Advertisement

Language Transfer vs. Language Talent? Individual Differences and Aptitude in L2 Phonology of Persian-Speaking Learners of English

  • Zhaleh Ghafoorian MaddahEmail author
  • Susanne M. Reiterer
Chapter
Part of the English Language Education book series (ELED, volume 16)

Abstract

Only little research regarding the phonology of Persian native speakers’ English has been conducted. In the present study, we compared different individual cognitive factors which result in ESL Iranian English pronunciation, such as cognitive ability and short-term memory (working memory and Llama_D), language aptitude (MLAT III, IV and V; Llama_D) and working memory (Tewes U, Hamburg-Wechsler-Intelligenz-Test für Erwachsene Revision. HAWIE-R, Bern, 1994). These measures were correlated with English pronunciation and phonetic measurements (vowel length measurement) of Persian ESL learners. The sample comprised 30 Iranians aged 20–40 years (mean age 26.08) with L1 Farsi and an academic education. Their age of onset of learning (AOA) ranged from 2 to 16 years (mean age 11.03). Three learner groups were identified based on their language proficiency, and results confirmed previous findings about the contribution of cognitive factors (Rota G, Reiterer SM, Cognitive aspects of pronunciation talent. In: Dogil G, Reiterer S (eds) Language talent and brain activity. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 67–96, 2009), language aptitude and multilingualism in L2 phonological processing. We observed significant correlations between English pronunciation scores and these three factors: schwa length pronunciation (r = −0.8), MLAT III (r = 0.8) and working memory (r = 0.78). Schwa length pronunciation also correlated highly with the number of languages (r = −.74) and the age of onset of acquisition (r = .41). Our cross-linguistic results suggest that phonological native-like L2 achievement in ESL adult learners is possible, as individuals with higher L2 aptitude and working memory capacity can overcome the transfer of L1 phonological categories in L2 processing.

References

  1. Abrahamson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(4), 481–509.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310808073X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. In Grune & Stratten. New York.Google Scholar
  3. Cabrelli Amaro, J., & Rothman, J. (2010). On L3 acquisition and phonological permeability: A new test case for debates on the mental representation of non-native phonological systems. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 48(2–3), 275–296.  https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2010.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In K. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 25–53). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  5. Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (1959). The modern languages aptitude test. San Antonio. Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  6. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner:Individual differences in second language acquisition. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Edwards, J., Beckman, M. E., & Munson, B. (2004). The interaction between vocabulary size and Phonotactic probability effects on children’s production accuracy and fluency in nonword repetition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(2), 421–436.  https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2004/034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Erard, M. (2012). Babel no more: The search for the world’s most extraordinary language learners. New York: Free press.Google Scholar
  9. Goad, H., & White, L. (2006). Ultimate attainment in interlanguage grammars: A prosodie approach. Second Language Research, 22(3), 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goto, H. (1971). Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “L” and “R”. Neuropsychologia, 9, 317–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Granena, G., & Long, M. H. (2012). Age of onset, length of residence, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment in three linguistic domains. Second Language Research, 29(3), 311–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ioup, G. (2008). Exploring the role of age in the acquisition of a second language phonology. In J. G. Hansen Edwards & M. L. Zampini (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 41–57). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jia, G., & Fuse, A. (2007). Acquisition of English grammatical morphology by native mandarin speaking children and adolescents: Age-related differences. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 50(5), 1280–1299.  https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krashen, S. D., Long, M. H., & Scarcella, R. (1979). Age, rate and eventual attainment in second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 573–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhl, P. K., Williams, K. A., Lacerda, F., Stevens, K. N., & Lindblom, B. (1992). Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255(5044), 606–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Lindblom, B. (2000). Emergent phonology. In Proceedings of the 25th annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society, pp. 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Major, R. C. (2008). Transfer in second language phonology. In J. G. Hansen Edwards & M. L. Zampini (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 63–83). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miyake, A., & Friedman, D. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Miyawaki, K., Strange, W., Verbrugge, R., Liberman, A. M., Jenkins, J. J., & Fujimura, O. (1975). An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of [r] and [l] by native speakers of Japanese and English. Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Munson, B., Edwards, J., & Beckman, M. E. (2005). Relationships between nonword repetition accuracy and other measures of linguistic development in children with phonological disorders. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 48(1), 61–78.  https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Munson, B., Kurtz, B. A., & Windsor, J. (2005). The influence of vocabulary size, phonotactic probability, and wordlikeness on nonword repetitions of children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(5), 1033–1047.  https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nauchi, A., & Sakai, K. L. (2009). Greater leftward lateralization of the inferior frontal gyrus in second language learners with higher syntactic abilities. Human Brain Mapping, 30(11), 3625–3635.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20790 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Neuner, S. (2002). Lernen als Verarbeitung von Informationen, Konditionstheoretische Übelegungen zum Fremsprachenunterricht. Babylonia, 10, 35–39.Google Scholar
  25. Obler, L. K., & Fein, D. (1988). The exceptional brain: Neuropsychology of talent and special abilities. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  26. Osgood, C. A. (1946). Meaningful similarity and interference in leaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 277–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Penfield, W., & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Pimsleur, P. (1966). The Pimsleur language aptitude battery. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovic.Google Scholar
  29. Rees, J. (2000). Predicting the future of foreign language aptitude. In S. Cornwell & P. Robinson (Eds.), Individual differences in foreign language learning: Effects of aptitude, intelligence, and motivation (pp. 187–197). Tokyo, Japan: Aoyama Gakuin University.Google Scholar
  30. Reiterer, S. M., Hu, X., Erb, M., Rota, G., Nardo, D., Grodd, W., et al. (2011). Individual differences in audio-vocal speech imitation aptitude in late bilinguals: Functional neuro-imaging and brain morphology. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(271), 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00271 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reiterer, S. M., Hu, X., Sumathi, T. S., & Singh, N. C. (2013). Are you a good mimic? Neuro-acoustic signatures for speech imitation ability. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(782), 1–13.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00271 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Robinson, P. (2002). Individual differences and instructed language learning. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive reference points. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 532–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rota, G., & Reiterer, S. M. (2009). Cognitive aspects of pronunciation talent. In G. Dogil & S. Reiterer (Eds.), Language talent and brain activity (pp. 67–96). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  36. Scovel, T. (1998). A time to speak: A psycholinguistic enquiry into the critical period for human speech. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  37. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International review of applied linguistics (Vol. 10, pp. 209–231).Google Scholar
  38. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Skehan, P. (2002). Theorising and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed Language Learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Skehan, P. (2011). Language aptitude. In S. Gassand & A. Mackay (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. London: Routledge (in press).Google Scholar
  41. Spolsky, B. (1995). Prognostication and language aptitude testing, 1925–1962. Language Testing, 12(3), 321–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Strange, W., & Dittmann, S. (1984). Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r-l/ by Japanese adults learning English. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tewes, U. (1994). Hamburg-Wechsler-Intelligenz-Test für Erwachsene Revision. Bern, Switzerland: HAWIE-R.Google Scholar
  44. Thomason, S. G. (2001). Language contact. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wardhaugh, R. (1970). The contrastive analysis hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly, 4(2), 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wen, Z. (2011). Foreign language aptitude. ELT Journal, 66(2), 233–235.  https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr068 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Werker, J. F., & Lalonde, C. E. (1988). Cross-language speech perception: Initial capabilities and developmental change. Developmental Psychobiology, 24, 672–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 7, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wong, P. C., & Ettlinger, M. (2011). Predictors of spoken language learning. Journal of Communication Disorders, 44(5), 564–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhaleh Ghafoorian Maddah
    • 1
    Email author
  • Susanne M. Reiterer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Linguistics and Centre for Teacher Education, Unit for Language Learning and Teaching ResearchUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations