Abstract
The intelligibility test is widely used in the field of second language acquisition and language distance measuring. However, the current intelligibility test does not take the effect of response time into account, which causes deviations in comprehension results. This paper attempts for the first time to demonstrate the necessity of adding time parameters to the comprehension test. On the basis of the previous calculation formula, it is found that reaction time should be converted into time parameters through normalization, classification and reference calculation, so that a more complete and more unified paradigm can be established for the intelligibility test among different language variants. The addition of the time parameter extends the interpretation of the test results from one dimension to two dimensions, which not only makes the intelligibility test process more consistent with the actual communicative state, but also makes the intelligibility test more psychologically realistic, thereby further improving the theory and practice of comprehension.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
With reference to Wen (2019), the mutual understanding among the dialects of Yue (Cantonese), Xiang and Min is calculated. The one-way intelligibility of Cantonese and Xiang dialects is 10.16%; the one-way intelligibility of Xiang and Cantonese dialects is 19.20%; the one-way intelligibility of Cantonese and Min dialects is 5.03%; the one-way intelligibility of Xiang and Cantonese dialects is 14.06%; the one-way intelligibility of Xiang and Min dialects is 7.64%. The one-way intelligibility of Cantonese dialect is 0.01%. The mutual intelligibility rate between Cantonese and Xiang dialects is 14.68%; the mutual intelligibility between Cantonese and Min dialects is 9.54%; and the mutual understanding between Xiang and Min dialects is 3.82%. Among them, the internal comprehension of Cantonese is 100%; the internal comprehension of Xiang dialect is 95.65%; the internal comprehension of Min dialect is 92.87%. Compared with Tang (2009:76–78), its data are more consistent with the observed language phenomenon.
- 2.
Chen Hailun (1996: 361) proposed that the one-way intelligibility of the dialect can be obtained by Y(I, J) = ΣX(I,j) × P(I,j) × R(I,j), where Y(I, J) is the one-way intelligibility of the dialect A to B dialect, X(I, j) is the similarity of a corresponding type of speech between the dialect A and B dialect, P(I, j) is the proportion of the type in the whole, R(I, j) is the influence of this type on the corresponding rule. The unidirectional communicability of the dialect vocabulary can be obtained by C(I, J) = ΣKv/(ΣKv + Σjv).
Where C(I, J) is the one-way communicability of the dialect vocabulary, Kv is the occurrence rate of words shared by both dialects, ΣKv is the sum of the occurrence rates of all words shared by both dialects, and jv is unique to a dialect The occurrence rate of a word of Σjv is the sum of the occurrence rates of all words unique to the dialect.
- 3.
The data in Chapter 3 of Wen (2019) contains 122 subjects who are mostly from universities. Each subject in that experiment needs to finish a test including 30 questions using different types of experiment material by the software of E-Prime, and the computer collects accuracy and reaction time for each question. Therefore, there are 30 × 2 × 144 = 8640 data items.
References
Anastasi, A., Urbina, S.: Psychological testing. Prentice Hall/Pearson Education (1997)
Bansal, R.K.: The Intelligibility of Indian English: Measurements of the Intelligibility of Connected Speech, and Sentence and Word Material, Presented to Listeners of Different Nationalities. Ph.D. dissertation. Hyderabad: Central Institute of English (1969)
Brennan, E.M., Brennan, J.S.: Measurements of accent and attitude toward Mexican-American speech. J. Psycholinguist. Res. 10(5), 487–501 (1981)
Chen, H.: Studies on dialect relevance, similarity, and communication indicators. Stud. Chin. Lang. (5), 361–368 (1996)
Comrie, B. (ed.): The World;s Major Languages. Routledge, Milton Park (2009)
Gui, S.: What is Psycholinguistic. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, Shangai (1996)
Hardman, J.: The Intelligibility of Chinese-accented English to International and American Students at a U.S. University. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation) (2010)
Hayes‐Harb, R., Watzinger‐Tharp, J.: Accent, intelligibility, and the role of the listener: perceptions of English‐Accented German by native German speakers. Foreign Lang. Ann. 45(2), 260–282 (2012)
Kent, R.D. (ed.): Intelligibility in Speech Disorders: Theory, Measurement, and Management, vol. 1. John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam (1992)
Melinger, A.: Distinguishing languages from dialects: a litmus test using the picture-word interference task. Cognition 172, 73–88 (2018)
Munro, M.J., Derwing, T.M.: Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Lang. Learn. 45(1), 73–97 (1995)
Munro, M.J., Derwing, T.M., Morton, S.L.: The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Stud. Second Lang. Acquisition 28(1), 111–131 (2006)
Nejjari, W., Gerritsen, M., Van der Haagen, M., Korzilius, H.: Responses to Dutch-accented English. World Engl. 31(2), 248–267 (2012)
Schiavetti, N., Kent, R.D.: Scaling procedures for the measurement of speech intelligibility. Intelligibility in speech disorders, Intelligibility in Speech Disorders: Theory, Measurement, and Management, vol. 1, pp. 11–34. John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam (1992)
Tiffen, B.W.: The Intelligibility of Nigerian English. (Doctoral dissertation, University of London) (1974)
Tang, C., van Heuven, V.J.J.P.: Mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects tested functionally. Linguist. Netherlands 25(1), 145–156 (2008)
Tang, C., Van Heuven, V.J.: Mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects experimentally tested. Lingua 119(5), 709–732 (2009)
Tang, C.: Mutual Intelligibility of Chinese Dialects: An Experimental Approach. LOT, Utrecht (2009)
Van Kuyk, S., Kleijn, W.B., Hendriks, R.C.: An instrumental intelligibility metric based on information theory. IEEE Sign. Proces. Lett. 25, 115–119 (2017)
Wardrip-Fruin, C., Constantinou, A.: Intelligibility of Mandarin speakers of English: Correlation of acoustic and perceptual measures. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94(3), 1866 (1993)
Wen, H.: Theory and Practice of Mutual Intelligibility Measurement between Languages. University of Macau, Ph.D desertation (2019)
Voegelin, C.F., Harris, Z.S.: Methods for determining intelligibility among dialects of natural languages. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 95(3), 322–329 (1951)
Yorkston, K.M., Beukelman, D.R.: Communication efficiency of dysarthric speakers as measured by sentence intelligibility and speaking rate. J. Speech Hearing Disord. 46(3), 296–301 (1981)
Zheng, J.: Calculation of the communication degree of Chinese dialects. Stud. Chinese Lang. 1, 35–43 (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wen, H. (2021). Significance and Application of Time Parameters in Intelligibility Test. In: Liu, M., Kit, C., Su, Q. (eds) Chinese Lexical Semantics. CLSW 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81197-6_65
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81197-6_65
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-81196-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-81197-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)