Filled pauses are well known for their speaker specificity, yet cross-linguistic research has also shown language-specific trends in their distribution and phonetic quality. To examine the extent to which speakers acquire filled pauses as language- or speaker-specific phenomena, this study investigates the use of filled pauses in the context of adult simultaneous bilinguals. Making use of both distributional and acoustic data, this study analyzed UH, consisting of only a vowel component, and UM, with a vowel followed by [m], in the speech of 15 female speakers who were simultaneously bilingual in French and German. Speakers were found to use UM more frequently in German than in French, but only German-dominant speakers had a preference for UM in German. Formant and durational analyses showed that while speakers maintained distinct vowel qualities in their filled pauses in different languages, filled pauses in their weaker language exhibited a shift towards those in their dominant language. These results suggest that, despite high levels of variability between speakers, there is a significant role for language in the acquisition of filled pauses in simultaneous bilingual speakers, which is further shaped by the linguistic environment they grow up in.
ActonE. K. (2011). On Gender Differences in the Distribution of um and uh. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 17(2), Article 2.
2.
AntoniouM.BestC. T.TylerM. D.KroosC. (2010). Language context elicits native-like stop voicing in early bilinguals’ productions in both L1 and L2. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 640–653. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2010.09.005
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01
5.
BellA. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13, 145–204. doi: 10.1017/S004740450001037X
6.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2016). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 6.0.19). Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
7.
BoskerH. R.TjiongJ.QuenéH.SandersT.de JongN. H. (2015). Both native and non-native disfluencies trigger listeners’ attention. In LickleyR.WesterM.RoseR.EklundR. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (pp. 5–8). Retrieved from http://disfluency.org/app/download/29670956/DiSS2015_Proceedings.pdf
8.
BraunA.RosinA. (2015). On the speaker-specificity of hesitation markers. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 0731.1–5). Glasgow, UK: The University of Glasgow.
9.
CandeaM.VasilescuI.Adda-DeckerM. (2005). Inter- and intra-language acoustic analysis of autonomous fillers. Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (pp. 47–51). Aix-en-Provence, France: Université de Provence.
10.
CenozJ. (2000). Pauses and hesitation phenomena in second language production. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 127, 53–69. doi:10.1075/itl.127-128.03cen
11.
CicresJ. (2014). Comparación forense de voces mediante el análisis multidimensional de las pausas llenas [Forensic voice comparison by means of the multidimensional analysis of filled pauses]. Revista Signos, 47, 365–384. doi:10.4067/S0718-09342014000300002
12.
ClarkH. H.Fox TreeJ. E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speech. Cognition, 84, 73–111. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00017-3
13.
CorleyM.HartsuikerR. J. (2011). Why um helps auditory word recognition: The temporal delay hypothesis. PLoS ONE, 6, e19792. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019792
14.
CorleyM.MacGregorM. J.DonaldsonD. I. (2007). It’s the way that you, er, say it: Hesitations in speech affect language comprehension. Cognition, 105, 658–668. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.010
15.
CorleyM.StewartO. W. (2008). Hesitation disfluencies in spontaneous speech: The meaning ofum. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2, 589–602. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2008.00068.x
16.
CruttendenA. (2001). Gimson’s Pronunciation of English (6th ed.). London: Arnold.
17.
de JongN. H.GroenhoutR.SchoonenR.HulstijnJ. H. (2015). Second language fluency: Speaking style or proficiency? Correcting measures of second language fluency for first language behavior. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 223–243. doi:10.1017/S0142716413000210
18.
de LeeuwE. (2007). Hesitation markers in English, German and Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 19, 85–114. doi:10.1017/S1470542707000049
19.
DelvauxV.DemolinD.HarmegniesB.SoquetA. (2008). The aerodynamics of nasalization in French. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 578–606. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2008.02.002
20.
DufourR. (2010). Transcription automatique de la parole spontanée [Automatic transcription of spontaneous speech] (Doctoral dissertation). Université du Maine, France. Retrieved from: http://cyberdoc.univ-lemans.fr/theses/2010/2010LEMA1024.pdf
21.
DupouxE.PeperkampS.Sebastián-GallésN. (2010). Limits on bilingualism revisited: Stress ‘deafness’ in simultaneous French-Spanish bilinguals. Cognition, 114, 266–275. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.001
22.
ErkerD.BrusoJ. (2017). Uh, Bueno, em . . .: Filled pauses as a site of contact-induced change in Boston Spanish. Language Variation and Change, 29, 205–244. doi:10.1017/S0954394517000102
23.
FehringerC.FryC. (2007). Hesitation phenomena in the language production of bilingual speakers: The role of working memory. Folia Linguistica, 41, 37–72. doi:10.1515/flin.41.1-2.37
24.
FinlaysonI. R. (2014). Testing the roles of disfluency and rate of speech in the coordination of conversation (Doctoral thesis). Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UK.
25.
FinlaysonI. R.CorleyM. (2012). Disfluency in dialogue: An intentional signal from the speaker?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 921–928. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0279-x
26.
FowlerC. A.SramkoV.OstryD. J.RowlandS. A.HalléP. (2008). Cross language phonetic influences on the speech of French–English bilinguals. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 649–663. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2008.04.001
27.
FrommerJ. G.IshikawaW. (1980). Alors. . . euh. . . on parle français?The French Review, 53, 501–506. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/391628
28.
Garcia-AmayaL. (2015). A longitudinal study of filled pauses and silent pauses in second language speech. In LickleyR.WesterM.RoseR.EklundR. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (pp. 23–27). Retrieved from http://disfluency.org/app/download/29670956/DiSS2015_Proceedings.pdf
GoldE.RossS.EarnshawK. (2017). Variation in filled pauses across speaking styles and boroughs within West Yorkshire: Implications for forensic speaker comparisons. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation 46. Madison, WI.
32.
Goldman-EislerF. (1961). A comparative study of two hesitation phenomena. Language and Speech, 4, 18–26. doi:10.1177/002383096100400102
33.
GrosjeanF. (2001). The bilinguals’ language modes. In NicolJ. L. (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
34.
GrosjeanF.DeschampsA. (1973). Analyse des variables temporelles du français spontané: II. Comparaison du français oral dans la description avec l’anglais (description) et avec le français (interview radiophonique) [Analysis of temporal variables in spontaneous French: II. Comparison of oral French in description with English (description) and with French (radio interview)]. Phonetica, 28, 191–226. doi:10.1159/000259456
35.
GrosjeanF.DeschampsA. (1975). Analyse contrastive des variables temporelles de l’anglais et du français: vitesse de parole et variables composantes, phénomènes d’hésitation [Contrastive analysis of temporal variables in English and French: Rate of speech and component variables, hesitation phenomena]. Phonetica, 31, 144–184. doi:10.1159/000259667
36.
GuionS. G. (2003). The vowel systems of Quichua-Spanish bilinguals. Phonetica, 60, 98–128. doi:10.1159/000071449
37.
GuzE. (2015). Establishing the fluency gap between native and non-native speech. Research in Language, 13, 230–247. doi:10.1515/rela-2015-0021
38.
HlavacJ. (2011). Hesitation and monitoring phenomena in bilingual speech: A consequence of code-switching or a strategy to facilitate its incorporation?Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3793–3806. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.008
39.
HughesV.WoodS.FoulkesP. (2016). Strength of forensic voice comparison evidence from the acoustics of filled pauses. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 23, 99–132. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v23i1.29874
40.
JessenM. (2008). Forensic phonetics. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2, 671–711. doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2008.00066.x
41.
KünzelH. J. (1997). Some general phonetic and forensic aspects of speaking tempo. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 4, 48–83. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v4i1.48
KupischT.BartonD.BianchiG.StangenI. (2012). The HABLA-Corpus (German-French and German-Italian). In SchmidtT.WörnerK. (Eds.), Multilingual corpora and multilingual corpus analysis (pp. 163–179). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
44.
KupischT.BartonD.HailerK.KlaschikE.StangenI.LeinT.van de WeijerJ. (2014). Foreign accent in adult simultaneous bilinguals. Heritage Language Journal, 11, 123–150.
45.
KupischT.LeinT.BartonD.SchröderD. J.StangenI.StoehrA. (2014). Acquisition outcomes across domains in adult simultaneous bilinguals with French as weaker and stronger language. Journal of French Language Studies, 24, 347–376. doi:10.1017/S0959269513000197
46.
LeinT.KupischT.van de WeijerJ. (2016). Voice onset time and global foreign accent in German–French simultaneous bilinguals during adulthood. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20, 732–749. doi:10.1177/1367006915589424
47.
LeveltW. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14, 41–104. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90026-4
48.
MaclayH.OsgoodC. E. (1959). Hesitation phenomena in spontaneous speech. WORD, 15, 19–44. doi:10.1080/00437956.1959.11659682
49.
MaekawaK.MoriH. (2015). Voice quality analysis of Japanese filled pauses: A preliminary report. In LickleyR.WesterM.RoseR.EklundR. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech. Retrieved from http://disfluency.org/app/download/29670956/DiSS2015_Proceedings.pdf
50.
McDougallK.DuckworthM. (2017). Profiling fluency: An analysis of individual variation in disfluencies in adult males. Speech Communication, 95, 16–27. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2017.10.001
51.
McDougallK.RhodesR.DuckworthM.FrenchP.KirchhübelC.WormaldJ. (2018). Applying disfluency analysis in forensic speaker comparison casework. Paper presented at 27th Annual Conference of the International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics. Huddersfield, UK.
52.
MöhleD. (1984). A comparison of the second language speech production of different native speakers. In DechertH. W.MöhleD.RaupachM. (Eds.), Second Language Production (pp. 26–49). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
MontrulS. (2012). Is the heritage language like a second language?EUROSLA Yearbook, 12(1), 1–29. doi:10.1075/eurosla.12.03mon.
55.
NakagawaS.JohnsonP. C. D.SchielzethH. (2017). The coefficient of determination R2 and intra-class correlation coefficient from generalized linear mixed-effects models revisited and expanded. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 14: 20170213. doi:10.1098/rsif.2017.0213
56.
O’ConnellD. C.KowalS. (2005). Uh and um revisited: Are they interjections for signaling delay?Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 555–576. doi:10.1007/s10936-005-9164-3
57.
OlynykM.d’AnglejanA.SankoffD. (1987). A quantitative and qualitative analysis of speech markers in the native and second language speech of bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 121–136. doi:10.1017/S0142716400000163
58.
PätzoldM.SimpsonA. (1995). An acoustic analysis of hesitation particles in German. In EleniusK.BranderudP. (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences Volume 3 (pp. 512–515). Stockholm, Sweden: KTH and Stockholm University.
59.
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Version 3.5.0. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
60.
RoseR. L. (2017). A comparison of form and temporal characteristics of filled pauses in L1 Japanese and L2 English. Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan, 21(3), 33–40. doi:10.24467/onseikenkyu.21.3_33
61.
SéguinM.-C. (2010). Catégorisation acoustique des voylles moyennes antérieures arrondies en français laurentien [Acoustic categorisation of mid front rounded vowels in Laurentian French] (Doctoral dissertation). University of Ottawa, Canada. doi:10.20381/ruor-20070
62.
ShribergE. E. (1994). Preliminaries to a theory of speech disfluencies (Doctoral thesis). University of California at Berkeley, CA.
63.
ShribergE. (2001). To ‘errrr’ is human: ecology and acoustics of speech disfluencies. Journal of International Phonetic Association, 31, 153–169. doi:10.1017/S0025100301001128
64.
Silber-VarodV.WeissA.AmirN. (2015). Can you hear these mid-front vowels? Formants analysis of hesitation disfluencies in spontaneous Hebrew. In LickleyR.WesterM.RoseR.EklundR. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (pp. 77–81). Retrieved from http://disfluency.org/app/download/29670956/DiSS2015_Proceedings.pdf
65.
SpreaficoL. (2016). Filled pauses in multilingual speech: An acoustic analysis. Linguistica e Filologia, 36, 99–116. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10446/77943
66.
StepanovaS. (2007). Some features of filled hesitation pauses in spontaneous Russian. In TrouvainJ.BarryW. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1325–1328). Saarbrücken, Germany: Universität des Saarlandes.
67.
SundaraM.PolkaL. (2008). Discrimination of coronal stops by bilingual adults: The timing and nature of language interaction. Cognition, 106, 234–258. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.01.011
68.
SundaraM.PolkaL.BaumS. (2006). Production of coronal stops by simultaneous bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 97–114. doi:10.1017/S1366728905002403
69.
SwertsM. (1998). Filled pauses as markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 485–496. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00014-9
70.
TempleL. (2000). Second language learner speech production. Studia Linguistica, 54, 288–297. doi:10.1111/1467-9582.00068
71.
TorreiraF.Adda-DeckerM.ErnestusM. (2010). The Nijmegen Corpus of Casual French. Speech Communication, 52, 201–212. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2009.10.004
72.
TottieG. (2011). Uh and Um as sociolinguistic markers in British English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16, 173–197. doi:10.1075/ijcl.16.2.02tot
73.
VasilescuI.Adda-DeckerM. (2007). A cross-language study of acoustic and prosodic characteristics of vocalic hesitations. In EspositoA.BratanićM.KellerE.MarinaroM. (Eds.), Fundamentals of verbal and nonverbal communication and the biometric issue (pp. 140–148). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: IOS Press.
74.
WatanabeM.HiroseK.DenY.MinematsuN. (2008). Filled pauses as cues to the complexity of upcoming phrases for native and non-native listeners. Speech Communication, 50, 81–94. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2007.06.002
75.
WickhamH. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
76.
WielingM.GrieveJ.BoumaG.FruehwaldJ.ColemanJ.LibermanM. (2016). Variation and change in the use of hesitation markers in Germanic languages. Language Dynamics and Change, 6, 199–234. doi:10.1163/22105832-00602001
77.
WieseR. (1984). Language production in foreign and native languages: Same or different? In DechertH. W.MöhleD.RaupachM. (Eds.), Second language production (pp. 11–25). Tübingen, Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag.
78.
WongS. G.-J.PappV. (2018). Transferability of non-lexical hesitation markers across languages: Evidence from te reo Māori-English bilinguals. Paper presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics. Huddersfield, UK.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
