LEARNING SECOND LANGUAGE SUPRASEGMENTALS: Effect of L2 Experience on Prosody and Fluency Characteristics of L2 Speech

By P. Trofimovich, W. Baker. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2006

525 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5bd89d1e0335cc37be760d94a6bba26386c9f95a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Video-Based Interaction, Negotiation for Comprehensibility, and Second Language Speech Learning: A Longitudinal Study (2017, background): “…L2 learners’ successful acquisition of relatively difficult features of L2 segments and prosody requires a great amount of interactional experience (Trofimovich & Baker, 2006) and/or unique individual difference profiles, such as early age of acquisition (Abrahamsson & Hylstenstam, 2009) and high…”
Effects of Second Language Pronunciation Teaching Revisited: A Proposed Measurement Framework and Meta‐Analysis (2019, background): “…global accentedness judgements were strongly tied to segmental accuracy (r = .80 in Riney, Takada, & Ota, 2000), and they appeared to have only weak associations with, in particular, melody-based characteristics of L2 speech (e.g., r = .15 for peak alignment in Trofimovich & Baker, 2006).”
Utopian Goals for Pronunciation Teaching (2015, background): “That is not to say that there aren‘t any changes after that, for Trofimovich and Baker (2006) demonstrated that there surely are, but the first year is when the most progress is made in the absence of pronunciation instruction.”
Second Language Comprehensibility Revisited: Investigating the Effects of Learner Background (2015, background): “With respect to accentedness, segmental accuracy (Derwing et al., 1998), pausing and articulation rate (Trofimovich & Baker, 2006), and various suprasegmental measures such as pitch range, stress, and pause length (Kang, 2010) have been linked to L2 accent.”
Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication (2008, background): “With exposure to L2 over time, some changes in the direction of the target language will occur, as several studies have shown (Flege 1988; Riney & Flege 1998; Flege & Liu 2001; Trofimovich & Baker 2006).”
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN L1 FLUENCY AND L2 FLUENCY DEVELOPMENT (2009, background): “This interpretation of fl uency is distinct from the notion of fl uency as overall profi ciency (Chambers, 1997 ; Lennon, 1990 ; Skehan & Foster, 1999 ; Trofi movich & Baker, 2006 ; Wood, 2001 ).”
Differential effects of instruction on the development of second language comprehensibility, word stress, rhythm, and intonation: The case of inexperienced Japanese EFL learners (2017, methodology): “…coder relied on acoustic information presented in Praat (i.e. fundamental frequencies) as a primary cue; however, the coder also adopted her impressionistic judgements where the spectrogram was unclear and difficult to decode (for a similar methodological decision, see Trofimovich & Baker, 2006).”
Second language speech production: Investigating linguistic correlates of comprehensibility and accentedness for learners at different ability levels (2016, background): “…L2 vocabulary and grammar (e.g., Birdsong & Molis, 2001), they often fail to master nativelike pronunciation (e.g., Flege, Yeni-Komshian, & Liu, 1999), with such learning difficulties being most pronounced for segmentals (Abrahamsson, 2012) compared to suprasegmentals (Trofimovich & Baker, 2006).”