Cover not available

Article published In: EUROSLA Yearbook: Volume 16 (2016)
Edited by Sarah Ann Liszka, Pascale Leclercq, Marion Tellier and Georges Daniel Véronique
[EUROSLA Yearbook 16] 2016
► pp. 144–178

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

“Identical” vowels in L1 and L2? Criteria and implications for L2 phonetics teaching and learning

Published online: 10 August 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.16.06pai
Researchers in the field of the teaching and learning of phonetics agree that learners of a foreign/second language (L2) acquire identical vowels by positive transfer from their first language (L1). This statement prompted us to examine whether the French and Czech languages, differing in the size of their vowel inventories, possess any identical vowels that could thus be omitted from French as a Foreign Language (FFL) phonetic curricula intended for Czech learners. The quantification of the vowels’ phonetic similarity is based on the comparison of their (1) phonetic symbols, (2) formant values (F-patterns), and (3) perceptual characteristics. The combined results show that strictly identical vowels between the two languages do not exist, but some French vowels can be defined as highly similar to some Czech vowels. Different coarticulatory effects of vowels produced in isolation and in labial, dental and palato-velar symmetrical environments point to a very strong influence of phonetic contexts on vowel similarity. Indeed, no French vowel is highly similar to any Czech vowel in all of the contexts studied. The findings suggest that phonetic exercises designed for Czech learners should focus on allophonic variations of all French vowels.
References (63)
Best, C.T. and Tyler, M.D. (2007). “Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities.” In Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production, M.J. Munro and O.S. Bohn (eds), 13–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bičan, A. 2013. Phonotactics of Czech. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P. and Weenink, D. (Producer). 2015. Praat: doing phonetics by computer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohn, O.S. and Flege, J.E. 1990. “Interlingual identification and the role of foreign language experience in L2 vowel perception.” Applied Psycholinguistics 11: 3103–328. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. “Perception and production of a new vowel category by second-language learners”. In Second-language speech: Structure and process, A. James and J. Leather (eds), 53–74. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borovičková, B. and Maláč, V. 1967.The spectral analysis of Czech sound combinations. Praha: Academia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brière, E.J. 1966. “An investigation of phonological interference”. Language 421: 768–796. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dankovičová, J. (1997). “Czech”. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 271: 77–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delattre, P. 1944. “Vers la méthode phonétique intégrale pour les débutants”. The French Review, 18(2): 109–115.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1961. “Le jeu des transitions de formants et la perception des consonnes”. Proc. of IVth Inter. Con. Phon. Sciences, Helsinki: 407–417.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1969. “An acoustic and articulatory study of vowel reduction in four languages”. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 7(4): 295–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delattre, P., Liberman, A.M., Cooper, F.S. and Gertsman, L.J. 1952. “An experimental study of the acoustic determinants of vowel color: observation on the one- and two-formant vowels sythetised from spectrographic patterns”. Word 3(3): 195–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Mareüil, P.B., Adda-Decker, M., Woehrling, C. 2010. “Antériorisation/aperture des voyelles /O/~/o/ en français du Nord et du Sud”. Proc. of the 28th Journées d’Étude sur la Parole, Mons, 81–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duběda, T. 2005. Jazyky a jejich zvuky : univerzálie a typologie ve fonetice a fonologii. Praha: Karolinum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duběda, T. and Januška, J. 2006. “K hypoartikulaci v pražské češtině.” In Sborník příspěvků z 5. mezinárodní konference Setkání mladých lingvistů, P. Porizka and V.P. Polach (eds), 75–81. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fant, G. 1973. Speech sounds and features. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J.E. 1987a. “The instrumental study of L2 speech production: some methodological considerations”. Language Learning 37(2): 285–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987b. “The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: evidence for the effect of equivalence classification”. Journal of Phonetics 151: 47–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. “The production and perception of foreign language speech sounds”. In Human Communication and Its Disorders, A. Review, H. Winitz (eds), 224–401. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Second language speech learning. Theory, findings, and problems”. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience : Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Cross-Language Speech Research, W. Strange (ed), 233–272. Timonium, MD: York Press Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. “English vowel production by Dutch talkers: More evidence for the “similar” vs “new” distinction.” In Second-language speech, Structure and process, A. James and J. Leather (eds), 11–52. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Language contact in bilingualism: Phonetic system interactions. In Laboratory Phonology 91, J. Cole and J.I. Hualde (eds), 353–380. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gendrot, C. and Adda-Decker, M. 2007. “Impact of duration and vowel inventory size on formant values of oral vowels: an automated formant analysis from eight languages”. Proc. of Inter. Con. Phon. Sciences, Saarbrûcken: 1417–1420.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldman, J.-P. 2011. “EasyAlign: an automatic phonetic alignment tool under Praat”. Proc. of InterSpeech, Firenze, Italy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guion, S.G., Flege, J.E., Akahane-Yamada, R. and Pruitt, J.S. 2000. “An investigation of current models of second language speech perception: the case of Japonese adult’s perception of English consonants”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107(5): 2711–2724. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hála, B. 1941. Akustická podstata samohlásek. Praha: Česká akademie věd a umění.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harmegnies, B., Delvaux, V., Huet, K. and Piccaluga, M. 2005. “Oralité et cognition: pour une approche raisonnée de la pédagogie du traitement de la matière phonique.” Revue Parole 34–35–361: 265–336.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hillenbrand, J., Clarke, C.M. and Nearey, T.M. 2001. “Effects of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109(2): 748–763. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, K., Flemming., E. and Wright, R. 1993. “The hyperspace effect: Phonetic targets are hyperarticulated”. Language 691: 505–528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamiyama, T. and Vaissière, J. 2009. “Perception and production of French close and close-mid rounded vowels by Japanese-speaking learners”. Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère, 21: 60–93.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kewley-Port, D. 1982. “Measurement of formant transitions in naturally produced stop consonant vowel syllables”. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 721: 379–389. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kučera, H. and George, K.M. (1968). A comparative quantitative phonology of Russian, Czech and German. New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landron, S., Paillereau, N., Nawafleh, A., Exare, C., Ando, H. and Gao, J. (2010). “Le corpus PhoDiFLE : un corpus commun de français langue étrangère pour une étude phonétique des productions de locuteurs de langues maternelles plurielles”. Cahiers de Praxématique 54–551: 73–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lado, R. 1957. Linguistics across cultures : applied linguistics for language teachers.University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Léon, P.R. 1993. Phonétisme et prononciation du français. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Léon, P.R. and Léon, M. 2007. La prononciation du français. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Livbjerg, I. and Mees, I.M. 1988. Practical English Phonetics. Kopenhagen: Shonberg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ludvíková, M. and Kraus, J. 1966. “Kvantitativní vlastnosti soustavy českých fonémů”. Slovo a slovesnost 271: 334–344.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Major, R.C. 1987. “Foreign accent : Recent research and theory”. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 151: 185–202.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Manuel, S.Y. and Krakow, R.A. 1984. “Universal and language particular aspects of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation”. Haskins Status Report on Speech Research 77/781: 69–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mázlová, V. 1946. “Jak se projevuje zvuková stránka češtiny v hláskových statistikách?” Naše řeč 301: 101–111.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Métral, J.P. 1967“Phonétique et phonologie”, Revue de Phonétique Appliquée 41: 21–47.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, L.J. 1981. “Effects of speaking rate on segmental distinctions”. In Perspectives on the Study of Speech, P.D. Eimas and J.L. Miller (eds), 39–73. NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, J.L., Grosjean, F., Mondini, M. and Dommergues, J.-Y. 2011. “Dialect effects in speech perception: The role of vowel duration in Parisian French and Swiss French”. Language and Speech 541: 467–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paillereau, N. 2015a. “Assessing the phonetic level in L2 vowels production with the VisuVo software: Case of Czech learners acquiring contrasts between French mid vowels e/ɛ, ø/œ and o/ɔ”. Proc. of PTLC2105, London, UK: 67–70.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015b. “Perception et production des voyelles orales du français par des futures enseignantes tchèques de Français Langue Etrangère (FLE)”. Unpublished PhD thesis, Sorbonne-Nouvelle University, Paris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Do isolated vowels represent vowel targets in French? An acoustic study on coarticulation”, Proc. of the 5th World Congress on French Linguistics, Tours, France.
Pustka, E. 2011. “L’accent méridional : représentations, attitudes et perceptions toulousaines et parisiennes”. Varia 691: 117–152.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigault, A. 1970. “L’accent dans deux langues à accent fixe: le français et le tchèque [Stress in two fixed-stress languages: French and Czech]”. Studia Phonetica 31: 1–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rochet, B.L. 1995. “Perception and production of second-language speech sounds by adults”. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Cross-Language Speech Research, W. Strange (ed), 379–407. Timonium, MD: York Press Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skarnitzl, R. and Volín, J. 2012. “Referenční hodnoty vokalických formantů pro mladé dospělé mluvčí standardní češtiny”. Akustické listy 181: 7–11.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steinlen, A.K. 2005. The influence of consonants on native and non-native vowel production. A cross-linguistic study. Tübingen: GNV.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevens, K.N. 1989. “On the quantal nature of speech”. Journal of Phonetics 171: 3–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevens, K.N. and House, A.S. 1963. “Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: An acoustical study”. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 6(2): 111–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strange, W., Bohn, O.S., Nishi, K. and Trent, S.A. 2005. “Contextual variation in the acoustic and perceptual similarity of North German and American English vowels”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118(3): 1751–1762. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Šimáčková, S., Podlipský, V.J. and Chládková, K. 2012. “Czech spoken in Bohemia and Moravia”. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 42(2): 225–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Troubetzkoy, N.S. 1957. Principes de phonologie. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vaissière, J. 2006. La phonétique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “Area functions and articulatory modeling as a tool for investigating the articulatory, acoustic and perceptual properties of the contrast between the sounds in a language”. In Experimental Approaches to Phonology, P.S. Beddor, M.J. Solé and J.J. Ohala (eds), 54–72. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. On the acoustic and perceptual characterization of reference vowels in a cross-language perspective. Proc. of XVII th Inter. Con. Phon. Sciences, Hong Kong: 52–59.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. 1953. Languages in Contact, Findings and Problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wode, H. 1994. “Nature, nurture, and age in language acquisition”. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 161: 325–345. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Paillereau, Nikola & Kateřina Chládková
2019. Spectral and temporal characteristics of Czech vowels in spontaneous speech. AUC PHILOLOGICA 2019:2 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue