Cited by 249Phonetics and Phonology ResearchEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningLinguistic Variation and Morphology

Production and perception of a novel, second-language phonetic contrast

Flege, James Emil·1993·The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Abstract

Four experiments, all of which focused on vowel duration, assessed Chinese subjects’ production and perception of the contrast between /t/ and /d/ in the final position of English words. Vowel duration was measured in minimal pairs in the first experiment. The stimuli in natural-edited beat–bead and bat–bad continua in which vowel duration varied in 20-ms steps were then presented to native English and Chinese subjects in a forced-choice test, in an experiment using the method of adjustment, and in an imitation task. The non-natives who learned English in childhood closely resembled native speakers in all four experiments. Three groups of non-natives who had learned English as a second language in adulthood, on the other hand, differed from the native speakers. The late learners produced significantly longer vowels in words ending in /d/ than /t/. However, the late learners’ vowel duration differences were much smaller than the native speakers’, and were correlated significantly with degree of foreign accent in English. The late learners differed from the native speakers in several ways in the two perception experiments, and also in the imitation task. The pattern of significant and nonsignificant between-group differences, but not data for individual subjects, was consistent with the hypothesis that L2 (second language) production accuracy is limited by the adequacy of perceptual representations for sounds in the L2.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1121/1.406818

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Speakers who learn a second language after puberty produce it with an "accent" typical of their primary language, even after long-term instruction.

    “Speakers who learn a second language after puberty produce it with an “accent” typical of their primary language, even after long-term instruction (90).”

    From A new view of language acquisition (2000) · cites this paper as [90]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flege, J. E.
Affiliations
University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Flege, James Emil
Venue
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Published
1993-03-01
Volume
93
Issue
3
Pages
1589-1608
ISSN
  • 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-8524
OpenAlex
W2051401856
Cited by
249
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
2.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC00257, R01DC000257)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistic Variation and Morphology
Keywords
vowel duration, English as a second language, Chinese learners of English, late learners, foreign accent, speech perception, speech production, phonetic imitation, perceptual representation, minimal pairs
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Age Factors, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Humans, Language, Male, Phonetics, Speech Perception, Speech Production Measurement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review