2014
DOI: 10.17161/kwpl.1808.12864
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discrimination of Cantonese Tones by Speakers of Tone and Non-tone Languages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
39
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
5
39
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Qin and Mok (2013) observed that although Mandarin listeners distinguished the Cantonese contour-level tones well, they often confused the three level tones even more than English listeners. However, this observation was limited to a small sample.…”
Section: The Use Of F0 In Cantonese Mandarin and Englishmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Qin and Mok (2013) observed that although Mandarin listeners distinguished the Cantonese contour-level tones well, they often confused the three level tones even more than English listeners. However, this observation was limited to a small sample.…”
Section: The Use Of F0 In Cantonese Mandarin and Englishmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Given the differences and similarities between the tonal systems in the two languages, it is predicted that Mandarin listeners will not have difficulty perceiving Cantonese T1 and T2, but they will have great difficulty distinguishing the three Cantonese level tones. Qin and Mok (2013) observed that although Mandarin listeners distinguished the Cantonese contour-level tones well, they often confused the three level tones even more than English listeners. However, this observation was limited to a small sample.…”
Section: The Use Of F0 In Cantonese Mandarin and Englishmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…In contrast, Mandarin listeners are more sensitive to pitch contour than pitch height [44][45][46][47]. Specifically, Mandarin listeners had a great difficulty distinguishing (e.g., Cantonese) level-level tonal contrasts [35,[48][49][50][51].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%