Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Ghosts in the bilingual machine: Consonant cluster production in Spanish and English bilinguals Grant M. Berry The Pennsylvania State University CASPSLaP.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Ghosts in the bilingual machine: Consonant cluster production in Spanish and English bilinguals Grant M. Berry The Pennsylvania State University CASPSLaP."— Presentation transcript:

1 Ghosts in the bilingual machine: Consonant cluster production in Spanish and English bilinguals Grant M. Berry The Pennsylvania State University CASPSLaP 2014 Download this Presentation:

2 Difficult Names… Christopher Nwankwo Chukwuma Senator, Nigeria hridôe ( হৃদয ) Bengali, heart Quvenzhané Wallis Actress, Beasts of the Southern Wild 2 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

3 Global Differences in CC Production When speakers encounter new words with unfamiliar consonant clusters, they are likely to: Epenthesize or use Anaptyxis (considered equivalent here) (Altenberg 2005, Eddington 2001, Fleischhacker 2000, Rose and Demuth 2006, Ramírez 2006) Delete a member of the cluster (Jabbari and Samarvachi 2011, Chang 2008, Bonet 2006) Resyllabify the cluster with a nuclear sonorant (Zec 1995: 88) IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 3 mbat ə

4 Some Strategies in Action: 4 Epenthesis æ b ɪ n IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

5 Some Strategies in Action: 5 Resyllabification b m æt IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

6 Some Strategies in Action: 6 Deletion b ʌ k IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

7 Global Differences in CC Production Strategies like these frequently occur with: heterorganic clusters (Byrd and Tan 1996) violations in sonority sequencing (Zec 1995, Sherwin 1999, Sing 1985) IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 7 Sherwin 1999:56 Onset Nucleus Coda

8 Phonotactics in Spanish and English The strategies used are constrained by the phonotactic systems of the speakers in question: Spanish Simple syllable structure Few clusters permitted; many contain a liquid (pl, bl, br, pr, kr, etc.) Coda clusters are rare English Allows a wide variety of onset and coda clusters (sixths=[sɪksθs]) Permits liquids and nasals as syllabic nuclei (as well as other sonorants) IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 8

9 Language-specific differences in Strategy Consequently, the strategies frequently used by speakers of these languages are: Spanish Preference for deletion of one member of the cluster (Bonet 2006) English Preference for resyllabification with a liquid or nasal Both Anaptyxis (the insertion of a small ghost vowel) is a common cross-linguistic strategy which may be produced by gestural mistiming or misalignment (cf. Byrd and Tan 1996, Hall 2006) This is reflected through lower vowel durations for ghost vowels compared to full vowels IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 9

10 Previous Research Most research has focused on monolingual speakers, and assumed that a given language’s phonotactics govern strategy use However, comparatively little work has looked at bilingual production of consonant clusters 10 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

11 Research Questions When one has experience with two phonotactic systems, which system’s preferred pattern predominates in consonant cluster production? How does experience modulate the choice of strategy for consonant cluster resolution? Do late bilinguals and early bilinguals show similar or distinct strategy patterns? Do anaptyctic vowels, which are cross-linguistically common, demonstrate evidence of gestural preparation? Do they share characteristics with nuclear vowels in their respective words? IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 11

12 Participants (10) English monolinguals (3) No significant experience with other languages Functionally monolingual Late English-Spanish bilinguals (2) Age of exposure to Spanish: 13 and 14 years Spanish Speaking Proficiency: 9Reading: 8 12 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

13 Participants (10) Late Spanish-English bilinguals (2) Mean age of exposure to English: 13 years Mean English Speaking Rating: 5.5Reading: 9 Early Spanish-English bilinguals (3) Mean age of exposure to English: 1.6 years Mean English Speaking Rating: 8Reading: 8.7 13 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

14 Experimental Stimuli 219 Experimental Stimuli 108 Targets 18 sC clusters 63 onset clusters, 45 coda clusters Targets were constructed to violate sonority sequencing, or to have heterorganic clusters 111 controls (mixture of monosyllabic and bisyllabic words) Construction of stimuli was mostly algorithmic Onset Cluster: Cluster group + {a, i, u}+Consonant Coda Cluster: Consonant +{a, i, u}+Cluster group IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 14 sC Cluster: skag Onset Cluster: fnar Coda Cluster: eebn Control: fana

15 Coding Coding Predictors: Strategy: Deletion, Epenthesis/Anaptyxis, Syllabic Nasal/Liquid, None, Other Stimulus Position Speaker group and participant number Permissibility in English, Both, or Neither Analysis: Data were analyzed in R (R Core Team, 2013) IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 15

16 Vowel Spaces and Ghost Production By Group 16 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion Vowels were plotted with the phonR package using F1 and F2 values (McCloy 2013)

17 17 English MonolingualsEnglish-Spanish Late Bilinguals Early Spanish-English Bilinguals Late Spanish-English Bilinguals IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

18 18 English Monolinguals English-Spanish Late Bilinguals Early Spanish-English Bilinguals Late Spanish-English Bilinguals IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

19 19 English Monolinguals English-Spanish Late Bilinguals Early Spanish-English Bilinguals Late Spanish-English Bilinguals IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

20 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 20 Vowel Length Density by Group The ghost vowel (anaptyxis) is consistently shortest cross-linguistically, in line with a gestural misalignment claim

21 F1 Deviance 21 Ghost F1-Main F1 Negative value implies that the ghost vowel is higher than the main vowel In general, we see a trend toward centralization of the anaptyctic vowel This seems to be independent of the stimulus position IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

22 F2 Deviance 22 Ghost F2-Main F2 Negative implies that the ghost vowel is more backed than the main vowel In general, we see a trend toward centralization of the anaptyctic vowel However, æ behaves differently for coda and onset targets. Why? IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

23 F1 and F2 deviances as functions of Euclidean distance 23 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

24 Factors Contributing to Overall Deviance To determine how F2 and F1 deviance related to overall Euclidean distance from the target vowel, an ANOVA was run on the square of the Euclidean Distance with the squares of F1 and F2 deviance as predictors, as well as the target vowel, cluster position, and speaker Results: F1 square deviance highly significant (p<.001) F2 square deviance highly significant (p<.001) Target Vowel significant (p<.02) /e/, /u/ and /i/ were the largest contributors to the effect No significance for participant or cluster position 24 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

25 Ghost Vowel Summary Ghost vowels are consistently much shorter than other vowels, suggesting they result from gestural misalignment rather than full vowel insertion Anaptyctic Vowels are usually centralized relative to target vowels, independent of whether the language has phonological vowel reduction in unstressed syllables This is true regardless of cluster position Both F1 and F2 deviance from the main vowel are strong predictors of total distance (perhaps unsurprisingly), as well as main vowel /i/, /u/, and /e/ are driving this effect 25 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

26 CC Resolution Strategies Only done on targets, because strategies are not expected to emerge with controls 26 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

27 Strategy by Group (Targets only) IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 27 Deletion Epenthesis Other Resyllabified Liquid/Nasal None ENGLATE Deletion is highest for late Spanish-English bilinguals Resyllabification is also lowest for this group English late bilinguals do not adapt deletion as a repair strategy They do, however, lower usage of resyllabification in favor of the cross- linguistic strategy of epenthesis Early Spanish-English bilinguals fall between English monolinguals and late English-Spanish bilinguals in terms of strategy usage They pattern more with monolinguals than English-Spanish late bilinguals

28 Strategy By Participant (Targets only) 28 Participant Individual differences are apparent, but in general follow similar trends within groups Spanish Early Spanish-English Late English MonolingualEnglish-Spanish Late IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

29 Strategy Count Summary English monolinguals are the highest users of resyllabified sonorants, and Spanish-English late bilinguals are the highest users of deletion Early Spanish-English bilinguals consistently fall in between English monolinguals and English-Spanish late bilinguals wrt strategy Individual differences currently abound, but they seem to be patterning similarly within groups Larger n will most likely wash this out at the group level 29 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

30 Statistical Analysis Multinomial Logistic Regression 30 Multinomial logistic regressions were calculated using the nnet package in R (Venables 2002) Speaker GroupPosition English Monolingual English- Spanish Late Bilingua l Spanish- English Late Bilingual Early Spanish- English Bilingual Deletion Epenthesis ResyllabificationNone Onset Coda Strategy EnglishNeither Permissibility IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

31 Multinomial Logistic Regression Run only on target items to predict repair strategy Intercept: Spanish-English early bilingual, coda cluster permissible in English and Spanish with no apparent strategy Run in R (R Core Team, 2013) with the multinom() function in nnet package Dependent Variables: Speaker Group Cluster Position (onset or coda) Permissibility IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion 31

32 Type 2 ANOVA on Model All 3 predictors highly significant (p<.0001) In order of decreasing Chi-square value: Permissibility Non-permissibility in both languages significantly increases the chance of a strategy emerging Speaker Group Not all speaker groups behaved identically with respect to resolution strategy Cluster Position Coda clusters were more likely to produce a strategy than onset clusters 32 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

33 Model Summary: Onset Clusters are less likely to produce a strategy than coda clusters Impermissibility in both Spanish and English increases the probability that a strategy will emerge, but the opposite is true for English-permissible clusters Early bilinguals behave similarly to English monolinguals wrt most strategies 33 IntroductionParticipantsStimuliVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion (Intercept) Late Spanish-English English Monolingual Late English-Spanish English- permissible Not permissible in Eng/SpanOnset Cluster Deletion-2.12.6-0.7-14.6-14.73.5-3.0 Epenthesis0.60.3- Other-1.31.1-0.9- Resyllabified-1.30.2-0.5-0.3-12.83.7-2.8

34 Discussion Though there are global tendencies for speakers of a given language to adopt a certain repair strategy for illicit clusters, these tendencies seem to shift with additional experience in a foreign language New strategies can develop with increased proficiency in a foreign language Early bilinguals, with the highest amount of experience in both languages, effectively demonstrate a hybrid phonotactic system with access to strategies common to both languages They consistently appear between English monolinguals and late English-Spanish bilinguals in terms of strategy use Ghosts vowels, when produced, demonstrate some degree of centralization reflected in changes in both F1 and F2. This effect is modulated by vowel, with high vowels showing the greatest change in position between ghost vowel and target (possibly due to potential outliers) 34 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

35 THANK YOU to: Professors/colleagues: Marianna Nadeu John Lipski Matthew Carlson Members of PHON (Phonetics/Phonology Reading Group at Penn State) Other members of the Department of Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese at Penn State Members of the Judith Kroll’s Purple Lab and Giuli Dussias’s ISÍ lab Research assistants: Hope Schmid SeonGu Lee 35 IntroductionParticipantsSetupVowelsStrategyDiscussionConclusion

Download ppt "Ghosts in the bilingual machine: Consonant cluster production in Spanish and English bilinguals Grant M. Berry The Pennsylvania State University CASPSLaP."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google