Cited by 16Phonetics and Phonology ResearchNeuroscience and Music PerceptionCategorization, perception, and language

The effects of native prosodic system and segmental context on Cantonese tone perception by Mandarin and Japanese listeners

Zhu, Min, Chen, Xiaoxiang, Yang, Yuxiao·2021·The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Abstract

This study explores the effects of native prosodic system and segmental context on the perception of Cantonese tones by Mandarin and Japanese listeners. In Experiment 1, 13 Mandarin and 13 Japanese subjects took part in a two-alternative forced-choice discrimination test of Cantonese tones in different segmental contexts (familiar vs unfamiliar). In Experiment 2, 20 Mandarin listeners participated in a perceptual assimilation task that examined the cross-language perceptual similarity between Mandarin and Cantonese tones. Results showed that Mandarin listeners were comparable to Japanese counterparts in discriminability, but the former attended more to pitch contour differences while the latter were more sensitive to pitch height. Moreover, the effect of segmental context was significant exclusively in the Mandarin group, whereas the Japanese group performed stably across syllables in discriminating Cantonese tones. It seemed that unfamiliar context rendered lower perceptual similarity, which further hindered corresponding discrimination by the Mandarin group. In addition, segmental effects were mainly observed in the assimilation patterns of category goodness or uncategorized-categorized. These findings suggested that non-native tone perception could be modulated by listeners' native prosodic structures in a finer way.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1121/10.0005274

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Zhu, M., Chen, X., & Yang, Y.
Affiliations
  • Hunan University (CN)
  • Hunan Normal University (CN)
Corresponding author
Chen, Xiaoxiang
Venue
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Published
2021-06-01
Volume
149
Issue
6
Pages
4214-4227
ISSN
  • 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-8524
OpenAlex
W3170170869
Cited by
16
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Philosophy and Social Science Foundation of Hunan Province (19YBQ112, 18YBA071)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
tone discrimination, Japanese listeners, perceptual assimilation, pitch contour, pitch height
MeSH terms
Timbre Perception, Humans, Japan, Phonetics, Pitch Perception, Speech Perception

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