One-to-multiple vowel mapping in the perception

of Dutch learners of Spanish

Paola EscuderoMcGill University and University of Utrecht

Paul BoersmaUniversity of Amsterdam

Dag van de Fonetiek Utrecht, December 20, 2001

Single-Category Assimilation (SCA)

Problem:– poor category differentiation– no lexical contrast no produced contrast

General solution: category split

L2English

L1Dutch

//

/æ///

L2S.English

L1Spanish

/i/

/I//i/

L2English

L1Japanese

/l/

/ /̈/R/

Two-Category Assimilation (TCA)

Very good category differentiation Problem:

boundary mismatch confusion General solution: boundary shift

L2English

L1Dutch

/ph/

/b8/ /p/

/b/

L2Spanish

L1Dutch

/u/

/o/

/u/

//

Multiple-Category Assimilation (MCA)

Category differentiation is “too good” Problems:

extra lexical contrasts, boundary mismatch, SCA Possible solutions?: category split/merger/loss,

boundary shift

L2Spanish

L1Dutch

/i/

/e/

/i//I///

L2English

L1Polish

/s/

/S/

/s//þ//§/

Preliminary hypothesis

1) MCA exists and it is problematic.

L2Spanish

L1Dutch

/i/

/e/

/i//I///

L2Spanish

L1Dutch

/u/

/o/

/u/

//

2) Therefore, Dutch learners will have poorer front than back vowel categorisation in Spanish.

Subjects Dutch learners of Spanish 38 (11+18+9) Bilingual Dutch-Spanish 3

Dutch-only 11

Spanish-only 44

Click the Spanish vowel that you heard

I

E

A

O

U

Task: “vowels from a Spanish text”125 Spanish target stimuli, 55 Spanish fillers

Beginning Dutch learners of Spanish

0 5 10 15 20 250

5

10

15

20

25

e i errors

1

1

1

11

1

1 1

1

11

Intermediate Dutch learners of Spanish

0 5 10 15 20 250

5

10

15

20

25

e i errors

2

2

22

2 22

2

2

2

2

22

22

22

2

Advanced Dutch learners of Spanish

0 5 10 15 20 250

5

10

15

20

25

e i errors

33

33

333

3

3

Dutch/Spanish bilinguals

0 5 10 15 20 250

5

10

15

20

25

e i errors

4

4

4

Spanish-only listeners

0 5 10 15 20 250

5

10

15

20

25

e i errors

5

5

5

5

55 5

5

5

5 5

5 5

5

5

5 5

5

5

5555

5

5 5

555

5

5

5

5

5

5

55

5

5

5555

5

We have observed:

Dutch learners of Spanish perform poorer on front than on back vowels. Our prediction is borne out.

Learners have better performance according to their experience.

This hints at the existence of MCA, its problematic nature, and its reduction during L2 development.

Is it really MCA that causes the problem with front vowels?

So that we could answer this question, our listening experiment had three separate tasks.

Task 1: Does MCA exist?

Click the Dutch vowel that you heard

h IE k h EE k h I k h E k

h UU k h EU k h U k h AA k

h OE k h OO k h O k h A k

Task 1: “vowels from a Dutch text”125 Spanish target stimuli, 55 Dutch decoys

Dutch labelling task (thinking it’s Dutch)

stim :

/i/

/e/

DUTresp :

i

I

BEGresp :

i

I

INTresp :

i

I

ADVresp :

i

I

BILresp :

i

I

Does MCA exist?

Yes . Learners use all three L1 categories when listening to Spanish thinking that it is Dutch.

Task 2: Do learners do anything about MCA?

We propose they reduce MCA(Assumption: people have language-dependent

perception modes)

Hypothesis: learners show less MCA in their L2 perception mode than in their L1 perception mode.

A measure of MCA:the amount of use of // in an L1 labelling

task. A measure of MCA reduction:

reduction of // use betweena Dutch and a Spanish perception mode.

Click the Dutch vowel that you heard

h IE k h EE k h I k h E k

h UU k h EU k h U k h AA k

h OE k h OO k h O k h A k

Task 2: “vowels from a Spanish text”125 Spanish target stimuli, 55 Spanish fillers

Dutch-only listeners

MCA-reductionis small ornon-existent

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Dutch" moderesp :

i

I

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Spanish" moderesp :

i

I

Beginning Dutch learners of Spanish

MCA-reductionis small ornon-existent

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Dutch" moderesp :

i

I

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Spanish" moderesp :

i

I

Intermediate Dutch learners of Spanish

MCA-reductionis intermediate

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Dutch" moderesp :

i

I

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Spanish" moderesp :

i

I

Advanced Dutch learners of Spanish

MCA-reductionis large

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Dutch" moderesp :

i

I

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Spanish" moderesp :

i

I

Dutch/Spanish bilinguals

MCA-reductionis large

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Dutch" moderesp :

i

I

stim :

/i/

/e/

"Spanish" moderesp :

i

I

Do learners do anything about MCA?

Yes . They reduce the usage of // between perception modes.

Task 3: Do learners have inaccurate L2 front vowel categorisation?

A measure of vowel categorisation accuracy:boundary location in an L2 labelling task.

Click the Spanish vowel that you heard

I

E

A

O

U

Task 3: “vowels from a Spanish text”125 Spanish target stimuli, 55 Spanish fillers

Spanish labelling task

stim :

/i/

/e/

BEGresp :

i

e

INTresp :

i

e

ADVresp :

i

e

BILresp :

i

e

SPAresp :

i

e

Do learners have inaccurate L2 front vowel categorisation?

Yes . Their boundary between /e/ and // is inappropriate for Spanish.

Whole experiment: Is it MCA that causes the front vowel problems for

Dutch learners of Spanish?

MCA reduction correlates strongly with categorisation accuracy

r = 0.62

p < 0.00002

95% = 0.37...0.78

-5 0 5 100

5

10

15

20

L1 /I/-reduction (Task1 minus Task2)

1

1 1

11

1

1

1

1

11

2

2

2

22

2

22

2

2

22

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

Our interpretationof this high correlation:

It reflects a causal relationship:

// reduction (MCA solving) determines the degree of

e-i accuracy for the learners

Conclusion1) MCA exists: learners use 3 categories where the target language

has 2.

2) MCA is problematic: it leads to inaccurate L2 categorisation.

3) Language-dependent perception modes exist: people do different things depending on the language that they hear (or think they hear).

4) Learners change: with experience, MCA decreases and categorisation accuracy increases.

5) Learners solve the MCA problem: we identified one strategy for solving MCA, namely they reduce the use of the extra category.

Dank u voor uw aandacht!¡Gracias por su atención!

Thank you for your attention!