Transcript 下載/瀏覽Download

&
Introduction
Error analysis
L2 acquisition (SLA)
Background
Markedness effect (ME) on l & r
Similarity effect (SE) on l & r
Outline
Hypotheses Testing
(Markedness Differential Hypothesis & Speech Learning Model)
Results of “l & r” production errors
Conclusions
ME in MDH (Eckman)
SE in SLM (Flege)
Introduction
Error analysis
L2 acquisition (SLA)
Contrastive Analysis
Different
Taiwanese
EFL learners
(TEFLLs)
Errors by L2 learners
L2
L1
/r/ (easy)
ㄌ /l/ (difficult)
Similar
Language Transfer with
Similarity Effect
Language Transfer
Similarity effect (SE)
L2 learners have problems with those sounds that sound similar
but are different in L1 and L2 (Flege, 1987, 1991, 1995a, 1995b).
L2 & L1 sounds: Similar
Difficult
Markedness on L2 Acquisition
Markedness
Universal grammar (UG)
Unmarked (common, easy)
Marked
(different, difficult)
Language transfer
(native transfer)
This study aims to test markedness vs. similarity on
acquisition of English /l/ & /r/
Taiwanese EFL learners (TEFLLs)
Markedness
Similarity
Unmarked
Marked Familiar
Unfamiliar
/l/
＞
/r/
/l/
＜
/r/
Which one is better to explain the learning path
followed by TEFLLs while learning “/l/ & /r/”
Background
ME on “/l/ & /r/”
SE on “/l/ & /r/”
Markedness proposed by Trubetzkoy (1939)
Linguistic theory
SLA
Markedness: marked (specific), not constrained by UG
unmarked (general), constrained by UG
A relative property, not a absolute one
Incorporated into MDH by Eckman
2 ways of explanation: typological markedness
generative grammar
Markedness Explained for 2 Ways
Typological markedness
by Eckman
every language
X
Y
include
(marked)
(unmarked)
Complex
syllables
(CVC)
include
Simple
syllables
(CV)
Generative grammar
by Chomsky
unmarked
marked
Core acquired Peripheral
(basic) before (complex)
difficult
＜
CV syllables
Complex
e.g. CVC
2 Diagnostic Tests for Markedness on English /l/ & /r/
Featural markedness
Frequency markedness
Segment types
/b/, /p/, /t/,
/r/
/l/ & /r/
/d/, /k/, /g/
(marked)
(marked compared to other in L1
hard
consonants, acquired later)
Note. M = Mandarin; S = Southern Min
M/SM
/l/ ㄌ
(unmarked)
sucessful
TEFLLs encounter difficulty
more marked than M/SM
Markedness Differentitial Hypothesis (MDH) by Eckman
(1) Difficult: areas of TL differ from NL; TL markedness > NL
(2) The degree of difficulty ＝ the degree of markedness
(3) Not difficult: areas of TL differ from NL; TL markedness < NL
Note. TL = Target language; NL = Native language
e.g. MDH on English-German obstruents
marke
d
English
unmarke
d
more marked
German
Voiced
Voiceless
Voiced
/b/, /d/, /g/ /p/, /t/, /k/ /b/, /d/, /g/
Wordinitial
Wordmedial
Wordfinal
difficult
Voiceless
/p/, /t/, /k/
Predictions of MDH on /l/ & /r/
(1) The areas of differences between L1 and L2
/l/ less marked than /r/
(2) TEFLLs
ME
Difficult/
problems
TEFLLs
/l/ (unmarked) acquired before /r/ (marked)
English
Word-initial /l/
M/SM
Beijing
ㄌ
Word-final /l/ (more marked)
Word-initial /r/ (lip round, e.g. read)
Word-final /r/ (tongue curl, e.g. car)
ㄦ
Speech Learning Model (SLM) by Flege
Equivalence classification (EC)
L2 learners
L2 sounds (＝ L1 sounds)
have difficulty
(1) sounds that sound similar but different in L1 & L2
(2) classify the differences between “similar” L1 & L2 sounds.
3 Assumptions on SLM
(1) An L2 phone ≒ L1
(2) An L2 phone ≠ L1
(3) The degree of similarity
1
phones
(norm)
easier to master than no counterpart
better to develop a ‘new’ category
the level of learnability.
identical, similar, or new?
L2
phones
3 criteria on the degree of phonetic similarity
(1) Cross-linguistic phonemic contrast
e.g. /r/-/l/ transfer on native-Japanese English learners
L1
L2
L1 alike
Japanese: /l/ (absent)
/r/
ra, ri, ru, re, ro
similar
No contrast
light & right
loom & room
la, li, ru, le, lo
problems in articulating /l/ & /r/ accurately
light
loom
light
(right)
(2) Perceptual evaluation
interlingual identification
L2
phones
L1
phones
merge
L1 phones
(the same category)
replace
e.g. Valdman (1976): English alveolar /s/ & French dental /s/
French
/s/
English
/s/
merge
English /s/
Flege (1986, 1987)
L2
phones
L1
phones
merge
L1 phones
(the same category)
EC
English /s/ (L1) & French /s/ (L2)
older children & adults
?
e.g. Takagi (1993):
easy
/l/ & /r/ on the final position (unfamiliar)
more experienced Japanese
/l/ & /r/ on the initial position (similar)
difficult