Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:47:53.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of the age of second language learning on the duration of first and second language sentences: The role of suppression

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2004

IAN R. A. MACKAY  and
JAMES E. FLEGE
IAN R. A. MACKAY
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
JAMES E. FLEGE
Affiliation:
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The primary aim of this study was to account for the finding that late bilinguals produce longer English sentences than early bilinguals. In Experiment 1, Italians who immigrated to Canada either between the age of 2–13 years (“early bilinguals”) or 15–28 years (“late bilinguals”) repeated matched English and Italian sentences following an aural model. The early bilinguals produced shorter English than Italian sentences, whereas the late bilinguals showed the opposite pattern. The same countervailing pattern was evident in Experiment 2, where bilinguals shortened sentences by 20% when instructed to repeat sentences as rapidly as possible. Subgroups of bilinguals who reported using Italian often M=46% Italian use) but not seldom (M=8%) were found to have produced significantly longer English sentences than native English (NE) speakers did. The results were interpreted to mean that the late bilinguals produced longer English sentences than the early bilinguals because they needed to expend more resources to suppress their Italian subsystem than the early bilinguals. The perceptual effect of sentence duration was evaluated in Experiment 3, where pairs of English sentences differing in duration were presented to NE-speaking listeners for foreign accent ratings. A 10% shortening caused sentences spoken by late bilinguals to sound less foreign accented but it caused sentences spoken by early bilinguals to sound more foreign accented.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , June 2004 , pp. 373 - 396
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

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

Anderson–Hsieh, & Koehler K. 1988. The effect of foreign accent and speaking rate on native speaker comprehension. Language Learning, 38, 561– 614.Google Scholar
Bradlow A., & Bent T. 2002. The clear speech effect for nonnative listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 272– 284.Google Scholar
Brennan E., & Brennan J. 1981. Measurement of accent and attitude toward Mexican American speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 10 487– 501.Google Scholar
Cunningham–Andersson U., & Engstrand O. 1989. Perceived strength and identity of foreign accent in Swedish. Phonetica, 46, 138– 154.Google Scholar
Derwing T., & Munro M. 1997. Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19 1– 16.Google Scholar
Favreau M., & Segalowitz N. 1982. Second language reading in fluent bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics 3 329– 341.Google Scholar
Favreau M., & Segalowitz N. 1983. Automatic and controlled processes in the first- and second-language reading of fluent bilinguals. Memory and Cognition 11 565– 574.Google Scholar
Flege J. 1984. The detection of French accent by American listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 76 692– 707.Google Scholar
Flege J., Frieda E., Walley A., & Randazza L. 1998. Lexical factors and segmental accuracy in second-language speech production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 155– 188.Google Scholar
Flege J., MacKay I., & Meador D. 1999. Native Italian speakers' production and perception of English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2973– 2987.Google Scholar
Flege J., MacKay I., & Piske T. 2002. Assessing bilingual dominance. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23 567– 598.Google Scholar
Flege J., & Munro M. 1994. The word unit in L2 speech production and perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16 381– 411.Google Scholar
Flege J., Munro M., & MacKay I. 1995a. Factors affecting degree of perceived foreign accent in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3125– 3134.Google Scholar
Flege J., Munro M., & MacKay I. 1995b. The effect of age of second language learning on the production of English consonants. Speech Communication 16, 1– 26.Google Scholar
Flege J., Takagi N., & Mann V. 1996. Lexical familiarity and English-language experience affect Japanese adults' perception of // and /1/. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 1161– 1173.Google Scholar
Flege J., Yeni–Komshian G., & Liu S. 1999. constraints on second language. Journal of Memory and Language, 106, 78– 104.Google Scholar
Gaitenby J. 1965. The elastic word. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, 2, 1– 12.Google Scholar
Geffen G., & Luszcz M. 1983. Are the spoken durations of rare words longer than those in common words? Memory & Cognition 11 13– 15.Google Scholar
Geffen G., Stierman I., & Tildesley P. 1979. The effect of word length and frequency on articulation and pausing during delayed auditory feedback. Language and Speech, 22, 191– 199.Google Scholar
Green D. 1986. Control, activation, and resource: A framework and a model for the control of speech in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 27, 210– 223.Google Scholar
Guion S., Flege J., Liu S., & Yeni–Komshian G. 2000. Age of learning affects on the duration of sentences produced in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 205– 228.Google Scholar
Jia G., & Aaronson D. 1999. Age differences in second language acquisition: The dominant language switch and maintenance hypothesis. In A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Tano (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 301– 312), Somerville, MA, Cascadilla Press.
Jonasson J., & McAllister R. 1972. Foreign accent and timing: An instrumental phonetic study. Papers from the Institute of Linguistics, University of Stockholm 14 11– 40.Google Scholar
Little R., & Rubin D. 1987. Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley.
Magen H. 1998. The perception of foreign-accented speech. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 381– 400.Google Scholar
Mägiste E. 1992. Second language learning in elementary and high school students. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4, 355– 365.Google Scholar
Major R. 1986 Paragoge and degree of foreign accent in Brazilian English. Second Language Research, 2, 53– 71.Google Scholar
Meuter R. F. I., & Allport A. 1999. Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language 40 25– 40.Google Scholar
Miller J., Green K., & Reeves A. 1986. Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast. Phonetica, 43, 106– 115.Google Scholar
Munro M. 1995. Nonsegmental factors in foreign accent: Ratings of filtered speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 17– 34.Google Scholar
Munro M. 1998. The effects of noise on the intelligibility of foreign-accented speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 139– 154.Google Scholar
Munro M., & Derwing T. 2001. Modeling perceptions of the accentedness and comprehensibility. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23 451– 468.Google Scholar
Munro M., Flege J., & MacKay I. 1996. The effect of age of second-language learning on the production of English vowels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 313– 334.Google Scholar
Picheny M., Durlach M., & Braida L. 1989. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing: III. An attempt to determine the contribution of speaking rate differences in intelligibility between clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 600– 683.Google Scholar
Piske T., Flege J., MacKay I., & Meador D. 2002. The production of English vowels by fluent early and late Italian–English bilinguals. Phonetica, 59, 49– 71.Google Scholar
Piske T., MacKay I., & Flege J. 2001. Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 191– 215.Google Scholar
Riggenbach H. 1991. Toward an understanding of fluency: A microanalysis of nonnative speaker conversations. Discourse Processes, 14, 423– 441.Google Scholar
Schairer K. 1992. Native speaker reaction to non-native speech. Modern Language Journal, 76, 309– 319.Google Scholar
Soares C., & Grosjean F. 1984. Bilinguals in a monolingual and a bilingual speech mode: The effect on lexical access. Memory & Cognition, 12, 380– 386.Google Scholar
van Wijngaarden S., Steeneken H., & Houtgast T. 2001. The effect of a non-native accent in Dutch on speech intelligibility. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 2473(A).Google Scholar
van Wijngaarden S., Steeneken H., & Houtgast T. 2002. Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 3004– 3013.Google Scholar
Wright C. 1979. Duration differences between rare and common words and their implication for the interpretation of word frequency effects. Memory & Cognition, 7, 411– 419.Google Scholar