2018
DOI: 10.3390/languages3030030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Revisiting (Non-)Native Influence in VOT Production: Insights from Advanced L3 Spanish

Abstract: A growing body of research investigating cross-linguistic influence on the acquisition of a third phonological system suggests that first (L1) and second (L2) languages concur in influencing oral production in the target third language (L3). Yet, there are also claims of either a more noticeable effect of the L2 on the L3, or a prevailing influence from the L1. This study further explores whether the L1 and the L2 compete or converge on exerting influence on L3 pronunciation. To do so, we examine the productio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
3
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recall that both the TPM and the L2SF would predict L2 English transfer in L1 Mandarin-L2 English-L3 Spanish speakers, whereas no negative transfer should be observed according to the CEM. Indeed, the results of the present study are more consistent with studies observing that the L1 or dominant language is a more likely source of transfer (Pyun 2005;Kopečková 2014;Llama and López-Morelos 2016;Llama and Cardoso 2018). Nevertheless, some clear evidence of L2 transfer was found; the L2 flap facilitated acquisition of the L3 tap (but not in the least proficient L3 speakers), and some productions of L2 [ô] were also observed.…”
Section: Implications For Models Of L3 Acquisitionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Recall that both the TPM and the L2SF would predict L2 English transfer in L1 Mandarin-L2 English-L3 Spanish speakers, whereas no negative transfer should be observed according to the CEM. Indeed, the results of the present study are more consistent with studies observing that the L1 or dominant language is a more likely source of transfer (Pyun 2005;Kopečková 2014;Llama and López-Morelos 2016;Llama and Cardoso 2018). Nevertheless, some clear evidence of L2 transfer was found; the L2 flap facilitated acquisition of the L3 tap (but not in the least proficient L3 speakers), and some productions of L2 [ô] were also observed.…”
Section: Implications For Models Of L3 Acquisitionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Nevertheless, the results reported by Kopečková (2014) reveal that for her learners, the L1 was a stronger source of CLI. Similar findings were reported in Pyun (2005), Llama and Cardoso (2018), and Llama and López-Morelos (2016). Pyun (2005) investigated the acquisition of phonological processes (e.g., unreleased obstruents, consonant cluster simplification) in L1 Korean-L2 English-L3 Swedish speakers.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Also, while significantly more CLI from the L2 was found for the L1 Polish group than the L1 German group, the relative amount of CLI from the L2 was very low and much lower than the rate of CLI from the L1. Instead, the results of the present study are more consistent with studies observing that the L1 is the most likely source of transfer at the initial stages of L3 phonological acquisition (Kopečková, 2014;Llama and Cardoso, 2018;Patience, 2018;Pyun, 2005). One reason for why L1 transfer may persist in the phonetic and phonological domain in a way that is not the case in the morphosyntactic domain could be the neuro-motor routines which tend to be established according to the L1 articulatory patterns, at least for L3 learning contexts in which the learner's L2 was acquired in a formal learning setting and when L2 articulations have not been mastered yet in a consistently target-like manner (see Hammarberg, 2001;Patience and Qian, 2022).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…VOT than Peninsular Spanish (Llama & Cardoso, 2018). Language pairs with similar voicing contrasts offer a unique opportunity to investigate whether bilinguals can exploit fine-grained phonetic differences to produce language-specific VOT.…”
Section: Vot Production In Bilingualsmentioning
confidence: 99%