Lexical and Prosodic Pitch Modifications in Cantonese Infant-directed Speech

The functions of acoustic-phonetic modifications in infant-directed speech (IDS) remain a question: do they specifically serve to facilitate language learning via enhanced phonemic contrasts (the hyperarticulation hypothesis) or primarily to improve communication via prosodic exaggeration (the prosodic hypothesis)? The study of lexical tones provides a unique opportunity to shed light on this, as lexical tones are phonemically contrastive, yet their primary cue, pitch, is also a prosodic cue. This study investigated Cantonese IDS and found increased intra-talker variation of lexical tones, which more likely posed a challenge to rather than facilitated phonetic learning. Although tonal space was expanded which could facilitate phonetic learning, its expansion was a function of overall intonational modifications. Similar findings were observed in speech to pets who should not benefit from larger phonemic distinction. We conclude that lexical-tone adjustments in IDS mainly serve to broadly enhance communication rather than specifically increase phonemic contrast for learners.

Hand Gestures Facilitate the Acquisition of Novel Phonemic Contrasts When They Appropriately Mimic Target Phonetic Features

Purpose Research has shown that observing hand gestures mimicking pitch movements or rhythmic patterns can improve the learning of second language (L2) suprasegmental features. However, less is known about the effects of hand gestures on the learning of novel phonemic contrasts. This study examines (a) whether hand gestures mimicking phonetic features can boost L2 segment learning by naive learners and (b) whether a mismatch between the hand gesture form and the target phonetic feature influences the learning effect. Method Fifty Catalan native speakers undertook a short multimodal training session on two types of Mandarin Chinese consonants (plosives and affricates) in either of two conditions: Gesture and No Gesture. In the Gesture condition, a fist-to-open-hand gesture was used to mimic air burst, while the No Gesture condition included no such use of gestures. Crucially, while the hand gesture appropriately mimicked the air burst produced in plosives, this was not the case for affricates. Before and after training, participants were tested on two tasks, namely, the identification task and the imitation task. Participants' speech output was rated by five Chinese native speakers. Results The perception results showed that training with or without gestures yielded similar degrees of improvement for the identification of aspiration contrasts. By contrast, the production results showed that, while training without gestures did not help improve L2 pronunciation, training with gestures improved pronunciation, but only when the given gestures appropriately mimicked the phonetic properties they represented. Conclusions Results revealed that the efficacy of observing hand gestures on the learning of nonnative phonemes depends on the appropriateness of the form of those gestures relative to the target phonetic features. That is, hand gestures seem to be more useful when they appropriately mimic phonetic features. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13105442

When You CAN See the Difference: The Phonetic Basis of Sonority in American Sign Language

Spoken and signed languages (SL) deliver perceptual cues which exhibit various degrees of perceptual validity during categorization: In spoken languages, listeners develop perceptual biases when integrating multiple acoustic dimensions during auditory categorization (Holt & Lotto, 2006). This leads us to expect differential perceptual validity for dynamic gestural units HANDSHAPE, MOVEMENT, ORIENTATION, and LOCATION produced by manual articulators in SLs. In this study, we use a closed-set sentence discrimination task developed by Bochner et al. (2011) to evaluate the perceptual saliency of the gestural components of signs in American Sign Language (ASL) for naïve signers and deaf L2 learners of ASL proficient in another SL. Our goal is to gauge which of these features are likely to present the phonetic basis of sonority in sign modality and relay phonemic contrasts perceptible for even first-time signers.25 deaf L2 ASL signers and 28 hearing English speakers with no experience in any SL participated in this study. Results reveal that phonemic contrasts based on HANDSHAPE presented an area of maximum difficulty in phonological discrimination for sign-naïve participants. For all participants, contrasts based on ORIENTATION and LOCATION and involving larger scale articulators, were associated with robust categorical discrimination.

The contribution of orthographic input, phonological skills, and rise time discrimination to the learning of non-native phonemic contrasts

Although learning second language phonology is a difficult task, orthographic input may support the learning of difficult sound contrasts through a process known as orthographic facilitation. We extended this research by examining the effects of orthographic input together with individual differences in three different phonological learning processes, namely, the production of, perception of, and memorization of words containing three Marathi phonemic contrasts (i.e., [k-kh], [], and []) by native English speakers. Moreover, because the [] and [] contrasts were particularly challenging in previous auditory training studies (e.g., Polka, 1991), we used cross-modal training in order to enhance learning by pairing auditory perception tasks with visual orthographic information, the amplification of relevant acoustic cues, and proprioceptive descriptions to the articulation of target phonemes. Results showed significant learning from the pre- to the posttest across tasks and contrasts, supporting the effectiveness of cross-modal training. Furthermore, incongruent orthographic input could inhibit perception, and orthographic input generally supported memory for word pronunciations. Moreover, individual differences regarding phonological skills and nonspeech auditory discrimination predicted participants’ success in different phonological learning processes. These results provide a detailed picture of the complexity between different aspects of second language phonological learning and cross-modal training.

Nonesuch phonemes in loanwords

Loanwords may or may not affect the phonological system of a language. Much of the loanword literature has focused on the adaptation of “foreign” contrasts to native systems; however, there are certain cases where languages appear to have borrowed new phonemes. We argue that loanwords alone cannot introduce a new phoneme into a language unless there are special circumstances. We examine three case studies of apparently borrowed “unusual” phonemic contrasts: Swiss German initial geminates, Bengali retroflex stops, and English voiced fricatives. In each case, we find that rather than the loanwords introducing brand-new phonemes, an existing allophonic alternation has become phonemic due to a large influx of loanwords. Thus, the phonology rather than the phonetics alone – marked or otherwise – dominates the absorption of loans.