Learning novel phonotactics from exposure to continuous speech

Abstract

Knowledge of phonotactics is commonly assumed to derive from the lexicon. However, computational studies have suggested that phonotactic constraints might arise before the lexicon is in place, in particular from co-occurrences in continuous speech. The current study presents two artificial language learning experiments aimed at testing whether phonotactic learning can take place in the absence of words. Dutch participants were presented with novel consonant constraints embedded in continuous artificial languages. Vowels occurred at random, which resulted in an absence of recurring word forms in the speech stream. In Experiment 1 participants with different training languages showed significantly different preferences on a set of novel test items. However, only one of the two languages resulted in preferences that were above chancelevel performance. In Experiment 2 participants were exposed to a control language without novel statistical cues. Participants did not develop a preference for either phonotactic structure in the test items. An analysis of Dutch phonotactics indicated that the failure to induce novel phonotactics in one condition might have been due to interference from the native language. Our findings suggest that novel phonotactics can be learned from continuous speech, but participants have difficulty learning novel patterns that go against the native language.

When statistics collide: The use of transitional and phonotactic probability cues to word boundaries

“…Although unexpected, this is in line with evidence showing that abrupt distinction between legal vs. illegal phonotactics at test affect preference, regardless of TP information presented during familiarization (Finn & Hudson Kam, 2008). Future research can prevent PP effects during test by using the same set of test items across conditions (Adriaans & Kager, 2017;Reber & Perruchet, 2003). It is worth noting, however, that the higher the stimuli PPs, as in the current study, the harder it is to balance PPs at both familiarization and test-especially when differences in PP, as small as 0.0024, might affect performance, a point we return in the next paragraphs.…”

“…Even before segmenting speech into words, 5-montholds are already sensitive to PP information from their native language (Sundara & Breiss, 2020). In addition, both infants (Chambers et al, 2003) and adults (Adriaans & Kager, 2017;Onishi et al, 2002) can learn PPs from brief exposures to continuous speech in the lab. Further, PPs have been shown to affect a range of psychological phenomena, from memory to speech production (Apel et al, 2006;Gathercole et al, 1999;Graf Estes et al, 2016;MacKenzie et al, 2012;Zamuner, 2009).…”

<strong>Order in the Statistical Learning of Phonotactics</strong>

“…Evidence of such learning is widespread, including indirect evidence from statistical learning tasks. In one such task, Adriaans and Kager (2017) familiarized Dutch speakers with consonant frames (for example, p_d_g_) in a continuous, synthesized speech stream. Vowels were added to the frames randomly, meaning that there were never repeated "words".…”

“…To succeed in the tasks reported by Adriaans and Kager (2017) and Richtsmeier (2011), learners must attend to the frequencies of repeated elements appearing in the experimental input.…”

Language structure, attitudes, and learning from ambient exposure: Lexical and phonotactic knowledge of Spanish among non-Spanish-speaking Californians and Texans

“…The formation of phonotactic knowledge is often thought to proceed in parallel with the construction of a proto-lexicon, with phonotactic knowledge helping to segment the speech stream and discover new morphs [ 29 ], and the discovery of new morphs helping to refine phonotactic knowledge [ 30 ]. While it has been argued that phonotactic knowledge can arise in the absence of a proto-lexicon [ 31 ], we assume here that the presence of phonotacic knowledge alongside implicit lexical knowledge implies the existence of a proto-lexicon. In this case, we assume for modeling purposes that the phonotactic knowledge derives unidirectionally from the proto-lexicon, in the same way as native-language phonotactic knowledge in adults is assumed to derive from the lexicon [ 32 , 33 ].…”