Phonetics and Speech Sciences (말소리와 음성과학)

Korean Society of Speech Sciences (한국음성학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Acoustic analysis of English lexical stress produced by Korean, Japanese and Taiwanese-Chinese speakers

  • Received : 2018.02.02
  • Accepted : 2018.03.28
  • Published : 2018.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Stressed vowels in English are usually produced using longer duration, higher pitch, and greater intensity than unstressed vowels. However, many English as a foreign language (EFL) learners have difficulty producing English lexical stress because their mother tongues do not have such features. In order to investigate if certain non-native English speakers (Korean, Japanese, and Taiwanese-Chinese native speakers) are able to produce English lexical stress in a native-like manner, speech samples were extracted from the L2 learners' corpus known as AESOP (the Asian English Speech cOrpus Project). Sixteen disyllabic words were analyzed in terms of the ratio of duration, pitch, and intensity. The results demonstrate that non-native English speakers are able to produce English stress in a similar way to native English speakers, and all speakers (both native and non-native) show a tendency to use duration as the strongest cue in producing stress. The results also show that the duration ratio of native English speakers was significantly higher than that of non-native speakers, indicating that native speakers produce a bigger difference in duration between stressed and unstressed vowels.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson-Hsieh, J., Johnson, R., & Koehler, K. (1992). The relationship between native speaker judgments of nonnative pronunciation and deviance in segmentals, prosody, and syllable structure. Language Learning, 42(4), 529-555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1992.tb01043.x
  2. Archibald, J. (1992). Transfer of L1 parameter settings: Some empirical evidence from polish metrics. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 37(3), 301-340.
  3. Beckman, M. (1982). Segment duration and the 'mora' in Japanese. Phonetica, 39(2-3), 113-135. https://doi.org/10.1159/000261655
  4. Beckman, M. (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Dordrecht: Walter de Gruyter (Vol. 7).
  5. Beckman, M., & Pierrehumbert, J. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255-309.
  6. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2016). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Version 6.0.21. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/ on January 16, 2018.
  7. Bolinger, D. (1958). A theory of pitch accent in English. Word, 14(2-3), 109-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1958.11659660
  8. Cheng, R. (1985). A comparison of Taiwanese, Taiwan Mandarin, and Peking Mandarin. Language, 352-377.
  9. Elder, C., Golombek, P. Nguyen, T., & Ingram, J. (2005). Vietnamese acquisition of English word stress. TESOL Quarterly, 39(2), 309-319.
  10. Flege, J., & Bohn, O. (1989). An instrumental study of vowel reduction and stress placement in Spanish-accented English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 35-62.
  11. Fokes, J., & Bond, Z. (1989). The vowels of stressed and unstressed syllables in nonnative English. Language Learning, 39(3), 341-373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1989.tb00596.x
  12. Fry, D. (1955). Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27(4), 765-768. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908022
  13. Guion, S. (2005). Knowledge of English word stress patterns in early and late Korean-English bilinguals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(4), 503-533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050230
  14. Hong, S. (2012). A phonetic study on the production and training of English lexical stress by Korean speakers. The Journal of Modern British & American Language & Literature, 30(4), 99-122.
  15. Kang, O. (2010). Relative salience of suprasegmental features on judgments of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness. System, 38(2), 301-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.01.005
  16. Kim, H., & Han, J. (1998). Vowel length in modern Korean: An acoustic analysis. In B. Park, & J. Yoon (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Korean Linguistics (pp. 412-418). Seoul: Hanshin.
  17. Kondo, M. (2009). Is acquisition of L2 phonemes difficult? Production of English stress by Japanese speakers. Proceedings of the 10th Generative approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) (pp. 105-112). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings. Project, 2009.
  18. Kondo, M., Tsubaki, H., & Sagisaka, Y. (2015). Segmental variation of Japanese speakers' English: Analysis of "the North Wind and the Sun" in AESOP Corpus (< Feature Articles> Corpus-Based Data-Driven Speech Research in Asia). Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan, 19(1), 3-17.
  19. Kwon, H. (2007). A phonetic analysis of advanced Korean EFL Learners' English reduced vowels. Korean Journal of English Language and Literature, 7(4), 547-564.
  20. Lee, B., Guion, S., & Harada, T. (2006). Acoustic analysis of the production of unstressed English vowels by early and late Korean and Japanese bilinguals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(3), 487-513. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060207
  21. Liu, S., & Samuel, A. (2004). Perception of Mandarin lexical tones when F0 information is neutralized. Language and Speech, 47(2), 109-138. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309040470020101
  22. McAllister, R., Flege, J., & Piske, T. (2002). The influence of L1 on the acquisition of Swedish quantity by native speakers of Spanish, English and Estonian. Journal of Phonetics, 30(2), 229-258. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2002.0174
  23. Moore, C., & Jongman, A. (1997). Speaker normalization in the perception of Mandarin Chinese tones. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102(3), 1864-1877. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.420092
  24. Na, T. (2013). Comparison of acoustic characteristics of English lexical stress between Korean and Mandarin speakers. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Yonsei University. Retrieved from RISS on January 20, 2018.
  25. Ou, S. (2010). Taiwanese EFL learners. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 36(1), 1-23.
  26. Peterson, G., & Lehiste, I. (1960). Duration of syllable nuclei in English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32(6), 693-703. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908183
  27. Port, R., Dalby, J., & O'Dell, M. (1987). Evidence for mora timing in Japanese. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 81(5), 1574-1585. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.394510
  28. Saha, S., & Mandal, S. (2018). Phonetic realization of English lexical stress by native (L1) Bengali speakers compared to native (L1) English speakers. Computer Speech & Language, 47, 1-15.
  29. Sluijter, A., & Van Heuven, V. (1996). Spectral balance as an acoustic correlate of linguistic stress. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100(4), 2471-2485. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.417955
  30. Tono, Y., Kawaguchi, Y., & Minegishi, M. (2012). Developmental and crosslinguistic perspectives in learner corpus research (Vol. 4). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
  31. Tsujimura, N. (1996). An introduction to Japanese linguistics. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
  32. Tsushima, T. (2015). A case study: How do Japanese learners of English learn to use acoustic cues to differentiate stressed and unstressed syllables in pronunciation training?. The Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences, 137, 33-57.
  33. Whalen, D., & Xu, Y. (1992). Information for Mandarin tones in the amplitude contour and in brief segments. Phonetica, 49(1), 25-47. https://doi.org/10.1159/000261901
  34. Zhang, Y., Nissen, S., & Francis, A. (2008). Acoustic characteristics of English lexical stress produced by native Mandarin speakers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(6), 4498-4513. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2902165
  35. Zuraiq, W., & Sereno, J. (2007). English lexical stress cues in native English and non-native Arabic speakers. Ratio, 1(2), 829-832.

Cited by

  1. Pitch trajectories of English vowels produced by American men, women, and children vol.10, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2018.10.4.031