Tables
1.5Summary of statistical test results for the effect of dialect, gender, and age of speaker on the diphthongization of /y/ and /ø/.
2.5Phonetic effects on heritage languages by type of language combination.
3.4Descriptive statistics of phonological transfer in the written test by group.
3.5Percentage of phonological transfer types in the written test by group.
3.6Correlation of phonological transfer with individual and sociocultural factors.
5.2Demographic and language profiles of the Bradford participants.
5.3Target words elicited from UK participants, with expected realization in MP by younger speakers, split by potential for adaptation in loanword patterns A, B, or C~D.
7.1Average VOT values for Russian, Polish, and German fortis and lenis stops in word-initial position in monolinguals.
7.4Average VOT values for voiceless/fortis stops in heritage Russian and Polish.
7.5Average VOT values for voiced/lenis stops in heritage Russian and Polish.
7.6Frequency of correct discrimination of voiced and voiceless consonants.
8.1Overall patterns of strategies for realizing information focus in Peninsular Spanish.
8.2Types and frequencies of focus-marking strategies in information focus declaratives by heritage and monolingual speakers of Peninsular Spanish.
8.3Overall patterns of strategies for realizing contrastive focus in Peninsular Spanish.
8.4Types and frequencies of focus-marking strategies in contrastive focus declaratives by heritage and monolingual speakers of Peninsular Spanish.
8.5Overview of attested pitch accents on constituents in declaratives with information focus by heritage and monolingual speakers of Peninsular Spanish.
8.6Overview of attested pitch accents on constituents in declaratives with contrastive focus by heritage and monolingual speakers of Peninsular Spanish.
12.1Intonational events from North American English, Modern Icelandic, and North American Icelandic.
12.2Estimated marginal means for pairwise comparisons of groups per pitch accent in declaratives.
12.3Estimated marginal means for pairwise comparisons of groups per pitch accent in polar questions.
12.4Results of the logistic mixed-effects model to predict boundary tone by group in polar questions.
14.6Social factor effects in models, comparing reported-merger tone pairs to pairs where no merger is expected.
14.7Linguistic factor effects in models, comparing reported-merger tone pairs to non-merging pairs.
15.1Comparison of ranges of mean release durations for Polish voiceless and English lenis and fortis plosives.
15.2Examples of the Polish intervocalic plosives investigated.
15.3Distribution of all analyzed tokens per speaker and per phoneme.
15.4Datasets and additional variables selected for modeling each acoustic parameter.
15.5Mean closure phonation percentages and standard deviations by generation and voicing.
15.6Results of the beta regression model of unnormalized closure phonation percentage.
15.7Distribution of tokens with a measurable V1 onset and mean V1 durations by generation, voice category, and stress.
15.8Results of the generalized linear model for z-scored unstressed V1 duration.
15.9Distribution of tokens, mean closure durations, and standard deviations per generation, voice category, and stress for V1.
15.10Results of the generalized linear model for z-scored closure duration in tokens with a preceding stressed vowel.
15.11Results of the generalized linear effects model for z-scored closure duration in tokens with a preceding unstressed vowel.
15.12Distribution of tokens, mean release durations, and standard deviations per generation, voice category, and place of articulation.
15.13Results of the generalized linear model results for z-scored release duration in tokens with a following stressed vowel.
15.14Results of the generalized linear model for z-scored release duration in tokens with a following unstressed vowel.
16.3Average VOT values, standard deviations, and ranges across groups.
16.4Dissimilarity ratings between Portuguese and English voiceless stops.
16.5Mean percent assimilation of Portuguese and English stops and goodness-of-fit ratings.
17.1Prosodic variables under examination in relation to Brazilian Veneto rhotics.
17.2Coefficients, standard errors, t values, and p values for the predictors in the primary statistical model.
