This article presents the foundations of the Feature Competition Model (FCM) of segment transfer. The FCM is a proposal to explain how L2 sounds are mapped on to L1 phonological categories. Like previous analyses on segment transfer, the FCM assumes that not all features are of the same prominence in a given phonemic inventory and that feature prominence can be determined through underspecification. Unlike previous analyses, the FCM adopts a dynamic approach to phonology, one which assumes that fea tures do not have discrete values, rather ones which are continuous, of greater or lesser prominence in an inventory. A specific metric for calculat ing prominence is given, and hypotheses for three L1-L2 contexts are gener ated and tested. The results of an experiment suggest that the metric has predictive power, but that certain refinements of the formula are necessary. Finally, implications the FCM has for our understanding of developing L2 speech patterns are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abaglo, P. and Archangeli, D.1989: Language-particular underspecification: Gengbe /e/ and Yoruba /i/. Linguistic Inquiry20, 457-80.
2.
Archangeli, D.1988: Aspects of underspecification theory. Phonology Yearbook5, 183—207.
3.
Bansal, R.K.1969: The intelligibility of Indian English. Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages.
4.
Benware, W.1986: Phonetics and phonology of modern German. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
5.
Best, C. and Strange, W.1992: Effects of phonological and phonetic factors on crosslanguage perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics20, 305-30.
6.
Bohn, O. and Flege, J.1992: The production of new and similar vowels by adult German learners of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition14,131-58.
7.
Broeder, P. and Plunkett, K. forthcoming: Connectionism and second language acquisition. In Ellis, N., editor, Implicit and explicit learning of languages. London: Academic Press.
8.
Broselow, E.1983: Non-obvious transfer: on predicting epenthesis errors . In Gass, S. and Selinker, L., editors, Language transfer in language leaning . Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 269-80.
9.
Bruner, J., Goodnow, J. and Austin, G.1956: A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.
10.
Chomsky, N.1991: The economy of derivation and representation. In Freidlin, R., editor, Principles and parameters in comparative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
Chomsky, N. and Halle, M.1968: The sound pattern of English. New York : Harper & Row.
12.
Clements, G.N.1985: The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook2, 223-52.
13.
— 1992: Phonological primes: features or gestures? Phonetica49, 181-93.
14.
Collins, B. and Mees, I.1984: The sounds of English and Dutch (2nd edn). Leiden: Leiden University Press.
15.
Cowan, R.1983: Toward a psychological theory of interference in second language learning. In Wallace Robinett, B. and Schachter, J., editors, Second language learning: contrastive analysis, error analysis, and related aspects. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 109—17.
16.
Dickerson, L.1974: Internal and external patterning of phonological variability in the speech of Japanese learners of English: toward a theory of second-language acquisition. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
17.
Flege, J.1991: Perception and production: the relevance of phonetic input to L2 learning. In Huebner, T. and Ferguson, C., editors, Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 249-89.
18.
Gass, S.1983: Language transfer and universal grammatical relations . In Gass, S. and Selinker, L., editors, Language transfer in language learning . Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 69-82.
19.
Gasser, M.1990: Connectionism and universals of second language acquisition . Studies in Second Language Acquisition12,179-99.
20.
Goldsmith, J.1990: Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
21.
— 1991: Dynamic computational models. Paper given at the Conference on Phonology: State of the Art, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, May.
22.
— 1992: Local modelling in phonology. In Davis, S., editor, Connectionism: theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 229—46.
23.
— 1993: The last phonological ruleChicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
Halle, M.1959: The sound pattern of Russian. The Hague : Mouton.
25.
Hancin-Bhatt, B.1994a: Phonological transfer in second language perception and production. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Illinois , Urbana-Champaign.
26.
— 1994b: Phonotactics in L2 production: universal vs language-specific effects. Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics, March, Baltimore.
27.
Hancin-Bhatt, B. and Bhatt, R.1992: On the nature of L1 filter and crosslanguage transfer effects. In Leather, J. and James, A., editors, New Sounds 92. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, 18—28.
28.
Hancin-Bhatt, B. and Govindjee, A. in preparation: A computational model of feature competition in L2 phonology. Proceedings, Workshop on Cognitive Models of Language Acquisition.
29.
Hooper, J.1976: An introduction to natural generative phonology. New York: Academic Press.
30.
James, A.1986a: Suprasegmental phonology and segmental form. Tübingen: Narr.
31.
— 1986b: Phonic transfer and phonological explanation. In Kellerman, E. and Sharwood Smith, M., editors, Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press, 134—49.
32.
Keel, W.1979: The acquisition of German as a second language. In Eckman, F. and Hastings, A., editors, Studies in first and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 215-23.
33.
Kellerman, E.1983: Now you see it, now you don't. In Gass, S. and Selinker, L., editors, Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 112-34.
34.
Koutsoudas, A. and Koutsoudas, O.1983: A contrastive analysis of the segmental phonemes of Greek and English. In Wallace Robinett, B. and Schachter, J., editors, Second language learning: contrastive analysis, error analysis, and related aspects . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 41—62 (reprinted from Language Learning12, 211—30).
35.
Lado, R.1957: Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
36.
Lees, R.1968: The phonology of modern standard Turkish. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
37.
Legendre, G. and Smolensky, P.1990a: Harmonic grammar-a formal multi-level connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: theoretical foundations. Proceedings, Twelfth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cambridge, MA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 388-95.
38.
— 1990b: Harmonic grammar-a formal multi-level connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: an application. Proceedings, Twelfth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cambridge, MA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 91.
39.
Linell, P.1982: The concept of phonological form and the activities of speech production and speech perception. Journal of Phonetics10, 37-72.
40.
MacWhinney, B.1987: The competition model. In MacWhinney, B., editor, Mechanisms of language acquisition . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 249-308.
41.
Michaels, D.1973: Sinhalese sound replacements and feature hierarchies. Linguistics170, 14—22.
42.
— 1974: Sound replacements and phonological systems. Linguistics176, 69-81.
43.
Mohanan, K.P.1993: Fields of attraction in phonology. In Goldsmith, J., editor, The last phonological rule. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 61-116.
44.
Nemser, W.1971: An experimental study of phonological interference in the English of Hungarians. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
45.
Odlin, T.1989: Language transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
Ohala, M.1983: Aspects of Hindi phonology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
47.
Paradis, C. and Prunet, J.-F.1991: Introduction: asymmetry and visibility. In Paradis, C. and Prunet, J.-F. , editors, Phonetics and phonology 2: the special status of coronals. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1-25.
48.
Pulleyblank, D.1988: Vocalic underspecification in Yoruba. Linguistic Inquiry9, 233-70.
49.
Ritchie, W.1968: On the explanation of phonic interference. Language Learning18, 183-97 (reprinted in Wallace Robinett, B. and Schachter, J., editors, 1983: Second language learning: contrastive analysis, error analysis, and related aspects. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 73-86).
50.
Sagey, E.1986: The representation of features and relations in nonlinear phonology. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.
51.
Schachter, J.1983: A new account of language transfer. In Gass, S. and Selinker, L. , editors, Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 98-111.
52.
Selinker, L.1969: Language transfer. GeneralLinguistics9, 67-92.
53.
Shibatani, M.1990: The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54.
Smolensky, P.1986: Information processing in dynamical systems: foundations of harmony theory. In Rumelhart, D., McClelland, J. and the PDP Research Group, editors, Parallel distributed processing : vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55.
Steriade, D.1987: Redundant values. In Papers from the twenty-third regional meeting, CLS. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
56.
Stockwell, R. and Bowen, J.1965: The sounds of English and Spanish. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
57.
Trubetzkoy, N.S.1969: Principles of phonology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press (trans. C. Baltaxe).
58.
Vance, T.1987: An introduction to Japanese phonology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
59.
Weinberger, S.1990: Minimal segments in second language phonology. Paper presented at New Sounds 90, Amsterdam .
60.
— in press: Minimal segments in second language phonology. In James, BA. and Leather, J. , editors, Second language speech. Berlin : Mouton.
61.
Weinreich, U.1953: Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.
62.
— 1957: On the description of phonic interference. Word13,1-11.
