Are Asian Language Speakers Similar or Different? The Perception of Mandarin Lexical Tones by Naïve Listeners from Tonal Language Backgrounds: A Preliminary Comparison of Thai and Vietnamese Listeners*

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
K. Tsukada
{"title":"Are Asian Language Speakers Similar or Different? The Perception of Mandarin Lexical Tones by Naïve Listeners from Tonal Language Backgrounds: A Preliminary Comparison of Thai and Vietnamese Listeners*","authors":"K. Tsukada","doi":"10.1080/07268602.2019.1620681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mandarin is one of the most representative tonal languages in the world with four tone categories (Tone 1 (T1): high level (ā); Tone 2 (T2): high rising (á); Tone 3 (T3): dipping (ǎ); Tone 4 (T4): high falling (à)). Learning Mandarin tones is known to be difficult for speakers from diverse linguistic backgrounds. The perception of Mandarin tones by naïve, non-native listeners from two tonal languages with a larger tone inventory than Mandarin—Thai and Vietnamese—was examined. The listeners’ discrimination accuracy of six tone pairs (T1–T2, T1–T3, T1–T4, T2–T3, T2–T4, T3–T4) was assessed and compared to that of native speakers of Mandarin on the one hand and Australian English on the other hand. The Thai and Vietnamese groups were clearly less accurate than the Mandarin group and showed a different pattern of results from each other. The Australian English group was less accurate than the Thai group only for T2–T4 and did not differ from the Vietnamese group for any of the pairs. Taken together, these findings suggest that first language tone knowledge may not necessarily be facilitative and that lack of experience with lexical tones may not disadvantage listeners from non-tonal language backgrounds in processing unfamiliar tones.","PeriodicalId":44988,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Linguistics","volume":"39 1","pages":"329 - 346"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07268602.2019.1620681","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1620681","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Mandarin is one of the most representative tonal languages in the world with four tone categories (Tone 1 (T1): high level (ā); Tone 2 (T2): high rising (á); Tone 3 (T3): dipping (ǎ); Tone 4 (T4): high falling (à)). Learning Mandarin tones is known to be difficult for speakers from diverse linguistic backgrounds. The perception of Mandarin tones by naïve, non-native listeners from two tonal languages with a larger tone inventory than Mandarin—Thai and Vietnamese—was examined. The listeners’ discrimination accuracy of six tone pairs (T1–T2, T1–T3, T1–T4, T2–T3, T2–T4, T3–T4) was assessed and compared to that of native speakers of Mandarin on the one hand and Australian English on the other hand. The Thai and Vietnamese groups were clearly less accurate than the Mandarin group and showed a different pattern of results from each other. The Australian English group was less accurate than the Thai group only for T2–T4 and did not differ from the Vietnamese group for any of the pairs. Taken together, these findings suggest that first language tone knowledge may not necessarily be facilitative and that lack of experience with lexical tones may not disadvantage listeners from non-tonal language backgrounds in processing unfamiliar tones.
讲亚洲语言的人是相似还是不同?从声调语言背景看天真听众对普通话词汇声调的感知——泰国和越南听众的初步比较*
普通话是世界上最具代表性的声调语言之一,有四种声调类别(声调1(T1):高级(ā);音调2(T2):高音(á);音调3(T3):蘸音;音调4(T4):高音下降(à))。众所周知,对于来自不同语言背景的人来说,学习普通话声调是很困难的。研究了来自两种音调库比普通话(泰语和越南语)大的音调语言的天真的非母语听众对普通话音调的感知。评估了听众对六个音调对(T1–T2、T1–T3、T1–T4、T2–T3、T2–T4、T3–T4)的辨别准确性,并将其与母语为普通话和澳大利亚英语的人的辨别准确性进行了比较。泰语组和越南语组的准确率明显低于普通话组,并且显示出不同的结果模式。澳大利亚-英国组仅在T2–T4方面不如泰国组准确,并且在任何配对方面都与越南组没有差异。总之,这些发现表明,第一语言音调知识可能不一定有助于理解,缺乏词汇音调经验可能不会使非音调语言背景的听众在处理不熟悉的音调时处于不利地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信