Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:52:13.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resolving word boundaries in spoken French: Native and non-native strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Bernadette Dejean De La Batie  and
Dianne C. Bradley
Bernadette Dejean De La Batie*
Affiliation:
Monash University
Dianne C. Bradley
Affiliation:
Monash University
*
Bernadette Dejean de la Bâtie, Department of Romance Languages, Monash University, Victoria 3168, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The segmentation strategies used by native and non-native listeners of French were examined in two phoneme-monitoring experiments which required the subjects to detect the presence of word-initial /t/ in potential liaison phrases (e.g., excellent tableau/excellent acteur) and in non-liaison phrases (e.g., vrai tableau/vrai acteur). The essentially faultless performance of the natives suggested that the optimal segmentation routine in such phrases is primarily based on the identification of the critical word and, to a lesser extent, on the contextual information, which was more efficiently used to check the outcome of word recognition. In contrast, non-natives tended to rely on guessing strategies, not based on contextual information (contrary to the widely held language teaching recommendation), but on an incomplete acoustic–phonetic/lexical analysis of the signal.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , January 1995 , pp. 59 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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

REFERENCES

Bradley, D. C., & Dejean, de la Bâtie B. (1990). Resolving boundaries in spoken French. In Seidl, R. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Third Australian International Conference on Speech Science Technology (pp. 330–335). Canberra: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335–359.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N., & Keyser, S. J. (1983). CV phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dejean, de la Bâtie B. (1993). Word boundary ambiguity in spoken French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar
Dirven, R., & Oakeshott-Taylor, J. (1984). Listening comprehension (part 2). Language Teaching, 18, 2–20.Google Scholar
Dunkel, P. A. (1986). Developing fluency in L2: Theoretical principles and pedagogical considerations. Modern Language Journal, 70, 100–106.Google Scholar
Encrevé, P. (1983). La liaison sans enchaînement. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 46, 39–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Encrevé, P. (1988). La liaison avec et sans enchaînement. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I. (1981). Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 465–495.Google Scholar
Glisan, E. W. (1988). A plan for teaching listening comprehension: Adaptation of an instructional reading model. Foreign Language Annals, 21, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey, D., Listening instruction and practice for advanced second language students. Language Learning, 27, 109–122.Google Scholar
Grammont, M. (1960). Traité de phonétique (6th ed.). Paris: Delagrave.Google Scholar
Imbs, P. (Ed.). (1971). Dictionnaire des fréquences. Nancy, France: Centre de recherche pour un trésor de la languc française (CNRS).Google Scholar
Joy, B., Lian, A., & Russell, R. (1983). Listening comprehension in foreign languages: Computing some possibilities. Babel, 18, 15–30.Google Scholar
Klein, W. (1986). Second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koster, C. J. (1987). Word recognition in foreign and native language. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Lian, A. P. (1985). An experimental computer-assisted listening comprehension system. Revue de Phonétique Appliquée, 73–75, 167–183.Google Scholar
Markham, P., & Latham, M. (1987). The influence of religion-specific background knowledge on the listening comprehension of adult second-language students. Language Learning, 37, 157–170.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word recognition. In Frauenfelder, U. H. & Komisarjevsky-Tyler, L. (Eds.), Spoken word recognition (pp. 71–102). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google ScholarPubMed
Matter, J. F. (1986). A la recherche des frontières perdues: Etude sur la perception de la parole en français. Doctoral dissertation, University of Utrecht. Amsterdam: De Werelt.Google Scholar
Mille, M., Loury, P., & Pécheur, J. (1982). A l'écoute de… Un extrait d'entretien radiophonique. Le Français dans le Monde, 168, 62–64.Google Scholar
Nord, J. R. (1981). Three steps leading to listening fluency: A beginning. In Winitz, H. (Ed.), The comprehension approach to foreign language instruction (pp. 69–100). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Nyrop, K. R. (1925). Manuel de phonétique du français parlé (4th ed.). Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel Nordisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Passy, P. (1917). Les sons du français (8th ed.). Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Reseigh, Long D. (1990). What you don't know can't help you: An exploratory study of background knowledge and second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 65–75.Google Scholar
Richards, J. C. (1983). Listening comprehension: Approach, design, procedure. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 219–240.Google Scholar
Saunders, G. E. (1988). The structure of errors in the perception of French speech. Revue de Phonétique Appliquée, 86, 43–99.Google Scholar
Smith, P., Packam, G., & McEvedy, M. R. (1986). Studying in Australia: Listening effectively. Melbourne: Nelson.Google Scholar
Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderplank, R. (1988). Implications of differences in native and nonnative speaker approaches to listening. British Journal of Language Teaching, 26, 32–39.Google Scholar
Yelland, G. W. (1987). The influence of sentential context on word recognition performance in inexperienced and skilled readers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar