.2012.37.1.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhof, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B.
    (2017) lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. doi:  10.18637/jss.v082.i13
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ladd, D. R.
    (1984) English compound stress. InD. Gibbon & H. Richer (Eds.), Intonation, accent and rhythm (pp.253–266). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110863239.253
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863239.253 [Google Scholar]
  19. Lado, R.
    (1957) Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee, Y.
    (2009) The phonetic realization of contrastive focus and its neighbors in Korean and English: A cross-language study. MA thesis, Hannam University.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2012) Prosodic correlation between the focusing adverb ozik ‘only’ and focus/givenness in Korean. Journal of Speech Sciences, 2(2), 85–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2015) Prosodic focus within and across languages. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lee, Y., Wang, T., & Liberman, M.
    (2016) Production and perception of tone 3 focus in Mandarin Chinese. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1058), 1–13. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01058
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01058 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee, Y., & Xu, Y.
    (2010) Phonetic realization of contrastive focus in Korean. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2010, paper33, 1–4.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Liberman, M.
    (1975) The intonational system of English. PhD thesis, MIT.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Liu, J., Xu, Y., and Lee, Y.
    (2019) Post-focus compression is not automatically transferred from Korean to L2 English. Phonetics and Speech Sciences, 11, 15–21. 10.13064/KSSS.2019.11.2.015
    https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2019.11.2.015 [Google Scholar]
  27. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2020) A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved fromwww.r-project.org
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Selinker, L.
    (1972) Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10, 203–230. doi:  10.1515/iral.1972.10.1‑4.209
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209 [Google Scholar]
  29. Shin, J., & Speer, S. R.
    (2012) English lexical stress and spoken word recognition in Korean learners of English. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2012, 422–425.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Song, J. J.
    (2005) The Korean language: Structure, use and context. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Suomi, K., Toivanen, J., & Ylitalo, R.
    (2003) Durational and tonal correlates of accent in Finnish. Journal of Phonetics, 31(1), 113–138. doi:  10.1016/S0095‑4470(02)00074‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(02)00074-8 [Google Scholar]
  32. Swerts, M., & Zerbian, S.
    (2010) Prosodic transfer in Black South African English. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2010, paper98, 1–4.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Ueyama, M., & Jun, S.-A.
    (1998) Focus realization in Japanese English and Korean English intonation. Japanese and Korean Linguistics, 7, 629–645.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vallduví, E.
    (1990) The informational component. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Van Rossum, G.
    (1995) Python reference manual. Amsterdam: CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science).
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Wagner, M., & McCurdy, K.
    (2010) Poetic rhyme reflects cross-linguistic differences in information structure. Cognition, 117(2), 166–175. doi:  10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.007 [Google Scholar]
  37. Wang, T., Liu, J., Lee, Y., & Lee, Y.
    (2020) The interaction between tone and prosodic focus in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Linguistics, 21(2), 331–350. 10.1075/lali.00063.wan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00063.wan [Google Scholar]
  38. Williams, S., & Hammarberg, B.
    (1998) Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 295–333. doi:  10.1093/applin/19.3.295
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.3.295 [Google Scholar]
  39. Wu, W. L., & Chung, L.
    (2011) Post-focus compression in English-Cantonese bilingual speakers. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 148–151.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Xu, Y.
    (2011) Post-focus compression: Cross-linguistic distribution and historical origin. Proceedings of the The 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 152–155.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. (2013) ProsodyPro – A Tool for large-scale systematic prosody analysis. Proceedings of Tools and Resources for the Analysis of Speech Prosody, 7–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Xu, Y., Chen, S., & Wang, B.
    (2012) Prosodic focus with and without post-focus compression: A typological divide within the same language family?The Linguistic Review, 29(1), 131–147. doi:  10.1515/tlr‑2012‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2012-0006 [Google Scholar]
  43. Xu, Y., & Xu, C. X.
    (2005) Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation. Journal of Phonetics, 33(2), 159–197. 10.1016/j.wocn.2004.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2004.11.001 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20031.liu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.20031.liu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: perception; production; Korean learners of English; focus prosody
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