Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T10:45:33.995Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON SOCIOPHONETIC COMPETENCE

Phrase-final Vowel Devoicing in Native and Advanced L2 Speakers of French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2016

Amanda Dalola  and
Barbara E. Bullock
Amanda Dalola*
Affiliation:
The University of South Carolina
Barbara E. Bullock
Affiliation:
The University of Texas at Austin
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Amanda Dalola, Department of Languages, Literatures & Cultures, 1620 College St, 619 Humanities Office Building, Columbia, SC 29208. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The data from this study investigate phrase-final vowel devoicing in Metropolitan French among L1 and L2 speakers, in terms of number of times a speaker devoices a phrase-final high vowel and percentage of the vowel that is devoiced. The goal is to assess whether experienced L2 speakers use style-based variation in response to the same factors as native speakers. Results from a set of role playing and word list tasks revealed that L2 devoicing rates matched those of the natives, but were conditioned by different factors in each group. The duration of L2 speaker devoicing, however, was found not to match native levels. Notable differences emerged in response to shifts in style: L1 speakers showed higher rates and enhanced degrees of devoicing in pragmatic contexts that favored either slower or more formal speech, while L2 speakers responded very little to pragmatic shifts within role plays, instead responding more pronouncedly to different tasks.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 769 - 799
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

We wish to express our appreciation to three anonymous reviewers for their astute recommendations. We also extend our thanks to our study participants for their patience and goodwill, and to Sally Amen for her invaluable assistance.

References

REFERENCES

Adamson, H. D., & Regan, V. M. (1991). The acquisition of community speech norms by Asian immigrants learning English as a second language: A preliminary study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, N., & Unsworth, S. (1999). Sociolinguistic variation in southern French schwa. Linguistics, 37, 127–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. (2006). Strength and weakness at the interface: Positional neutralization in phonetics and phonology. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, L. M. (1980). Sociolinguistic variation and style shifting in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 30, 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, L., & Zuengler, J. (1983). Accommodation theory: An explanation for style shifting in second language dialects. In Wolfson, N. & Judd, E. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 195–213). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1984). Language Style as Audience Design. Language in Society, 13(2), 145–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171–204). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenik, D. (2013). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. (Version 5.3.83). Retrieved from www.praat.org.Google Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T. (2002). The clear speech effect for non-native listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 272–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bybee, J. L. (2001a). Frequency effects on French liaison. In Bybee, J. L. & Hopper, P. (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistics structure (pp. 337–360). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L. (2001b). Phonology and language use . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, P. M. (2005). Prosodic variation in SLA: Rhythm in an urban North Carolina Hispanic community. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 11, 59–71.Google Scholar
Dalola, A. (2014). Un drôle de bruit_hhh: A sociophonetic examination of the production and perception of final vowel devoicing among L1 and L2 speakers of French (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
Dalola, A. (2015). The role of vowel type and preceding consonant on final vowel devoicing in Continental French. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow, UK: University of Glasgow. ISBN 978-0-85261-941-4. Paper number 649 retrieved from http://www.icphs2015.info/pdfs/Papers/ICPHS0649.pdf.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J.-M. (2004). The acquisition of sociolinguistic competence in French as a foreign language: An overview. Journal of French Language Studies, 14, 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. G. H. (2008). Social factors and variation in production in L2 phonology. In Hansen, J. G. (Ed.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 251–279). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagyal, Z. (2003). The matter with the penultimate: Prosodic change in the vernacular of lower-class immigrant youth in Paris. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1, 671–674.Google Scholar
Fagyal, Z. (2005). Prosodic consequences of being a Beur: French in contact with immigrant languages in Paris. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 8.Google Scholar
Fagyal, Z., & Moisset, C. (1999). Sound change and articulatory release: Where and why are high vowels devoiced in Parisian French. Proceedings of the 14th ICPhS, 309–312.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Munro, M. J., & MacKay, I. R. A. (1995). Factors affecting strength of perceived foreign accent in a second language. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3125–3134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fónagy, I. (1989). Le Français change de visage? Revue Romane, 24, 225–254.Google Scholar
Fougeron, C., & Steriade, D. (1997). Does deletion of French schwa lead to neutralization of lexical distinctions? EUROSPEECH 2, 943–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulkes, P., & Docherty, G. (2006). The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34, 409–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulkes, P., & Hay, J. B. (2015). The emergence of sociophonetic structure. In MacWhinney, B. & O’Grady, W. (Eds.), The handbook of language emergence (Vol. 87, pp. 292–313). Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulkes, P., Scobbie, J. M., & Watt, D. (2010). Sociophonetics. In Hardcastle, W. J., Laver, J., & Gibbon, F. E. (Eds.), The handbook of phonetic sciences (2nd ed.) (pp. 703–754). Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, A. B. (2001). Lexical diffusion as a factor of phonetic change: The case of Modern French nasal vowels. Language Variation and Change, 13, 209–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, M. (2004). Sociolinguistic variation and second language acquisition: A preliminary study of advanced learners of French. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 17, 143–165.Google Scholar
Howard, M. (2013). Liaison in French as a second language: A preliminary longitudinal Study. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 4, 190–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, K. (1997). Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In Johnson, K. & Mullennix, J. W. (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 145–165). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jun, S.-A., & Fougeron, C. (1995). The accentual phrase and the prosodic structure of French. In Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 722–725).Google Scholar
Jun, S.-A. & Fougeron, C. (2000). A phonological model of French intonation. In Botinis, A. (Eds.), Intonation (pp. 209–242). Berlin: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society, 1, 97–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1996). The sounds of the world’s languages. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Léon, P. R. (1973). Réflexions idiomatologiques sur l’accent en tant que métaphore sociolinguistique. French Review, 46, 783–789.Google Scholar
Martin, P. (2004). French vowel devoicing. La Linguistique, 40(2), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, S. (2005). Vowel duration and neutralization of vowel length contrasts in Kinyarwanda. Journal of Phonetics, 33, 427–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadasdi, T., Mougeon, R., & Rehner, K. (2005). Learning to speak everyday (Canadian) French. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 61, 543–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niedzielski, N. (2010). Linguistic security, ideology, and vowel perception. In Preston, D. R. & Niedzielski, N. (Eds.), A Reader in sociophonetics (pp. 253–264). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogden, R. (2006). Phonetics and social action in agreements and disagreements. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1752–1775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (2002). Word-specific phonetics. Laboratory Phonology, 7, 101–139.Google Scholar
Piller, I. (2002). Passing for a native speaker: Identity and success in second language learning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6, 179–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2007). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
R. Core Team, & others. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://cran.case.edu/web/packages/dplR/vignettes/timeseries-dplR.pdf.Google Scholar
Regan, V., & Ní Chasaide, C. (2010). Language practices and identity construction by multilingual speakers of French L2 (Vol. 80). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Rehner, K., & Mougeon, R. (1999). Variation in the spoken French of immersion students: To ne or not to ne, That is the sociolinguistic question. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 56, 124–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehner, K., & Mougeon, R. (2003). The effect of educational input on the development of sociolinguistic competence by French immersion students: The case of expressions of consequence in spoken French. The Journal of Educational Thought/Revue de La Pensee Educative, 37(3), 259–281.Google Scholar
Sachs, J., Lieberman, P., & Erickson, D. (1973). Anatomical and cultural determinants of male and female speech. In Shuy, R. W. & Fasold, R. W. (Eds.), Language attitudes: Current trends and prospects (pp. 74–84). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Sax, K. J. (2003). Acquisition of stylistic variation in American learners of French (Doctoral dissertation, unpublished). Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Smith, C. L. (2002). Prosodic finality and sentence type in French. Language and Speech, 45, 141–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C. L. (2003). Vowel devoicing in contemporary French. Journal of French Language Studies, 13, 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. (2006). In and out of the laboratory: Using a variety of data sources to study variation source in speech. Poster presented at LabPhon 6, Barcelona.Google Scholar
Stewart, C. M. (2012). On the socio-indexicality of a Parisian French intonation contour. Journal of French Language Studies, 22, 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. (2004). Phonetic norm versus usage in advanced French as a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 42, 365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar