The perception of non-native phonological categories in adult-directed and infant-directed speech: An experimental study
Abstract
In the present study, we test whether adult listeners detect phonological contrasts faster and more accurately in non-native infant-directed speech (IDS) than in non-native adult-directed speech (ADS). 21 participants listened to pairs of speech signals and their task was to decide as quickly as possible whether the signals constitute the same or different words. Each pair of signals contained target vowels or consonants representing a certain category of contrast that was phonologically relevant in a given language but not in Polish, i.e., the native language of the participants of the listening test. The signals were presented in a random order, and each pair occurred in the material twice. Although we demonstrated significant acoustic-phonetic differences between the utterances realized in the IDS and ADS speaking styles, the listeners in our study were not significantly more accurate or faster in the identification of contrasts in either IDS or ADS stimuli.
Keywords
infant-directed speech; native phonological categories; non-native phonological categories; L2 perception
References
Adriaans, F., & Swingley, D. (2017). Prosodic Exaggeration within Infant-directed Speech: Consequences for Vowel Learnability. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 141(5), 3070–3078.
Best, C.T., McRoberts, G.W., & Goodell, E. (2001). Discrimination of Non-native Consonant Contrasts Varying in Perceptual Assimilation to the Listener’s Native Phonological System. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109(2), 775–794.
Best, C.T., & Tyler, M.D. (2007). Nonnative and Second-language Speech Perception: Commonalities and Complementarities. In: O.-S. Bohn, M.J. Munro (eds.), Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honor of James Emil Flege, vol. 1334. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Bradlow, A.R., & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual Adaptation to Non-native Speech. Cognition, 106(2), 707–729.
Boer, B. de, & Kuhl, P.K. (2003). Investigating the Role of Infant-directed Speech with a Computer Model. Acoustic Research Letters Online, 4, 129–134.
Brent, M.R., & Siskind, J.M. (2001). The Role of Exposure to Isolated Words in Early Vocabulary Development. Cognition, 81, B33–B44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00122-6.
Cristià, A. (2010). Phonetic Enhancement of Sibilants in Infant-directed Speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(1), 424–434.
Cristià, A. (2013). Input to Language: The Phonetics and Perception of Infant-directed Speech. Language and Linguistics Compass, 7, 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12015.
Cristià, A., & Seidl, A. (2014). The Hyperarticulation Hypothesis of Infant-directed Speech. Journal of Child Language, 41, 913–934. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000912000669.
Czoska, A., Klessa, K., Karpiński, M. (2015). Polish Infant Directed vs. Adult Directed Speech: Selected Acoustic-Phonetic Differences. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow, UK.
Cooke, M., Garcia Lecumberri, M.L., & Barker, J. (2008). The Foreign Language Cocktail Party Problem: Energetic and Informational Masking Effects in Non-native Speech Perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(1), 414–427.
Cooper, R.P., Abraham, J., Berman, S., & Staska, M. (1997). The Development of Infants’ Preference for Motherese. Infant Behavioral Development, 20, 477–488.
Eaves, B.S., Jr., Feldman, N.H., Griffiths, T.L., & Shafto, P. (2016). Infant-directed Speech Is Consistent with Teaching. Psychological Review, 123, 758–771. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000031.
Fernald, A., & Simon, T. (1984). Expanded Intonation Contours in Mothers’ Speech to Newborns. Developmental Psychology, 20(1), Jan 1984, 104–113.
Fernald, A., Taeschner, T., Dunn, J., Papoušek, M., Boysson-Bardies, B.D., & Fukui, I. (1989). A Cross-language Study of Prosodic Modifications in Mothers’ and Fathers’ Speech to Preverbal Infants. Journal of Child Language, 16(3), 477–501.
Flege, J.E., Bohn, O.S., & Jang, S. (1997). Effects of Experience on Non-native Speakers’ Production and Perception of English Vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 25(4), 437–470.
IBM Corp. Released 2019. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
Jamieson, D.G., & Morosan, D.E. (1986). Training Non-native Speech Contrasts in Adults: Acquisition of the English /ð/ – /θ/ Contrast by Francophones. Perception & Psychophysics, 40(4), 205–215.
Jusczyk, P.W., Houston, D.M., & Newsome, M. (1999). The Beginnings of Word Segmentation in English-learning Infants. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 159–207.
Kilman, L., Zekveld, A., Hällgren, M., & Rönnberg, J. (2015). Native and Non-native Speech Perception by Hearing-impaired Listeners in Noise-and Speech Maskers. Trends in Hearing, (19). https://doi.org/10.1177/2331216515579127.
Kitamura, C., Guellaï, B., & Kim, J. (2014). Motherese by Eye and Ear: Infants Perceive Visual Prosody in Point-line Displays of Talking Heads. PLOS ONE, 9(10), e111467. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111467.
Klessa, K., Karpiński, M., & Czoska, A. (2015). Design, Structure, and Preliminary Analyses of a Speech Corpus of Infant Directed Speech (IDS) and Adult Directed Speech (ADS). Presented at 48th Annual Meeting of Societas Linguistica Europea (SLE). Leiden, The Netherlands.
Kuhl, P.K., et al. (1997). Cross-language Analysis of Phonetic Units in Language Addressed to Infants. Science, 277(5326), 684–686.
Kuhl, P.K., Tsao, F.M., & Liu, H.M. (2003). Foreign-language Experience in Infancy: Effects of Short Term Exposure and Social Interaction on Phonetic Learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(15), 9096–9101.
Lecumberri, M.L.G., Cooke, M., & Cutler, A. (2010). Non-native Speech Perception in Adverse Conditions: A Review. Speech Communication, 52(11–12), 864–886.
Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: An Open-source, Graphical Experiment Builder for the Social Sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7.
Mauch, M., & Dixon, S. (2014). pYIN: A Fundamental Frequency Estimator Using Probabilistic Threshold Distributions. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 659–663.
Narayan, C.R., & McDermott, L.C. (2016). Speech Rate and Pitch Characteristics of Infant-directed Speech: Longitudinal and Cross-linguistic Observations. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139(3), 1272–1281.
Pajak, B., & Levy, R. (2014). The Role of Abstraction in Non-native Speech Perception. Journal of Phonetics, 46, 147–160.
Polka, L. (1995). Linguistic Influences in Adult Perception of Non‐native Vowel Contrasts. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(2), 1286–1296.
Saito, K., & Poeteren, K. van (2012). Pronunciation-specific Adjustment Strategies for Intelligibility in L2 Teacher Talk: Results and Implications of a Questionnaire Study. Language Awareness, 21(4), 369–385.
Seery, A.M., Vogel-Farley, V., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Nelson, C.A. (2013). Atypical Lateralization of ERP Response to Native and Non-native Speech in Infants at Risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 10–24.
Thiessen, E.D., Hill, E.A., & Saffran, J.R. (2005). Infant-directed Speech Facilitates Word Segmentation. Infancy, 7(1), 53–71. DOI: 10.1207/s15327078in0701_5.
Trainor, L.J., & Desjardins, R.N. (2002). Pitch Characteristics of Infant-directed Speech Affect Infants’ Ability to Discriminate Vowels. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 335. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196290.
Uther, M., Knoll, M.A., & Burnham, D. (2007). Do You Speak E-NG-LI-SH? A Comparison of Foreigner- and Infant-directed Speech. Speech Communication, 49(1), 2–7.
Zangl, R., & Mills, D.L. (2007). Increased Brain Activity to Infant-directed Speech in 6- and 13-month-old Infants. Infancy, 11, 31–62.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Owners of the submitted texts grant the Reader the right to use the pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY SA). The user can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.