Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T17:12:04.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilingual perceptual benefits of experience with a heritage language*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2014

CHARLES B. CHANG Open the ORCID record for CHARLES B. CHANG [Opens in a new window]
CHARLES B. CHANG*
Affiliation:
Boston University
*
Address for correspondence: Boston University, CAS Linguistics Program, 621 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USAcbchang@post.harvard.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research on the linguistic knowledge of heritage speakers has been concerned primarily with the advantages conferred by heritage language experience in production, perception, and (re)learning of the heritage language. Meanwhile, second-language speech research has begun to investigate potential benefits of first-language transfer in second-language performance. Bridging these two bodies of work, the current study examined the perceptual benefits of heritage language experience for heritage speakers of Korean in both the heritage language (Korean) and the dominant language (American English). It was hypothesized that, due to their early bilingual experience and the different nature of unreleased stops in Korean and American English, heritage speakers of Korean would show not only native-like perception of Korean unreleased stops, but also better-than-native perception of American English unreleased stops. Results of three perception experiments were consistent with this hypothesis, suggesting that benefits of early heritage language experience can extend well beyond the heritage language.

Keywords

heritage speakersKorean AmericansKoreanAmerican Englishunreleased stopscoarticulation
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 19 , Special Issue 4: Cross-language Effects in Bilingual Production and Comprehension , August 2016 , pp. 791 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The author gratefully acknowledges technical, financial, and logistical support from the Center for Advanced Study of Language, the Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, and the Second Language Acquisition Program at the University of Maryland and helpful feedback from four anonymous reviewers and audiences at the CUNY Graduate Center, the 2013 Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, and the 7th Heritage Language Research Institute.

References

Abramson, A. S., & Tingsabadh, K. (1999). Thai final stops: Cross-language perception. Phonetica, 56, 111–122.Google Scholar
Au, T. K., Knightly, L. M., Jun, S.-A., & Oh, J. S. (2002). Overhearing a language during childhood. Psychological Science, 13, 238–243.Google Scholar
Au, T. K., & Oh, J. S. (2009). Korean as a heritage language. In Lee, C., Simpson, G. B. & Kim, Y. (eds.), Handbook of East Asian psycholinguistics (vol. III): Korean, pp. 268–275. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Au, T. K., Oh, J. S., Knightly, L. M., Jun, S.-A., & Romo, L. F. (2008). Salvaging a childhood language. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 998–1011.Google Scholar
Au, T. K., & Romo, L. F. (1997). Does childhood language experience help adult learners? In Chen, H.-C. (ed.), The cognitive processing of Chinese and related Asian languages, pp. 417–443. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.Google Scholar
Ben-Zeev, S. (1977). The influence of bilingualism on cognitive strategy and cognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1009–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bent, T., & Bradlow, A. R. (2003). The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114, 1600–1610.Google Scholar
Bent, T., Bradlow, A. R., & Smith, B. L. (2008). Production and perception of temporal patterns in native and non-native speech. Phonetica, 65, 131–147.Google Scholar
Best, C. T. (1994). The emergence of native-language phonological influences in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. In Goodman, J. C. & Nusbaum, H. C. (eds.), The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words, pp. 167–224. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Strange (ed.), pp. 171–204.Google Scholar
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In Bohn, O.-S. & Munro, M. J. (eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege, pp. 13–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (2010). Cognitive and linguistic processing in the bilingual mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 19–23.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Green, D. W., & Gollan, T. H. (2009). Bilingual minds. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10, 89–129.Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2011). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.3. http://www.praat.org (retrieved November 1, 2011).Google Scholar
Bohn, O.-S., & Best, C. T. (2012). Native-language phonetic and phonological influences on perception of American English approximants by Danish and German listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 40, 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., & Pisoni, D. B. (1999). Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: Talker-, listener-, and item-related factors. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 2074–2085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broselow, E. (1984). An investigation of transfer in second language acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 22, 253–269.Google Scholar
Byrd, D. (1993). 54,000 American stops. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 83, 97–116.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. N., & Rosenthal, J. W. (2000). Heritage languages. In Rosenthal, J. W. (ed.), Handbook of undergraduate second language education, pp. 165–184. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chang, C. B. (2012). Rapid and multifaceted effects of second-language learning on first-language speech production. Journal of Phonetics, 40, 249–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, C. B., Haynes, E. F., Yao, Y., & Rhodes, R. (2009). A tale of five fricatives: Consonantal contrast in heritage speakers of Mandarin. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 15, 37–43.Google Scholar
Chang, C. B., Haynes, E. F., Yao, Y., & Rhodes, R. (2010). The phonetic space of phonological categories in heritage speakers of Mandarin. In Bane, M., Bueno, J., Grano, T., Grotberg, A. & McNabb, Y. (eds.), Proceedings from the 44th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society: The Main Session, pp. 31–45. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Chang, C. B., & Mishler, A. (2012). Evidence for language transfer leading to a perceptual advantage for non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 132, 2700–2710.Google Scholar
Chang, C. B., Yao, Y., Haynes, E. F., & Rhodes, R. (2011). Production of phonetic and phonological contrast by heritage speakers of Mandarin. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 129, 3964–3980.Google Scholar
Cheon, S. Y., & Anderson, V. B. (2008). Acoustic and perceptual similarities between English and Korean sibilants: Implications for second language acquisition. Korean Linguistics, 14, 41–64.Google Scholar
Cutler, A. (2001). Listening to a second language through the ears of a first. Interpreting, 5, 1–23.Google Scholar
Cutler, A., García Lecumberri, M. L., & Cooke, M. (2008). Consonant identification in noise by native and non-native listeners: Effects of local context. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124, 1264–1268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, L. (2011). Characteristics of stop releases in American English spontaneous speech. Speech Communication, 53, 1042–1058.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English: 425 million words, 1990–present. http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/ (retrieved November 1, 2011).Google Scholar
Dixon, P. (2008). Models of accuracy in repeated-measures designs. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 447–456.Google Scholar
Doyle, A.-B., Champagne, M., & Segalowitz, N. (1978). Some issues in the assessment of linguistic consequences of early bilingualism. In Paradis, M. (ed.), Aspects of bilingualism, pp. 13–21. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1987). The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics, 15, 47–65.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange (ed.), pp. 233–272.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (2003). A method for assessing the perception of vowels in a second language. In Fava, E. & Mioni, A. (eds.), Issues in clinical linguistics, pp. 19–43. Padova, Italy: Unipress.Google Scholar
García Lecumberri, M. L., & Cooke, M. (2006). Effect of masker type on native and non-native consonant perception in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 2445–2454.Google Scholar
Godson, L. (2003). Phonetics of language attrition: Vowel production and articulatory setting in the speech of Western Armenian heritage speakers. Ph.D. dissertation , University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Godson, L. (2004). Vowel production in the speech of Western Armenian heritage speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 2, 44–69.Google Scholar
Goto, H. (1971). Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “L” and “R”. Neuropsychologia, 9, 317–323.Google Scholar
Hallé, P. A., Best, C. T., & Levitt, A. (1999). Phonetic vs. phonological influences on French listeners’ perception of American English approximants. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 281–306.Google Scholar
Han, M. (1992). The timing control of geminate and single stop consonants in Japanese: A challenge for nonnative speakers. Phonetica, 49, 102–127.Google Scholar
Hayes-Harb, R., Smith, B. L., Bent, T., & Bradlow, A. R. (2008). The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit for native speakers of Mandarin: Production and perception of English word-final voicing contrasts. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 664–679.Google Scholar
Hecht, B. F., & Mulford, R. (1982). The acquisition of a second language phonology: Interaction of transfer and developmental factors. Applied Psycholinguistics, 3, 313–328.Google Scholar
Ingram, J. C. L., & Park, S.-G. (1997). Cross-language vowel perception and production by Japanese and Korean learners of English. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 343–370.Google Scholar
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2003). A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition, 87, B47–B57.Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446.Google Scholar
Kang, Y. (2003). Perceptual similarity in loanword adaptation: English postvocalic word-final stops in Korean. Phonology, 20, 219–273.Google Scholar
Kim, J.-H., Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Binding interpretations of anaphors by Korean heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 16, 3–35.Google Scholar
Knightly, L. M., Jun, S.-A., Oh, J. S., & Au, T. K. (2003). Production benefits of childhood overhearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114, 465–474.Google Scholar
Ko, I. (2009). The merger of ey /e/ and ay /ɛ/ of Seoul Korean. Eoneo Jeongbo [Language Information], 10, 73–89.Google Scholar
Kuhl, P. K., Williams, K. A., Lacerda, F., Stevens, K. N., & Lindblom, B. (1992). Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255, 606–608.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lee, H. B. (1993). Korean. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 23, 28–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee-Ellis, S. (2012). Looking into bilingualism through the heritage speaker's mind. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B., & MacNeilage, P. (2011). Coarticulation: A universal phonetic phenomenon with roots in deep time. TMH-QPSR (Speech, Music and Hearing Quarterly Progress and Status Report), 51, 41–44.Google Scholar
Lisker, L. (1999). Perceiving final voiceless stops without release: Effects of preceding monophthongs versus nonmonophthongs. Phonetica, 56, 44–55.Google Scholar
Lukyanchenko, A., & Gor, K. (2011). Perceptual correlates of phonological representations in heritage speakers and L2 learners. In Danis, N., Mesh, K. & Sung, H. (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 414–426. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user's guide (2nd edn.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (2001). Foreign accent: The ontogeny and phylogeny of second language phonology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (2008). Transfer in second language phonology: A review. In Hansen Edwards, J. G. & Zampini, M. L. (eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition, pp. 63–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Malécot, A. (1958). The role of releases in the identification of released final stops: A series of tape-cutting experiments. Language, 34, 370–380.Google Scholar
Michael, E. B., & Gollan, T. H. (2005). Being and becoming bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 389–407. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Michaud, A., Vũ Ngọc, T., Amelot, A., & Roubeau, B. (2006). Nasal release, nasal finals and tonal contrasts in Hanoi Vietnamese: An aerodynamic experiment. Mon-Khmer Studies, 36, 121–137.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. [A.] (2002). Incomplete acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in adult bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 39–68.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. [A.] (2004). Convergent outcomes in L2 acquisition and L1 loss. In Schmid et al. (eds.), pp. 259–279.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2008). Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2012). Is the heritage language like a second language? EUROSLA Yearbook, 12, 1–29.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. [A.], Bhatt, R., & Bhatia, A. (2012). Erosion of case and agreement in Hindi heritage speakers. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2, 141–176.Google Scholar
Mora, J. C. (2005). Lexical knowledge effects on the discrimination of non-native phonemic contrasts in words and non-words by Spanish/Catalan bilingual learners of English. In Hazan, V. & Iverson, P. (eds.), Proceedings of the ISCA Workshop on Plasticity in Speech Perception (PSP2005), pp. 43–46. London: International Speech Communication Association.Google Scholar
Nábělek, A. K., & Donahue, A. M. (1984). Perception of consonants in reverberation by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 632–634.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Anderson, J. R. (ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition, pp. 1–55. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oh, J. S., & Au, T. K. (2005). Learning Spanish as a heritage language: The role of sociocultural background variables. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 18, 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oh, J. S., Au, T. K., & Jun, S.-A. (2002). Benefits of childhood language experience for adult L2 learners’ phonology. In Skarabela, B., Fish, S. & Do, A. H.-J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 2), pp. 464–472. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Oh, J. S., Au, T. K., & Jun, S.-A. (2009). The nature of childhood language memory: Korean adoptees learning Korean as adults. In J. Chandlee, M. Franchini, S. Lord & G.-M. Rheiner (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 2), pp. 391–397. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Oh, J. S., Au, T. K., & Jun, S.-A. (2010). Early childhood language memory in the speech perception of international adoptees. Journal of Child Language, 37, 1123–1132.Google Scholar
Oh, J., Jun, S.-A., Knightly, L., & Au, T. (2003). Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86, B53–B64.Google Scholar
Pallier, C., Dehaene, S., Poline, J.-B., LeBihan, D., Argenti, A.-M., Dupoux, E., & Mehler, J. (2003). Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: Can a second language replace the first? Cerebral Cortex, 13, 155–161.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. (2008). Gender under incomplete acquisition: Heritage speakers’ knowledge of noun categorization. Heritage Language Journal, 6, 40–71.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M., & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 368–395.Google Scholar
Psychology Software Tools, Inc. (2002). E-Prime. Version 2.0. http://www.pstnet.com (retrieved November 1, 2011).Google Scholar
Roca, I., & Johnson, W. (1999). A course in phonology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Rositzke, H. A. (1943). The articulation of final stops in General American speech. American Speech, 18, 39–42.Google Scholar
Schmid, M. S., Köpke, B., Keijzer, M., & Weilemar, L. (eds.) (2004). First language attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, N., & Soto-Faraco, S. (1999). Online processing of native and non-native phonemic contrasts in early bilinguals. Cognition, 72, 111–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheldon, A., & Strange, W. (1982). The acquisition of /r/ and /l/ by Japanese learners of English: Evidence that speech production can precede speech perception. Applied Psycholinguistics, 3, 243–261.Google Scholar
Sohn, H.-M. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strange, W. (ed.) (1995). Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research. Baltimore, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Sumner, M., & Samuel, A. G. (2005). Perception and representation of regular variation: The case of final /t/. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 322–338.Google Scholar
Sumner, M., & Samuel, A. G. (2009). The effect of experience on the perception and representation of dialect variants. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 487–501.Google Scholar
Tajima, K., Kato, H., Rothwell, A., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Munhall, K. G. (2008). Training English listeners to perceive phonemic length contrasts in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 397–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tees, R. C., & Werker, J. F. (1984). Perceptual flexibility: Maintenance or recovery of the ability to discriminate non-native speech sounds. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38, 579–590.Google Scholar
Tsukada, K. (2006). Cross-language perception of word-final stops in Thai and English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 309–318.Google Scholar
Tsukada, K., Nguyen, T. T. A., Roengpitya, R., & Ishihara, S. (2007). Cross-language perception of word-final stops: Comparison of Cantonese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese listeners. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, pp. 1781–1784. Dudweiler: Pirrot.Google Scholar
Tsukada, K., & Roengpitya, R. (2008). Discrimination of English and Thai words ending with voiceless stops by native Thai listeners differing in English experience. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 38, 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valdés, G. (2005). Bilingualism, heritage language learners, and SLA research: Opportunities lost or seized? The Modern Language Journal, 89, 410–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ventureyra, V. A. G., & Pallier, C. (2004). In search of the lost language: The case of adopted Koreans in France. In Schmid et al. (eds.), pp. 207–221.Google Scholar
Ventureyra, V. A. G., Pallier, C., & Yoo, H.-Y.. (2004). The loss of first language phonetic perception in adopted Koreans. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 79–91.Google Scholar
Wang, W. S.-Y. (1959). Transition and release as perceptual cues for final plosives. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 2, 66–73.Google Scholar
Yamada, R. A. (1995). Age and acquisition of second language speech sounds: Perception of American English /r/ and /l/ by native speakers of Japanese. In Strange (ed.), pp. 305–320.Google Scholar
Yamada, R. A., & Tohkura, Y. (1992). Perception of American English /r/ and /l/ by native speakers of Japanese. In Tohkura, Y., Vatikiotis-Bateson, E. & Sagisaka, Y. (eds.), Speech perception, production and linguistic structure, pp. 155–174. Tokyo: Ohmsha.Google Scholar
Yamada, R. A., Tohkura, Y., & Kobayashi, N. (1996). Effect of word familiarity on non-native phoneme perception: Identification of English /r/, /l/, and /w/ by native speakers of Japanese. In James, A. & Leather, J. (eds.), Second-language speech: Structure and process, pp. 103–117. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar