Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:59:44.579Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acquisition of Phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

Björn Hammarberg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is quite evident that the study of phonological issues within second language acquisition [SLA] research has been vitalized in recent years and is attracting wider interest today than it did a decade ago. This can be seen in the major journals in the field, and also in the fact that compensive anthologies solely devoted to the phonological domain of SLA research have begun to appear (Ioup and Weinberger 1987, James and Leather 1987). Since this review is intended to concentrate on works from the last few years (mostly from 1986 on), it is worth pointing out that this period does not in itself mark a radical shift or reorientation towards new research issues. Rather, it is mainly a continuation of topics that originated a few years back, and a consolidation of a field of research which is gradually becoming more established.

Type
Process and product in sla
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 9 , March 1988 , pp. 23 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Unannotated Bibliography

Abuhamdia, Z. A. 1987. Neurobiological foundations for foreign language. International review of applied linguistics. 25. 3. 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altenberg, E. P. and Vago, R. M.. 1987. Theoretical implications of an error analysis of second language phonology production. In Ioup, G. and Weinberger, S. H. (eds.) Interlanguage phonolory: The acquisition of a second language sound system. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House, 148–164.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. I.. 1987. The markedness differencial hypothesis and syllable structure difficulty. In Ioup, G. and Weinberger, S. H. (eds.) Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. 279–291.Google Scholar
Benson, B. 1986. The mardedness differential hypothesis: Implications for Vietnamese speakers of English. In Eckman, F. R., Moravcsik, E. A., and Writh, J. R. (eds.) Markedness. New York: Plenum press. 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broselow, E., Hurtig, R. R., and Ringen, C.. 1987. The perception of second language prosody.In Ioup, G. and Weinberger, S. H. (eds.) Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. 350–361.Google Scholar
de Bot, K.. 1986. The transfer of intonation and the missing data base. In Kellerman, E. and Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.) 1986. Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New York: Peergamon. 110–119.Google Scholar
Dickerson, L.. 1974. Internal and external patterning os phonological variability in the speech of Japanese learners of English: Toward a theory of language acquisition. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois. Ph. D. diss.Google Scholar
Dickerson, W.. 1976. The psycholinguistic unity of language learning and language change. Language learning. 26. 2. 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickerson, W.. 1987. Explicit rules and the developing interlanguage phonology. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns is second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 121–140.Google Scholar
Donegan, P. J. and Stampe, D.. 1979. The study of natural phonology. In Dinnsen, D. A. (ed.) Current approaches or phonological theory. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 126–173.Google Scholar
Dziubalska, K. 1986. Cyclicity and phonostylistic interference. Papers and studies in contrastive linguistics. 21. 87–92.Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, K.. 1987b. Phonological rule typology and second language acquisition. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 193–205.Google Scholar
Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, K.. 1987c. How do poles perform English “tips of the slung”? Papers and studies in contrastive linguistics. 22. 179–186.Google Scholar
Eckman, F. R.. 1977. Markedness and the constrastive analysis hypothesis. Language learning. 27. 2. 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. R.. 1981. On the naturalness of interlanguage phonological rules. Language learning. 31. 1. 195–216.Google Scholar
Eckman, F. R.. 1987. The reduction of word-final consonant cluster in interlanguage. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris publications. 143–162.Google Scholar
Eckman, F. R., Moravcsik, E. A., and Wirth, J. R. (eds.) Markedness. New York: Plenum press.Google Scholar
Eliasson, S.. 1982. Transfer as ecidence for phonological solutions. Studia Anglica Poznaniensia. 14. 185–196.Google Scholar
Eckman, F. R. (ed.) 1984. Theoretical issues in contrastice phonology. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.Google Scholar
Faerch, C. and Kasper, G.. 1986. Cognitive dimensions of language transfer. In Kellerman, E. and Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.) Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New york: Pergamon. 49–65.Google Scholar
Fellbaum, M. L. 1986. Markedness and allophomic rules. In Eckman, F. R., Moravcsik, E. A., and Writh, J. R. (eds.) Markedness. New York: Plenum Press. 291–308.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. 1987c. The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics. 15. 1. 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. and Madden, C. G. (eds.) 1985. Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B. 1985. Learnability and learner strategies in second language syntax and phonology. In Hyltenstam, K. and Pienemann, M. (eds.) Modelling and assessing second language acquisition. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. 153–175.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B.. Forthcoming. Variation and development in L2 phonology: A natural path of strategic choice? In Nicholas, H. and Pieneman, M. (eds.) Explaining interlanguage development. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual matters. [Originally presented at the conference on Explaining Interlanguage Development. Melbourne. 08 1987.].Google Scholar
Hieke, A. E.. 1984. Linking as a marker of fluent speech. Language and Speech. 27. 4. 343–354.Google Scholar
Hieke, A. E. 1987a. Absorption and fluency in native and non-native casual English speech. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 41–58.Google Scholar
Hieke, A. E. 1987b. the resolution of dynamic speech in L2 listening. Language learning. 37. 1. 123–140.Google Scholar
Ioup, G. and Tansomboon, A.. 1987. The acquisition of tone: A maturational perspective. In Ioup, G. and Weinberger, S. H. (eds.) Interlanguage phonology: The acquisition of a second language sound system. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. 333–349.Google Scholar
James, A.. 1986. Suprasegmental phonology and segmental form. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
James, A.. 1987a. The acquisition of phonological representation: A modular approach. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 225–249.ssGoogle Scholar
James, A.. 1987b. Prosodic structure in phonological acquisition. Second language research. 3. 2. 117–140.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. and Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.) 1986. Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D.. 1981. Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Linell, P.. 1979. Psychological reality in phonology: A theoretical study. Cambridge: Cambriger University press.Google Scholar
Major, R. C.. 1986a. The Ontogeny Model: Evidence from L2 acquisition of Spanish Jr. Language learning. 36. 4. 435–504.Google Scholar
Major, R. C.. 1986b. Paragoge and degree of foreign accent in Brazilian English. Second language research. 2. 1. 53–71.Google Scholar
Major, R. C.. 1987a. Foreign accent: Recent research and theory. Internationsl review of applied liguistics. 25. 3. 185–202.Google Scholar
Meyer, J.. 1987. Contrastive phonology: Particle, wave, field. Internationsl review of applied linguistics. 25. 3. 213–219.Google Scholar
Pennington, M. C. and Richards, J. C.. 1986. Pronunciation revisited. TESOL quarterly 20. 2. 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, N. J.. 1987. Morphophomemic variations in clusters in Japanese English. Language learning. 37. 2. 247–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, B.. 1986. A comparative study of children‘s and adults’ acquisition of tone accents in Swedish. Language learning. 36. 2. 185–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R. and Ford, A.. 1987. Interphonology and phonological theory. In James, A. and Leather, J. (eds.) Sound patterns in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 163–172.Google Scholar
Tropf, H. S.. 1983. Variation in der phonologie des ungesteuerten Zweitspracherwerbs. Band 1: Theorie und Methode. B and 2: Analyse der Daten. [Variation in teh phonology of untutored second language acquisition. Vol. 1: Theory and method. Vol. 2: Analysis of the data] Heidelberg: University of Heidelberg. Ph.D.diss.Google Scholar
Wenk, B.. 1986. Crosslinguistic influence in second language phonology: Speech rhythms. In Kellerman, E. and Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.) Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon.120–133.Google Scholar