Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T07:56:17.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Written training tasks are better than oral training tasks at improving L2 learners’ speech production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2019

Clara Solier ,
Cyril Perret ,
Lorraine Baqué  and
Christiane Soum-Favaro
Clara Solier*
Affiliation:
University of Toulouse
Cyril Perret
Affiliation:
University of Poitiers
Lorraine Baqué
Affiliation:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Christiane Soum-Favaro
Affiliation:
University of Toulouse
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: clara.solier@univ-tlse2.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the effect of written input on the production of word-final vowels (oral: /i/, /e/; nasal: /ɑ̃/, /ɔ̃/) by 100 native Moroccan learners of French as a second language, relying on a pretest/posttest paradigm. During pretest, participants performed a word repetition task. Then, participants were assigned to five experimental (training) conditions, varying in the modality of stimulus presentation (oral vs. written) and in the modality of response (oral vs. written), before their oral production of the word-final vowels was evaluated in the posttest. Results clearly showed that posttest pronunciation accuracy was affected by the presence of orthographic information in the training task. The copy training task was the most efficient at improving posttest accuracy. Results indicate that orthography, and more specifically the written production copy task, helps L2 learners’ pronunciation more efficiently than phonetic correction.

Keywords

copy taskL2 spoken word productionorthographic representationsphonological representationswritten input
Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 40 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 1455 - 1480
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abu‐Rabia, S. (1995). Learning to read in Arabic: Reading, syntactic, orthographic and working memory skills in normally achieving and poor Arabic readers. Reading Psychology, 16, 351–394. doi:10.1080/0270271950160401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abu-Rabia, S. (2019). The role of short vowels in reading Arabic: A critical literature review. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10936-019-09631-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. doi:10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asadi, I. A., Ibrahim, R., & Khateb, A. (2017). What contributes to spelling in Arabic? A cross-sectional study from first to sixth grade. Writing Systems Research, 9, 60–81. doi:10.1080/17586801.2016.1218748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astésano, C., & Bertrand, R. (2016). Accentuation et niveaux de constituance en français: Enjeux phonologiques et psycholinguistiques. Langue française, 191, 11. doi:10.3917/lf.191.0011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassetti, B. (2007). Effects of Hanyu Pinyin on pronunciation in learners of Chinese as a foreign language. In Guder, A., Jiang, X., & Wan, Y. (Eds.), The cognition, learning and teaching of Chinese characters (pp. 156–179). Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press.Google Scholar
Bassetti, B. (2008). Orthographic input and second language phonology. In Thorsten, P. & Young-Scholten, M. (Eds.), Input matters in SLA (pp. 191–206). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassetti, B. (2017). Orthography affects second language speech: Double letters and geminate production in English. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1835–1842. doi:10.1037/xlm0000417Google ScholarPubMed
Bassetti, B., & Atkinson, N. (2015). Effects of orthographic forms on pronunciation in experienced instructed second language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 67–91. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, C., & Tyler, M. (2007). Non-native and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In Munro, M. J. & Bohn, O.-S. (Eds.), Second language speech learning: the role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp. 13–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bi, Y., Wei, T., Janssen, N., & Han, Z. (2009). The contribution of orthography to spoken word production: Evidence from Mandarin Chinese. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 555–560. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.3.555CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Billières, M. (2005). Les pratiques du verbo-tonal. Retour aux sources. In Berré, M. (Ed.), Linguistique de la parole et apprentissage des langues. Questions autour de la méthode verbo-tonale de P. Guberina (pp. 67–87). Mons: CIPA.Google Scholar
Bonin, P., Collay, S., & Fayol, M. (2008). La consistance orthographique en production verbale écrite: une brève synthèse. L’année Psychologique, 108(3), 517–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, J. S., Davis, C. J., & Hanley, D. A. (2005). Interfering neighbours: The impact of novel word learning on the identification of visually similar words. Cognition, 97, B45–B54. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Browning, S. R. (2004). Analysis of Italian children’s English pronunciation. [EU FP5 PF STAR Project]. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Bürki, A., Spinelli, E., & Gaskell, M. G. (2012). A written word is worth a thousand spoken words: The influence of spelling on spoken-word production. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 449–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calaque, E. (1992). Les erreurs persistantes dans la production de locuteurs arabophones parlant couramment le français. L’Information Grammaticale, 54, 48–51. doi:10.3406/igram.1992.3200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevrot, J.-P., Beaud, L., & Varga, R. (2000). L’apprentissage des unités phonologiques variables: L’exemple du /R/ post-consonantique final en français. Linx, 42, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Un cadre européen commun de référence pour les langues: Apprendre, enseigner, évaluer. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Damian, M. F., & Bowers, J. S. (2003). Effects of orthography on speech production in a form-preparation paradigm. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 119–132. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00008-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Martin, C. (2013). Effet de l’apprentissage systématique de l’écrit sur l’acquisition de la langue orale en L2: Cas du français appris par des enfants marocains au Maroc (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Toulouse le Mirail, Toulouse).Google Scholar
Dixon, P. (2008). Models of accuracy in repeated-measures designs. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 447–456. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Detey, S., & Nespoulous, J. L. (2008). Can orthography influence second language syllabic segmentation? Japanese epenthetic vowels and French consonantal clusters. Lingua, 118(1), 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumay, N., & Gaskell, M. G. (2007). Sleep-associated changes in the mental representation of spoken words. Psychological Science, 18, 35–39. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01845.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dupoux, E., & Peperkamp, S. (2002). Fossil markers of language development: Phonological “deafnesses” in adult speech processing. In Durand, J. & Laks, B. (Eds.), Phonetics, phonology, and cognition (pp. 168–190). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Erdener, V. D., & Burnham, D. K. (2005). The role of audiovisual speech and orthographic information in nonnative speech production. Language Learning, 55, 191–228. doi:10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00303.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escudero, P. (2005). Linguistic perception and second language acquisition: Explaining the attainment of optimal phonological categorization (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University).Google Scholar
Escudero, P. (2009). The linguistic perception of similar L2 sounds. In Boersma, P. & Hamann, S. (Eds.), Phonology in perception (pp. 151–190). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Escudero, P. (2015). Orthography plays a limited role when learning the phonological forms of new words: The case of Spanish and English learners of novel Dutch words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 7–22. doi:10.1017/S014271641400040XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-language research (pp. 229–273). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Fort, M., Kandel, S., Chipot, J., Savariaux, C., Granjon, L., & Spinelli, E. (2013). Seeing the initial articulatory gestures of a word triggers lexical access. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 1207–1223. doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.701758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, R., & Ziegler, J. C. (2007). Speech and spelling interaction: The interdependence of visual and auditory word recognition. In Gaskell, M. G. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 107–118). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gaskell, M. G., & Dumay, N. (2003). Lexical competition and the acquisition of novel words. Cognition, 89, 105–132. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00070-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Han, J.-I., & Choi, T.-H. (2016). The influence of spelling on the production and storage of words with allophonic variants of /h/ in Korean. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37, 757–780. doi:10.1017/S0142716415000235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, L., Kline, K., Price, C., Jones, A., Mosley, S., Farmer, S., & Fain, B. (2013). A web based voting application study of fonts for voters with dyslexia. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation Accessible Voting Technology Initiative Working Paper Series (pp. 1–30). Washington, DC: Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.Google Scholar
Hayes-Harb, R., Brown, K., & Smith, B. L. (2018). Orthographic input and the acquisition of German final devoicing by native speakers of English. Language and Speech, 61, 547–564. doi:10.1177/0023830917710048CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hermena, E. W., Drieghe, D., Hellmuth, S., & Liversedge, S. P. (2015). Processing of Arabic diacritical marks: Phonological–syntactic disambiguation of homographic verbs and visual crowding effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 494–507. doi:10.1037/xhp0000032Google ScholarPubMed
Ibrahim, R. (2013). Reading in Arabic: New evidence for the role of vowel signs. Creative Education, 4, 248–253. doi:10.4236/ce.2013.44036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kandel, S., Lassus-Sangosse, D., Grosjacques, G., & Perret, C. (2017). The impact of developmental dyslexia and dysgraphia on movement production during word writing. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 34, 219–251. doi:10.1080/02643294.2017.1389706CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambert, E., Alamargot, D., Larocque, D., & Caporossi, G. (2011). Dynamics of the spelling process during a copy task: Effects of regularity and frequency. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 65, 141–150. doi:10.1037/a0022538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathieu, L. (2016). The influence of foreign scripts on the acquisition of a second language phonological contrast. Second Language Research, 32, 145–170. doi:10.1177/0267658315601882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maume, J.-L. (1973). L’apprentissage du français chez les Arabophones maghrébins (diglossie et plurilinguisme en Tunisie). Langue française, 19, 90–107. doi:10.3406/lfr.1973.5642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcgurk, H., & Macdonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264(5588), 746–748. doi:10.1038/264746a0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merkx, M., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2011). The acquisition of morphological knowledge investigated through artificial language learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1200–1220. doi:10.1080/17470218.2010.538211CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 516–524. doi:10.3758/BF03195598CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nimz, K. (2016). Sound perception and production in a foreign language: Does orthography matter? Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar
Nimz, K., & Khattab, G. (2019). On the role of orthography in L2 vowel production: The case of Polish learners of German. Second Language Research. doi:10.1177/0267658319828424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. (2011). Individual differences in child English second language acquisition: Comparing child-internal and child-external factors. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 213–237. doi:10.1075/lab.1.3.01parCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattamadilok, C., Morais, J., Ventura, P., & Kolinsky, R. (2007). The locus of the orthographic consistency effect in auditory word recognition: Further evidence from French. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 700–726. doi:10.1080/01690960601049628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez, M. (2013). L’apprentissage de l’orthographe lors de la dictée et la copie de mots manuscrits: effets des tâches et processus sous-jacents (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Toulouse: Université Le Mirail.Google Scholar
Pérez, M., & Giraudo, H. (2016). Effets d’encodages visuel (lecture) et visuo-graphomoteur (copie) sur les productions en dictée de pseudomots en 1re et 2e années élémentaires. In Proceedings of the International Symposium for Educational Literacy (SILE/ISEL) 2015 (pp. 337–363). Sherbrooke: Éditions de l’Université de Sherbrooke.Google Scholar
Pérez, M., Giraudo, H., & Tricot, A. (2012). Les processus cognitifs impliqués dans l’acquisition de l’orthographe: Dictée vs copie. A.N.A.E, 118, 280–286.Google Scholar
Pinheiro, J., & Bates, D. (2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Planton, S. (2014). Processus centraux et périphériques en production écrite de mots: Etudes comportementales, en neuroimagerie fonctionnelle et par stimulation magnétique transcrânienne (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université de Toulouse, Université Toulouse III-Paul Sabatier).Google Scholar
Planton, S., Jucla, M., Démonet, J.-F., & Soum-Favaro, C. (2019). Effects of orthographic consistency and word length on the dynamics of written production in adults: psycholinguistic and rTMS experiments. Reading and Writing, 32(1), 115–146. doi:10.1007/s11145-017-9776-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafat, Y. (2013). Orthography-induced transfer in the production of English-speaking learners of Spanish. Language Learning Journal, 44, 197–213. doi:10.1080/09571736.2013.784346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafat, Y. (2015). The interaction of acoustic and orthographic input in the acquisition of Spanish assibilated/fricative rhotics. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 43–66. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafat, Y., & Stevenson, R. A. (2019). Auditory-orthographic integration at the onset of L2 speech acquisition. Language and Speech, 62(3), 427–451. doi:10.1177/0023830918777537CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rapp, B., Epstein, C., & Tainturier, M. (2002). The integration of information across lexical and sublexical processes in spelling. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 19, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rastle, K., McCormick, S. F., Bayliss, L., & Davis, C. J. (2011). Orthography influences the perception and production of speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1588–1594. doi:10.1037/a0024833Google Scholar
R Core Development Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical ComputingGoogle Scholar
Rello, L., & Baeza-Yates, R. (2013). Good fonts for dyslexia. Paper presented at the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Bellevue, WA, October 21–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofs, A. (2006). The influence of spelling on phonological encoding in word reading, object naming, and word generation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 33–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roettger, T. B., Winter, B., Grawunder, S., Kirby, J., & Grice, M. (2014). Assessing incomplete neutralization of final devoicing in German. Journal of Phonetics, 43, 11–25. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2014.01.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, M. (1999). L’intonation: Le système du français; description et modélisation. Gap: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Showalter, C. E. (2018). Impact of Cyrillic on native English speakers’ phono-lexical acquisition of Russian. Language and Speech, 61, 565–576. doi:10.1177/0023830918761489CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Showalter, C. E., & Hayes-Harb, R. (2013). Unfamiliar orthographic information and second language word learning: A novel lexicon study. Second Language Research, 29, 185–200. doi:10.1177/0267658313480154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, E., Chambless, D., & Kickhöfel Alves, U. (2010). Understanding the role of orthography in the acquisition of a non-native vowel contrast. Language Sciences, 32(3), 380–394. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2009.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silveira, R. (2007). O papel desempenhado pelo tipo de tarefa e pela ortografia na produção de consoantes em final de palavra. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 15. doi:10.17851/2237-2083.15.1.147-180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soum-Favaro, C., Gunnarsson, C., Simoës-Perlant, A., & Largy, P. (2014). La liaison à l’interface entre l’oral et l’écrit. In Soum-Favaro, C., Coquillon, A., & Chevrot, J.-P. (Eds.), La liaison: Approches contemporaines (pp. 141–167). Berne: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, J. (2005). Assessing the role of orthographic versus uniquely auditory input in acquiring new L2 segments. Paper presented at the 7th Rencontres Internationales du Réseau Français de Phonologie, Aix en Provence, France.Google Scholar
Taha, H. (2016). Deep and shallow in Arabic orthography: New evidence from reading performance of elementary school native Arab readers. Writing Systems Research, 8, 133–142. doi:10.1080/17586801.2015.1114910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troubetzkoy, N. S. (1939). Principes de phonologie. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
van Leussen, J.-W., & Escudero, P. (2015). Learning to perceive and recognize a second language: The L2LP model revised. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ventura, P., Morais, J., Pattamadilok, C., & Kolinsky, R. (2004). The locus of the orthographic consistency effect in auditory word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 57–95. doi:10.1080/01690960344000134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young-Scholten, M., Akita, M., & Cross, N. (1999). Focus on form in phonology: Orthographic exposure as a promoter of epenthesis. In Robinson, P. & Jungheim, N. (Eds.), Pragmatics and pedagogy: Proceedings of the third PacSLRF (Vol. 2, pp. 226–134). Tokyo: Aoyama Gakuin University.Google Scholar
Young-Scholten, M., & Langer, M. (2015). The role of orthographic input in second language German: Evidence from naturalistic adult learners’ production. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 93–114. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q., & Damian, M. F. (2012). Effects of orthography on speech production in Chinese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41, 267–283. doi:10.1007/s10936-011-9193-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegler, J. C., Jacobs, A. M., & Stone, G. O. (1996). Statistical analysis of the bidirectional inconsistency of spelling and sound in French. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28, 504–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar