Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Investigating The Lexical Support In Non-Native English Speakers Using The Phonemic Restoration Paradigm

View through CrossRef
Samuel and Frost (2015) investigated the differences between native and non-native English speakers’ lexical influence in speech perception. Using the selective adaptation method, the study showed that lexical support was weaker in less language proficient non-native speakers than native speakers; however, lexical support became stronger in more proficient non-native speakers. The present study investigated the lexical support in speech perception between native and non-native English speakers. Unlike the method used by Samuel and Frost (2015), the present study used the phonemic restoration paradigm. The benefit of using this method is to investigate the difference between native and non-native speakers in perceptually restoring missing phonemes. It was hypothesized that native speakers will show a higher phonemic restoration effect than non-native speakers, as well as greater sensitivity to the phoneme position in a word. In the current study, a group of native speakers and a group of non-native speakers participated in a phonemic restoration task. Both groups were presented with four-syllable stimuli words with one phoneme either replaced with white noise (replacement condition), or white noise added on that phoneme (added condition) in either the third syllable or the forth syllable, followed by an intact version of the same word. Participants rated the degradation of the manipulated word compared to its intact version. Results showed that both native and non-native speakers rated the added versions of the word more similar to the intact version than the replaced version. In addition, both native and non-native speakers rated the manipulated (i.e., added or replaced) versions of the word more similar to the intact version when the manipulated phoneme was in the fourth syllable than when the manipulated phoneme was in the third syllable. However, non-native speakers rated the replaced versions of manipulated words as similar to the intact versions as the native English speakers.
Fort Hays State University
Title: Investigating The Lexical Support In Non-Native English Speakers Using The Phonemic Restoration Paradigm
Description:
Samuel and Frost (2015) investigated the differences between native and non-native English speakers’ lexical influence in speech perception.
Using the selective adaptation method, the study showed that lexical support was weaker in less language proficient non-native speakers than native speakers; however, lexical support became stronger in more proficient non-native speakers.
The present study investigated the lexical support in speech perception between native and non-native English speakers.
Unlike the method used by Samuel and Frost (2015), the present study used the phonemic restoration paradigm.
The benefit of using this method is to investigate the difference between native and non-native speakers in perceptually restoring missing phonemes.
It was hypothesized that native speakers will show a higher phonemic restoration effect than non-native speakers, as well as greater sensitivity to the phoneme position in a word.
In the current study, a group of native speakers and a group of non-native speakers participated in a phonemic restoration task.
Both groups were presented with four-syllable stimuli words with one phoneme either replaced with white noise (replacement condition), or white noise added on that phoneme (added condition) in either the third syllable or the forth syllable, followed by an intact version of the same word.
Participants rated the degradation of the manipulated word compared to its intact version.
Results showed that both native and non-native speakers rated the added versions of the word more similar to the intact version than the replaced version.
In addition, both native and non-native speakers rated the manipulated (i.
e.
, added or replaced) versions of the word more similar to the intact version when the manipulated phoneme was in the fourth syllable than when the manipulated phoneme was in the third syllable.
However, non-native speakers rated the replaced versions of manipulated words as similar to the intact versions as the native English speakers.

Related Results

Aviation English - A global perspective: analysis, teaching, assessment
Aviation English - A global perspective: analysis, teaching, assessment
This e-book brings together 13 chapters written by aviation English researchers and practitioners settled in six different countries, representing institutions and universities fro...
Phonemic error Patterns in the Pediatric Population as Reported by Practicing Speech-Language Pathologists
Phonemic error Patterns in the Pediatric Population as Reported by Practicing Speech-Language Pathologists
Background: Phonemic awareness plays a vital role in speech intelligibility and literacy development in early stages of learning. Phonemic errors may occur in cases of phonemic awa...
The The Comparison of Lexical Bundles in EFL Teachers’ Talk between Non-native and Native English Teachers
The The Comparison of Lexical Bundles in EFL Teachers’ Talk between Non-native and Native English Teachers
Lexical bundles are multi-word expressions that usually hang together. They are considered as a main factor in building fluency in academic discourse; helping to shape meanings and...

Back to Top