The Development of Phonological Stratification: Evidence from Stop Voicing Perception in Gurindji Kriol and Roper Kriol

Abstract

This study tests the effect of multilingualism and language contact on consonant perception. Here, we explore the emergence of phonological stratification using two alternative forced-choice (2afc) identification task experiments to test listener perception of stop voicing with contrasting minimal pairs modified along a 10-step continuum. We examine a unique language ecology consisting of three languages spoken in Northern Territory, Australia: Roper Kriol (an English-lexifier creole language), Gurindji (Pama-Nyungan), and Gurindji Kriol (a mixed language derived from Gurindji and Kriol). In addition, this study focuses on three distinct age groups: children (group i, 8>), preteens to middle-aged adults (group ii, 10–58), and older adults (group iii, 65+). Results reveal that both Kriol and Gurindji Kriol listeners in group ii contrast the labial series [p] and [b]. Contrarily, while alveolar [t] and velar [k] were consistently identifiable by the majority of participants (74%), their voiced counterparts ([d] and [g]) showed random response patterns by 61% of the participants. Responses to the voiced stimuli from the preteen-adult Kriol group were, however, significantly more consistent than in the Gurindji Kriol group, suggesting Kriol listeners may be further along in acquiring the voicing contrast. Significant results regarding listener exposure to Standard English in both language groups also suggests constant exposure to English maybe a catalyst for setting this change in motion. The more varied responses from the Gurindji, Kriol, and Gurindji Kriol listeners in groups ii and iii, who have little exposure to English, help support these findings.

Fickle fricatives: Fricative and stop perception in Gurindji Kriol, Roper Kriol, and Standard Australian English

“…The Kriol listeners showed marginally more consistent responses than the Gurindji Kriol listeners in the unaspirated-like token series. Stewart et al (2018) conclude that Gurindji Kriol is currently in the process of adopting the contrasts through increased exposure to mainstream English through schooling. This is evidenced by the elderly Gurindji speaking listeners and very young children, who have little exposure and do not appear to be as advanced in the acquisition of stop voicing contrasts.…”

“…II B outlines demographic information relating to the participants. The methodology used in this study follows that of Stewart et al (2018).…”

“…This is of interest given that these contact languages have developed under the influence of traditional Australian languages, wellknown for their lack of fricative-stop contrasts (Maddieson, 2011). We also test one case of [f] vs [p h ] as Stewart et al (2018) showed that most Gurindji Kriol and Kriol listeners distinguish unaspirated and aspirated bilabial stops ([p h ] and [p]) aurally, while this was not the case for other places of articulation.…”

“…Their results suggest that there is little effect of the English contrast in Gurindji Kriol among words of SAE origin in word-initial position, although there is some degree of variability. Stewart et al (2018) used an identification task experiment to examine the perception of minimal pairs in Kriol, Gurindji Kriol, and Gurindji, which differed in the degree of aspiration (long-vs short-lag) of word-initial stops. The Gurindji Kriol and Kriol listeners showed consistent response patterns to the aspirated series but more randomized responses to the unaspirated series, with the exception of the bilabial minimal pairs that showed a great deal of contrastability.…”

The Effects of Language Contact on Non-Native Vowel Sequences in Lexical Borrowings: The Case of Media Lengua

“…To answer this question, phonemic conflict sites (i.e., conflicting areas of phonological convergence in the source languages' phonologies) are compared acoustically and quantitative analyses provide important details into how sounds are treated in the mixed language. Interestingly, unlike the clear splits observed in the morphosyntax, results from acoustic studies (see e.g., Buchan, 2012;Bundgaard-Nielsen & O'Shannessy, 2019;Hendy, 2019;Jones & Meakins, 2013;Jones et al, 2011Jones et al, , 2012Meakins & Stewart, accepted;Rosen, 2006Rosen, , 2007Rosen et al, 2020;Stewart, 2014Stewart, , 2015aStewart, , 2015bStewart, , 2020Stewart & Meakins, accepted;Stewart et al, 2018Stewart et al, , 2020b show that there is a propensity for phonological material to assimilate to the phonology of the ancestral language. In other words, "the language, which was acquired 1 originally as an L2 [second language] .…”