Cover not available

Article published In: ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 176:2 (2025) ► pp.244–273

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

The production of German vowels by Arabic-speaking L2 learners

An acoustic analysis

 | Al -Akhawayn University (AUI)
Published online: 30 October 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.24004.ade
Abstract
This study investigates the production of German front rounded and tense–lax back vowels (/uː/, /ʊ/, /ʏ/, /yː/) by Arabic-speaking L2 learners, addressing the underexplored area of how L1 Arabic phonological systems — where vowel length is phonemic — influence the acquisition of German vowel contrasts in L2 speech production. These vowels were selected based on predictions from the Speech Learning Model (SLM), as they represent both similar (/uː/, /ʊ/) and new (/ʏ/, /yː/) categories relative to the Arabic vowel inventory. Nine Arabic-speaking learners of German participated in the study and were compared with nine L1 German speakers. The study specifically examines the acoustic characteristics of these four vowels, focusing on formant values (F1 and F2) and vowel duration. The target vowels were embedded in disyllabic and multisyllabic word contexts. Acoustic analysis revealed that Arabic-speaking learners maintained a vowel length contrast similar to that of L1 speakers, with no significant durational differences observed between groups except for the vowel /ʊ/. The durational patterns suggest a possible transfer of L1 phonological features into the L2 environment. Additionally, significant differences in F1 and F2 values were found across speaker groups and vowel categories, with Arabic-speaking learners exhibiting vowel fronting and formant transfer. The findings are discussed within the framework of the SLM, illustrating the assimilation of similar vowels (/uː/, /ʊ/) to corresponding Arabic vowels, while new vowels (/ʏ/, /yː/) appear to be established as distinct phonetic categories. The results also offer pedagogical implications for improving pronunciation accuracy and speech intelligibility among Arabic-speaking learners of German.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Acoustic work on L2 German with consideration of L1 influence
    • 2.1Acoustic and phonological foundations
    • 2.2L1 influence on L2 German vowel production and perception
    • 2.3Cross-linguistic transfer and L1 vowel inventory size
  • 3.Theoretical framework
  • 4.Rationale of the study
  • 5.Methodology
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Speech material and task
    • 5.3Data analysis
    • 5.4Statistical analysis
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Vowel duration
    • 6.2Formant frequency
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Limitations and future research
  • 9.Conclusion
  • References
References (74)
References
Abou Haidar, L. (1994). Norme linguistique et variabilité dialectale: Analyse formantique du système vocalique de la langue arabe. Revue de Phonétique Appliquée, 110(2), 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Al-Ani, S. (1970). Arabic phonology. Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alharbi, M., Foltz, A., Kornder, L., & Mennen, I. (2022). L2 acquisition and L1 attrition of VOTs of voiceless plosives in highly proficient late bilinguals. Second Language Research, 221, 1–3.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alispahic, S., Mulak, K. E., & Escudero, P. (2017). Acoustic properties predict perception of unfamiliar Dutch vowels by adult Australian English and Peruvian Spanish listeners. Frontiers in Psychology, 81, 52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andreeva, B., Barry, W., Pützer, M., & Tanchev, A. (2015). L2 stressed vowel production by Bulgarian learners of German. Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Retrieved from [URL]
Baayen, R., Davidson, D., & Bates, D. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barrientos, F. (2024). Out with the old, in with the new: Contrasts involving new features with acoustically salient cues are more likely to be acquired than those that redeploy L1 features. Frontiers in Language Science. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Belkaid, Y. (1984). Arabic vowels, modern literature, spectrographic analysis. Travaux de l’Institut Phonétique de Strasbourg, 161, 217–240.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Best, C. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171–204). York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Best, C., & Tyler, M. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In O.-S. Bohn & M. J. Munro (Eds.), Language experience in second-language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp. 13–34). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2019). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Retrieved from [URL]
Bohn, O. (1995). Cross language speech perception in adults: First language transfer doesn’t tell it all. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 279–304). York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cao, G. (2023, August 2). Phonetic Dissimilarity and L2 Category Formation in L2 Accommodation. Language and Speech. Advance. online publication. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carroll, P., Trouvain, J., & Zimmerer, F. (2015). A visual feedback tool for German vowel production. Proceedings of Elektronische Sprachsignalverarbeitung (ESSV), 150–157.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chao, S., Ochoa, D., & Daliri, A. (2019). Production variability and categorical perception of vowels are strongly linked. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 131, 1–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, W., van de Weijer, J. (2022). The role of L1-L2 dissimilarity in L2 segment learning — Implications from the acquisition of English post-alveolar fricatives by Mandarin and Mandarin/Wu speakers. Front Psychol. 131, 1017724. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dellwo, V., & Wagner, P. (2003). Relations between language rhythm and speech rate. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), 471–474.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dong, W., van Hout, R., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2024). L2 prosody assessment by combining acoustic and neural model features. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2024. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Escudero, P. (2005). Linguistic perception and second language acquisition: Explaining the attainment of optimal phonological categorization (Doctoral dissertation). Utrecht University.
Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2002). The subset problem in L2 perceptual development: Multiple-category assimilation by Dutch learners of Spanish. In B. Skarabela, S. Fish, & A. H.-J. Do (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 208–219). Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J. (1980). Phonetic approximation in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 301, 117–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Eefting, W. (1987). Cross-language switching in stop consonant perception and production by Dutch speakers of English. Speech Communication, 6(3), 185–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J. (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
(1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J., & Bohn, O. (2021). The Revised Speech Learning Model (SLM-r). In R. Wayland (Ed.), Second language speech learning: Theoretical and empirical progress (pp. 3–83). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J., Bohn, O., & Jang, S. (1997). Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 251, 437–470. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J., & Hillenbrand, J. (1984). Limits on pronunciation accuracy in foreign language speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 761, 708–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J., & Liu, S. (2001). The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 231, 527–552. [URL].
Flege, J., & MacKay, I. (2004). Perceiving vowels in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 261, 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flege, J., Schmidt, A., & Wharton, G. (1996). Age of learning affects rate-dependent processing of stops in a second language. Phonetica 531, 143–161. PMID Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghazeli, S. (1977). Back consonants and backing coarticulation in Arabic. [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University Texas at Austin].
Gao, Y., Ding, H., Birkholz, P., Jäckel, R., & Lin, Y. (2019). Perception of German tense and lax vowel contrast by Chinese learners. Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Electronic Speech Signal Processing (ESSV). Retrieved from [URL]
Georgiou, G. (2018). Discrimination of L2 Greek vowel contrasts: Evidence from learners with Arabic L1 background. Speech Communication, 1021, 68–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guion, S., & Pederson, E. (2007). Investigating the role of attention in phonetic learning. In O. S. Bohn & M. J. Munro (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege (pp. 57–77). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, C. (2003). Modern German pronunciation: An introduction for speakers of English. Manchester University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hazan, V., & Markham, D. (2004). Acoustic-phonetic correlates of talker intelligibility for adults and children. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 1161, 3108–3118.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopp, H., & Schmid, M. (2013). Perceived foreign accent in first language attrition and second language acquisition: The impact of age of acquisition and bilingualism. Applied Psycholinguistics 341, 361–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iverson, P., & Evans, G. (2007). Learning English vowels with different first-language vowel systems: perception of formant targets, formant movement, and duration. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1221, 2842–2854. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2001). A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. In Speech, hearing and language: Work in progress (Vol. 131, pp. 106–118). University College London Department of Phonetics and Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kabakoff, H., & Levi, G. (2020). Training a non-native vowel contrast with a distributional learning paradigm results in improved perception and production. Journal of Phonetics, 781, 94–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerschhofer-Puhalo, N. (2014). Similarity, cross-linguistic influence and preferences in non-native vowel perception: An experimental cross-language comparison of German vowel identification by non-native listeners [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wien University].
Kim, D., Clayards, M., & Kong, E. (2020). Individual differences in perceptual adaptation to unfamiliar phonetic categories. Journal of Phonetics, 811, 84–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kingston, J. (2003). Learning foreign vowels. Language & Speech, 461, 295–349. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P. (2006). A Course in phonetics (5th ed.). Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Johnson, K. (2014). A course in phonetics (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lipińska, D. (2015). Production of L3 vowels: Is it possible to separate them from L1 and L2 sounds? Research in Language, 13(1), 77–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayer, R., & Escudero, P. (2010). Explaining individual variation in L2 perception: Rounded vowels in English learners of German. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 131, 279–297. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McAllister, R., Flege, J., & Piske, T. (2002). The influence of L1 on the acquisition of Swedish quantity by native speakers of Spanish, English and Estonian. Journal of Phonetics. 301, 229–258. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitleb, F. (1984). Vowel length contrast in Arabic and English: A spectrographic test. Journal of Phonetics, 121, 229–235. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitterer, H., Eger, N., & Reinisch, E. (2020). My English sounds better than yours: Second-language learners perceive their own accent as better than that of their peers. PLoS ONE, 151, 1–12. e0227643. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moon, S., & Lindblom, B. (1994). Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 961, 40–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Munro, M. (1993). Production of English vowels by native speakers of Arabic: Acoustic measurements and accentedness ratings. Language and Speech, 361, 39–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newman, D., & Verhoeven, J. (2002). Frequency analysis of Arabic in connected speech. Papers in Linguistics, 1001, 77–86.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, M., & Fagan, S. (2016). German Phonetics and Phonology: Theory and Practice. Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oh, E. (2019). The relationship between “native-like” L2 vowel production and perceptual judgments enhancement by native listeners. Linguistic Research, 36(2), 241–261. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perwitasari, A. (2018). Perception of English vowels by Javanese and Sundanese speakers: A mouse-tracking study. Wacana: Journal of the Humanities of Indonesia, 19(1), Article 9. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perwitasari, A., Klamer, M., & Schiller, N. (2016). Formant frequencies and vowel space area in Javanese and Sundanese English language learners. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 221, 141–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pickett, M. (1999). The acoustics of speech communication: Fundamentals, speech perception theory, and technology. Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piske, T., MacKay, I., & Flege, J. (2001). Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics, 291, 191–215. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polka, L., & Bohn, O. (1996). A cross-language comparison of vowel perception in English-learning and German-learning infants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1001, 577–592. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saadah, E. (2011). The production of Arabic vowels by English L2 learners and heritage speakers of Arabic [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign].
Stevens, K. (1999). Acoustic phonetics. MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sonnenberg, C., & vom Brocke, J. (2012). Evaluations in the science of the artificial — Reconsidering the build-evaluate pattern in design science research. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2012), 381–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strandberg, J., Gooskens, C., & Schüppert, A. (2021). Simultaneous bilingualism and speech style as predictors of variation in allophone production: evidence from Finland-Swedish. Journal of Phonetics, 881, 95–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strange, W. (2011). Automatic selective perception (ASP) of first and second language speech: A working model. Journal of Phonetics, 39(4), 456–466. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strange, W., Akahane-Yamada, R., Kubo, R., Trent, S., & Nishi, K. (2001). Effects of consonantal context on perceptual assimilation of American English vowels by Japanese listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1091, 1691–1704. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strange, W., Bohn, O., Nishi, K., & Trent, S. (2005). Contextual variation in the acoustic and perceptual similarity of North German and American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1181, 1751–1762. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2025, in press). The effects of production training on speech perception in L2 learners of German. Journal of Phonetics, 1081. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis (2nd ed.). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wottawa, J., & Adda-Decker, M. (2018). Quand les voyelles longues et brèves ne tiennent pas en place : la qualité vocalique en allemand L2, 64–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Chen, X., & Xiao, Q. (2022). Cross-linguistic similarity in L2 speech learning: evidence from the acquisition of Russian stop contrasts by Mandarin speakers. Second Language Research, 381, 3–29. Res. 381, 3–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue