Tilburg University
Learning L2 Rhythm
van Maastricht, Lieke; Krahmer, Emiel; Swerts, Marc; Prieto, Pilar
Publication date:
2016
Document Version
Peer reviewed version
Link to publication in Tilburg University Research Portal
Citation for published version (APA):
van Maastricht, L., Krahmer, E., Swerts, M., & Prieto, P. (2016). Learning L2 Rhythm: does the direction of acquisition matter?. Poster session presented at Speech Prosody 2016, Boston, United States.
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal
Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Results
Lengthening in % of baseline condition
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Language Group SLD A1 SLD A2 SLD B1 SLD B2 SLD C1 NL L1 DLS A1 DLS A2 DLS B1 DLS B2 DLS C1 DLS C2 L1 SP 138 148 148 145 143 136 134 164 151 164 155 148 153 111 117 121 119 115 117 113 143 138 134 136 127 134 145 138 154 161 144 146 139 131 135 145 135 129 141 148 148 168 149 164 156 152 140 137 144 133 134 135
ip final IP final stressed & accented stressed & nuclear accented
This research was supported by two grants to the first author: one of the Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds (40005750/HEV/ILE) and
Background
Markedness Differential Hypothesis
(Eckman, 1977, 2008)
“the areas of the target language that differ from the L1 and are more marked than the L1 will be difficult for L2 learners.”
Markedness
(Eckman, 1977 : 320-321)
“A phenomenon is more typologically marked if the presence of this phenomenon in a language implies the presence of another phenomenon; but the
presence of the latter does not imply the presence of the former.” 75 GH PDPD YDQ QDGLQH S NRPW XLW PDODJD G @ P A P D I A Q D G L Q @ N O P W œ\ W P A O D [ D G@ PA PD IA QD GL Q@ NOP Wœ\W PA OD [D
&9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9& &99& &9 &9 &9
QV VD QV QV QV QD QV VD QV QD QV QV QI QI QI QI QI QI LI QI QI QI QI LSI 7LPH V F0 +] F0 +]
1) INTRODUCTION
Syllable-timed languages Stress-timed languages2,3
ga
La ma dre de Su sa na es de Má la
ga
De ma ma van Su sa na komt uit Má la
2 Abercrombie (1967)
3 Pike (1945)
Research Question
Does the direction of learning affect the acquisition of final and accentual lengthening by Dutch
learners of Spanish (DLS) and Spanish learners of Dutch (SLD)?
Spanish Dutch
“syllable-timed” “stress-timed”
simple syllables (CV) complex syllables
(up to 6 Cs in 1 syllable) < final lengthening > final lengthening
< accentual lengthening > accentual lengthening
Rhythm & Markedness
Stress-timed is more marked than syllable-timed
(e.g., Ordin & Polyanskaya, 2015; Payne, Post, Prieto, Vanrell & L. Astruc, 2012)
Lengthening effects of any kind imply that there is a lower baseline.
Dutch is more marked than Spanish, due to its
complex syllable structure and lengthening effects.
Hypothesis
Rhythmic features of Dutch are more difficult to acquire for Spanish learners than the rhythmic feature of Spanish are for Dutch learners.
Focus on: accentual and final lengthening
Learning L2 Rhythm: Does the direction of acquisition matter?
Lieke van Maastricht
1, Emiel Krahmer
1, Marc Swerts
1& Pilar Prieto
21 Tilburg center for Cognition and Communication, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
2 ICREA, Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Catalunya
3 Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
l.j.vanmaastricht@uvt.nl
Method
Participants
5 participants per language group:
L1 Dutch, DLS with varying proficiency: A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2 L1 Spanish, SLD with varying proficiency: A1, A2, B1, B2, C1
Materials
15 sentences with comparable type and number of syllables and prosodic frases for both languages.
(Prieto, Vanrell, Astruc, Payne & Post, 2012; Nazzi, Bertoncini & Mehler, 1998)
Procedure
participants were asked to read the sentences aloud, repeating those that were not fluent.
Prosodic coding (Prieto et al., 2012)
Statistical analysis
Generalized Linear Mixed Effects model
Fixed factors: speaker group, lengthening level (either accentual or final) Random factor: speaker
Target variable: syllable duration, in percentage of baseline condition (Li & Post, 2014)
Conclusion
H: Rhythmic features of Dutch are more difficult to
acquire for Spanish learners than Spanish is for Dutch learners.
Both groups approach native values quite well.
Statistically, there are no differences were found that can determine whether DLS or SLD advance more towards their target.
The hypothesis cannot be rejected based on the results.
