Adult learners acquire second language (L2) allophones with experience. We examine two mechanisms which may support the acquisition of allophonic variants in second language acquisition. One of the mechanisms is based on the distribution of phones with respect to their phonological context (i.e. phonological distribution). The other is based on the role the phones play in contrasting words (i.e. lexical contrast). Experiment 1 established adult native English speakers’ baseline sensitivity to the novel [b]–[β] auditory contrast. In Experiment 2 we examined whether adult native English speakers infer the phonological status of [b] and [β] in an artificial language based only on their distributions to phonological contexts. We observed no evidence that these participants were able to do so. In Experiment 3 we investigated whether learners infer the phonological status of [b] and [β] from the role they play in lexical contrast and observed both perceptual and lexical processing evidence to suggest that adults may use meaning-based cues to the lack of contrast to learn that two phones are allophones of the same phoneme. Together our findings suggest that adult L2 learners may prioritize information about function (in this case, lexical contrast) over the phonological distribution of phones as they determine the phonological status of L2 sounds.
BarriosSHayes-HarbR (2020) Second language learning of phonological alternations with and without orthographic input: Evidence from the acquisition of a German-like voicing alternation. Applied Psycholinguistics41: 517–45.
2.
BarriosSLNamystAMLauEFFeldmanNHIdsardiWJ (2016) Establishing new mappings between familiar phones: Neural and behavioral evidence for early automatic processing of nonnative contrasts. Frontiers in Psychology7: 995.
3.
BatesDMaechlerMBolkerBWalkerS (2015) Lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4: Version R package 1.1–1.15. Journal of Statistical Software67: 1–48.
4.
BeddorPMcGowanKBolandJCoetzeeA (2013) The time course of perception of coarticulation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America133: 2350–66.
5.
BestCT (1995) A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In: StrangeW (ed.) Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research. Timonium, MD: York Press, pp. 171–204.
6.
BestCTTylerMD (2007) Nonnative and second language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In: BohnO-SMunroMJ (eds) Language experience and second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege: Volume 17. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 13–34.
7.
BoomershineACurrie HallKHumeEJohnsonK (2008) The impact of allophony versus contrast on speech perception. In AveryPDresherBERiceK (eds) Contrast in phonology: Theory, perception, acquisition (pp. 145–72). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
8.
CarrascoPHualdeJISimonetM (2012) Dialectal differences in Spanish voiced obstruent allophony: Costa Rican versus Iberian Spanish. Phonetica69: 149–79.
9.
ChládkováKŠimáčkovአ(2020) Distributional learning of speech sounds: An exploratory study into the effects of prior language experience. Language Learning71: 131–61.
10.
CristiàA (2018) Can infants learn phonology in the lab? A meta-analytic answer. Cognition170: 312–27.
11.
EscuderoPBendersTWanrooijK (2011) Enhanced bimodal distributions facilitate the learning of second language vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America130: EL206.
12.
FeldmanNHMyersEBWhiteKSGriffithsTLMorganJL (2013) Word-level information influences phonetic learning in adults and infants. Cognition127: 427–38.
13.
ForsterKForsterJ (2003) DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers35: 116–24.
14.
GaskellMDumayN (2003) Lexical competition and the acquisition of novel words. Cognition89: 105–32.
15.
GelmanAHillJ (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
GomezRL (2002) Variability and detection of invariant structure. Psychological Science13: 431–36.
17.
HanJ-IKimJ-Y (2017) The influence of orthography on the production of alphabetic, second-language allophones by speakers of a non-alphabetic language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research46: 963–82.
18.
HarnsbergerJD (2001) The perception of Malayalam nasal consonants by Marathi, Punjabi, Tamil, Oriya, Bengali, and American English listeners: A multidimensional scaling analysis. Journal of Phonetics29: 303–27.
19.
HautusMJ (1995) Corrections for extreme proportion and their biasing effects on estimated values of dʹ. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers27: 46–51.
20.
Hayes-HarbR (2007) Lexical and statistical evidence in the acquisition of second language phonemes. Second Language Research23: 65–94.
21.
Hayes-HarbRBrownKSmithBL (2018) Orthographic input and the acquisition of German final devoicing by native speakers of English. Language and Speech61: 547–64.
22.
HothornTBretzFWestfallP (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal50: 346–63.
23.
JohnsonKBabelM (2010) On the perceptual basis of distinctive features: Evidence from the perception of fricatives by Danish and English speakers. Journal of Phonetics38: 127–36.
24.
KazaninaNPhillipsCIdsardiWJ (2006) The influence of meaning on the perception of speech sounds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America103: 11381–86.
25.
KuhlPWilliamsKLacerdaFStevensKLindblomB (1992) Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science255: 606–08.
26.
LlompartMReinischE (2020) The phonological form of lexical items modulates the encoding of challenging second-language sound contrasts. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition46: 1590–1610.
27.
MayeJ. (2000). The acquisition of speech sound categories on the basis of distributional information. Unpublished PhD, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
28.
MayeJWerkerJFGerkenL (2002) Infant sensitivity to distributional information can affect discrimination. Cognition82: B101–B111.
29.
MoengE (2018) The acquisition of phonetic categories: An artificial language learning study. Unpublished PhD, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
30.
NoguchiMHudson KamCL (2018) The emergence of the allophonic perception of unfamiliar speech sounds: The effects of contextual distribution and phonetic naturalness. Language Learning68: 147–76.
31.
ÖzçelikÖSprouseRA (2016) Decreasing dependence on orthography in phonological development: Evidence from vowel harmony in English–Turkish interlanguage. In: GürelA (ed.) Second language acquisition of Turkish: Volume 59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 49–72.
32.
PeggJWerkerJF (1997) Adult and infant perception of two English phones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America102: 3742–53.
33.
PeirceJGrayJRSimpsonS, et al. (2019) PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers51: 195–203.
34.
PeperkampSSkoruppaKDupouxE (2006a) The role of phonetic naturalness in phonological rule acquisition. In: MagnitskaiaTColleenZ (eds) Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development: Volume 2. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 464–75.
35.
PeperkampSLe CalvezRNadalJ-PDupouxE (2006b) The acquisition of allophonic rules: Statistical learning with linguistic constraints. Cognition101: B31–B41.
36.
PierrehumbertJ (2003) Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology. Language and Speech46: 115–54.
37.
PolkaLWerkerJF (1994) Developmental changes in perception of nonnative vowel contrasts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance20: 421–35.
38.
Ramon-CasasMSwingleyDSebastián-GallésNBoschL (2009) Vowel categorization during word recognition in bilingual toddlers. Cognitive Psychology59: 96–121.
39.
R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing [software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org (accessed April 2022).
40.
RostGMcMurrayB (2009) Speaker variability augments phonological processing in early word learning. Developmental Science12: 339–49.
41.
RostGMcMurrayB (2010) Finding the signal by adding noise: The role of noncontrastive phonetic variability in early word learning. Infancy15: 608–35.
42.
SaffranJRAslinRNNewportEL (1996) Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science274: 1926–28.
43.
SeidlACristiàA (2012) Infants’ learning of phonological status. Frontiers in Psychology3: 448.
44.
SeidlACristiàABernardAOnishiKH (2009) Allophonic and phonemic contrasts in infants’ learning of sound patterns. Language Learning and Development5: 191–202.
45.
SheaCE (2014) Second language learners and the variable speech signal. Frontiers in Psychology5: 01338.
46.
SheaC (2017) L1 English / L2 Spanish: Orthography–phonology activation without contrasts. Second Language Research33: 207–32.
47.
SheaCECurtinS (2010) Discovering the relationship between context and allophones in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition32: 581–606.
48.
SheaCECurtinS (2011) Experience, representations, and the production of second language allophones. Second Language Research27: 229–50.
49.
SnodgrassJGVanderwartM (1980) A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory6: 174–215.
50.
ThiessenE (2007) The effect of distributional information on children's use of phonemic contrasts. Journal of Memory and Language56: 16–34.
51.
WanrooijKBoersmaPvan ZuijenTL (2014) Distributional vowel training is less effective for adults than for infants: A study using the mismatch response. PLoS One9: e109806.
52.
WerkerJFTeesRC (1984) Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development7: 49–63.
53.
WhalenDHBestCTIrwinJR (1997) Lexical effects in the perception and production of American English /p/ allophones. Journal of Phonetics25: 501–28.
54.
WhiteKSPeperkampSKirkCMorganJL (2008) Rapid acquisition of phonological alternations by infants. Cognition107: 238–65.
55.
YeungHHWerkerJF (2009) Learning words’ sounds before learning how words sound: 9-month-olds use distinct objects as cues to categorize speech information. Cognition113: 234–43.
56.
Young-ScholtenM (2002) Orthographic input in L2 phonological development. In BurmeisterPPiskeTRohdeA (eds) An integrated view of language development: Papers in honour of Henning Wode. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, pp. 263–79.
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.
