Previous studies have yielded contradictory results on the relationship between perception and production in second language (L2) phonological processing. We re-examine the relationship between the two modalities both within and across processing levels, addressing several issues regarding methodology and statistical analyses. We focus on the perception and production of the French contrast /u/–/y/ by proficient English-speaking late learners of French. In an experiment with a prelexical perception task (ABX discrimination) and both a prelexical and a lexical production task (pseudoword reading and picture naming), we observe a robust link between perception and production within but not across levels. Moreover, using a clustering analysis we provide evidence that good perception is a prerequisite for good production.
Akahane-YamadaRMcDermottEAdachiTKawaharaHPruittJS (1998) Computer-based second language production training by using spectrographic representation and HMM-based speech recognition scores. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, paper 0429.
2.
AtkinsPWBBaddeleyAD (1998) Working memory and distributed vocabulary learning. Applied Psycholinguistics19: 537–52.
3.
BaddeleyADHitchGJ (1974) Working memory. In: BowerG (ed.) Recent advances in learning and motivation: Volume 8. New York: Academic Press, pp. 47–90.
4.
BaddeleyALewisVVallarG (1984) Exploring the articulatory loop. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A36: 233–52.
5.
BaddeleyADGathercoleSEPapagnoC (1998) The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review105: 158–73.
6.
Baese-BerkMMSamuelAG (2016) Listeners beware: Speech production may be bad for learning speech sounds. Journal of Memory and Language89: 23–36.
7.
BakerWTrofimovichP (2005) Interaction of native and second language vowel system(s) in early and late bilinguals. Language and Speech48: 1–27.
8.
BartonK (2018) MuMIn: Multi-model inference. R package version 1.42.1 [computer software]. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn (accessed January 2021).
9.
BatesDMMaechlerMBolkerBWalkerS (2014) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 [computer software].
10.
Bettoni-TechioMRauberASKoerichRD (2007) Perception and production of alveolar stops by Brazilian Portuguese learners of English. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2007, pp. 2293–96.
11.
BoersmaPWeeninkD (2013) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [computer program]. Available at: http://www.praat.org (accessed January 2021).
12.
BohnOSFlegeJE (1997) Perception and production of a new vowel category by adult second language learners. In: AllenJLeatherJ (eds) Second-language speech: Structure and process. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 53–73.
13.
BradlowARPisoniDBAkahane-YamadaRTohkuraY (1997) Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV: Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America101: 2299–2310.
14.
CasillasJV (2019) Phonetic category formation is perceptually driven during the early stages of adult L2 development. Language and Speech63: 550–81.
15.
ChandrasekaranBSampathPDWongPCM (2010) Individual variability in cue-weighting and lexical tone learning. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America128: 456–65.
16.
DelattrePLibermanMCooperFSGerstmanL (1952) An experimental study of the acoustic determinants of vowel colour: Observations on one- and two-formant vowels synthesized from spectrographic patterns. Word8: 192–210.
17.
DeteySRacineI (2015) Does perception precede production in the initial stage of French nasal vowel quality acquisition by Japanese learners? A corpus-based discrimination experiment. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
18.
DeteySRacineIEychenneJKawaguchiY (2014) Corpus-based L2 phonological data and semi-automatic perceptual analysis: The case of nasal vowels produced by beginner Japanese learners of French. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2014, pp. 539–43.
19.
DíazBMittererHBroersmaMSebastián-GallésN (2012) Individual differences in late bilinguals’ L2 phonological processes: From acoustic–phonetic analysis to lexical access. Learning and Individual Differences22: 680–89.
20.
DunnALFox TreeJE (2009) A quick, gradient Bilingual Dominance Scale*. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12: 273–89.
21.
ElvinJWilliamsDEscuderoP (2016) The relationship between perception and production of Brazilian Portuguese vowels in European Spanish monolinguals. Loquens3: 2386–2637.
22.
FlegeJBohnOJangS (1997) Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics25: 437–70.
23.
FlegeJE (1987) The production of ‘new’ and ‘similar’ phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics15: 47–65.
24.
FlegeJE (1993) Production and perception of a novel, second-language phonetic contrast. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America93: 1589–1608.
25.
FlegeJE (1995) Second language speech learning: theory, findings, and problems, In: StrangeW (eds) Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research. Timonium, MD: York Press, pp. 233–77.
26.
FlegeJE (1999) The relation between L2 production and perception. In: Proceeding of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, pp. 1273–76.
27.
FlegeJEEeftingW (1987) Production and perception of English stops by native Spanish speakers. Journal of Phonetics15: 67–83.
28.
FlegeJEEeftingW (1988) Imitation of a VOT continuum by native speakers of English and Spanish: Evidence for phonetic category formation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America83: 729–40.
29.
FlegeJESchmidtAM (1995) Native speakers of Spanish show rate-dependent processing of English stop consonants. Phonetica52: 90–111.
30.
FlegeJEMacKayIRMeadorD (1999) Native Italian speakers’ perception and production of English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America106: 2973–87.
31.
GotoH (1971) Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds ‘L’ and ‘R’. Neuropsychologia9: 317–23.
32.
HaoYCde JongK (2016) Imitation of second language sounds in relation to L2 perception and production. Journal of Phonetics54: 151–68.
33.
HattoriKIversonP (2009) English /r/–/l/ category assimilation by Japanese adults: Individual differences and the link to identification accuracy. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America125: 469–79.
34.
HattoriKIversonP (2010) Examination of the relationship between L2 perception and production: an investigation of English /r/–/l/ perception and production by adult Japanese speakers. In: NacanoM (ed) Interspeech workshop on second language studies: Acquisition, learning, education and technology. Waseda University, Japan.
35.
HuenschATremblayA (2015) Effects of perceptual phonetic training on the perception and production of second language syllable structure. Journal of Phonetics52: 105–20.
36.
JacquemotCScottSK (2006) What is the relationship between phonological short-term memory and speech processing?Trends in Cognitive Science10: 480–86.
37.
JiaGStrangeWColladoYWuJGuanQ (2006) Perception and production of English vowels by Mandarin speakers: Age-related differences vary with amount of L2 exposure. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America119: 1118–30.
38.
JohnsonKLadefogedPLindauM (1993) Individual differences in vowel production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America94: 701–14.
39.
KartushinaNFrauenfelderUH (2014) On the effects of L2 perception and of individual differences in L1 production on L2 pronunciation. Frontiers in Psychology5: 1–17.
40.
KartushinaNHervais-AdelmanAFrauenfelderUHGolestaniN (2015) The effect of phonetic production training with visual feedback on the perception and production of foreign speech sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America138: 817–32.
41.
KittredgeAKDellGS (2016) Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production. Journal of Memory and Language89: 8–22.
42.
KlugeDCRauberASReisMSBionRAH (2007) The relationship between the perception and production of English nasal codas by Brazilian learners of English. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2007, pp. 2297–2300.
43.
LeeAHLysterR (2016) Effects of different types of corrective feedback on receptive skills in a second language: A speech perception training study. Language Learning66: 809–33.
44.
LengerisA (2016) Comparison of perception–production vowel spaces for speakers of Standard Modern Greek and two regional dialects. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America140: EL314–19.
45.
LengerisAHazanV (2010) The effect of native vowel processing ability and frequency discrimination acuity on the phonetic training of English vowels for native speakers of Greek. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America128: 3757–68.
46.
LevyES (2009) Language experience and consonantal context effects on perceptual assimilation of French vowels by American-English learners of French. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America125: 1138–52.
47.
LevyESLawFF (2010) Production of French vowels by American-English learners of French: language experience, consonantal context, and the perception–production relationship. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America128: 1290–1305.
48.
LevyESStrangeW (2008) Perception of French vowels by American English adults with and without French language experience. Journal of Phonetics36: 141–57.
49.
LindblomB (1963) Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America35: 1773–81.
50.
LlompartMReinischE (2019) Imitation in a second language relies on phonological categories but does not reflect the productive usage of difficult sound contrasts. Language and Speech62: 594–622.
51.
MackM (1989) Consonant and vowel perception and production: early English–French bilinguals and English monolinguals. Perception and Psychophysics46: 187–200.
52.
MahalanobisPC (1936) On the generalized distance in statistics. In: Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India2: 49–55.
53.
McCloyDR (2016) phonR: Tools for phoneticians and phonologists: R package version 1.0-7 [computer software]. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=phonR (accessed January 2021).
54.
McCulloughEA (2013) Acoustic correlates of perceived foreign accent in non native English. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
55.
Motohashi-SaigoMHardisonDM (2009) Acquisition of L2 Japanese geminates: Training with waveform displays. Language Learning and Technology13: 29–47.
56.
NadeuM (2014) Stress- and speech rate-induced vowel quality variation in Catalan and Spanish. Journal of Phonetics46: 1–22.
57.
NagleCL (2018) Examining the temporal structure of the perception–production link in second language acquisition: A longitudinal study. Language Learning68: 234–70.
58.
OkunoTHardisonDM (2016) Perception–production link in L2 Japanese vowel duration: training with technology. Language Learning and Technology20: 61–80.
59.
PeperkampSBouchonC (2011) The relation between perception and production in L2 phonological processing. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2011, pp. 161–64.
60.
PiskeTMacKayIRFlegeJE (2001) Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics29: 191–215.
61.
PisoniDLuceP (1987) Acoustic–phonetic representations in word recognition. Cognition25: 21–52.
62.
RatoARauberA (2015) The effects of perceptual training on the production of English vowel contrasts by Portuguese learners. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
63.
RenwickMELLaddDR (2016) Phonetic distinctiveness vs. lexical contrastiveness in non-robust phonemic contrasts. Laboratory Phonology7: 19.
64.
SakaiMMoormanC (2018) Can perception training improve the production of second language phonemes? A meta-analytic review of 25 years of perception training research. Applied Psycholinguistics39: 187–224.
65.
SawuschJR (2005) Acoustic analysis and synthesis of speech. In: PisoniDBRemezRE (eds) The handbook of speech perception. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 7–27.
66.
Sebastián-GallésN (2005) Cross-language speech perception. In: PisoniDBRemezRE (eds) The handbook of speech perception. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 546–66.
67.
Sebastián-GallésNBausC (2005) On the relationship between perception and production in L2 categories. In: CutlerA (ed.) Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. New York: Erlbaum, pp. 279–92.
68.
SheldonA (1985) The relationship between production and perception of the /r/–/l/ contrast in Korean adults learning English: A reply to Borden, Gerber, and Milsark. Language Learning35: 107–113.
69.
SheldonAStrangeW (1982) The acquisition of /r/ and /l/ by Japanese learners of English: Evidence that speech production can precede speech perception. Applied Psycholinguistics3: 243–61.
70.
SchmidtAMFlegeJE (1995) Effects of speaking rate changes on native and non-native production. Phonetica52: 41–54.
71.
StrangeWAkahane-YamadaRKuboRTrentSATNishiK (2001) Effects of consonantal context on perceptual assimilation of American English vowels by Japanese listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America109: 1691–1704.
72.
TsukadaKBirdsongDBialystokE, et al. (2005) A developmental study of English vowel production and perception by native Korean adults and children. Journal of Phonetics33: 263–90.
73.
TurnbullR (2017) The role of predictability in intonational variability. Language and Speech60: 123–53.
74.
WerkerJFLoganJS (1985) Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics37: 35–44.
75.
WerkerJFTeesRC (1984) Phonemic and phonetic factors in adult cross-language speech perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America75: 1866–78.
76.
WongJWS (2013) The effects of perceptual and or productive training on the perception and production of English vowels /ɪ/ and /i:/ by Cantonese ESL learners. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2013, pp. 2113–17.
77.
WongJWS (2015) Comparing the perceptual training effects on the perception and production of English high-front and high-back vowel contrasts by Cantonese ESL Learners. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow: University of Glasgow, pp. 107–11.
78.
ZhangKPengG (2017) The relationship between the perception and production of non-native tones. In: Proceeding of Interspeech 2017, pp. 1799–1803.
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.
