Examining linguistic and experimenter biases through “non-native” versus “native” speech

IF 2.4 2区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Applied Psycholinguistics Pub Date : 2023-03-13 DOI:10.1017/S0142716423000115
Rachel Elizabeth Weissler, Shiloh Drake, Ksenia Kampf, Carissa A. Diantoro, Kurtis Foster, Audrey Kirkpatrick, Isabel Preligera, Orion Wesson, Anna Wood, M. Baese-Berk
{"title":"Examining linguistic and experimenter biases through “non-native” versus “native” speech","authors":"Rachel Elizabeth Weissler, Shiloh Drake, Ksenia Kampf, Carissa A. Diantoro, Kurtis Foster, Audrey Kirkpatrick, Isabel Preligera, Orion Wesson, Anna Wood, M. Baese-Berk","doi":"10.1017/S0142716423000115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is a consensus in psycholinguistic research that listening to unfamiliar speech constitutes a challenging listening situation. In this commentary, we explore the problems with the construct of non-native and ask whether using this construct in research is useful, specifically to shift the communicative burden from the language learner to the perceiver, who often occupies a position of power. We examine what factors affect perception of non-native talkers. We frame this question by addressing the observation that not all “difficult” listening conditions provide equal challenges. Given this, we ask how cognitive and social factors impact perception of unfamiliar accents and ask what our psycholinguistic measurements are capturing. We close by making recommendations for future work. We propose that the issue is less with the terminology of native versus non-native, but rather how our unexamined biases affect the methodological assumptions that we make. We propose that we can use the existing dichotomy to create research programs that focus on teaching perceivers to better understand talkers more generally. Finally, we call on perceivers and researchers alike to question the idea of speech being “native,” “non-native,” “unfamiliar,” and “accented” to better align with reality as opposed to our inherently biased views.","PeriodicalId":48065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psycholinguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psycholinguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716423000115","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract There is a consensus in psycholinguistic research that listening to unfamiliar speech constitutes a challenging listening situation. In this commentary, we explore the problems with the construct of non-native and ask whether using this construct in research is useful, specifically to shift the communicative burden from the language learner to the perceiver, who often occupies a position of power. We examine what factors affect perception of non-native talkers. We frame this question by addressing the observation that not all “difficult” listening conditions provide equal challenges. Given this, we ask how cognitive and social factors impact perception of unfamiliar accents and ask what our psycholinguistic measurements are capturing. We close by making recommendations for future work. We propose that the issue is less with the terminology of native versus non-native, but rather how our unexamined biases affect the methodological assumptions that we make. We propose that we can use the existing dichotomy to create research programs that focus on teaching perceivers to better understand talkers more generally. Finally, we call on perceivers and researchers alike to question the idea of speech being “native,” “non-native,” “unfamiliar,” and “accented” to better align with reality as opposed to our inherently biased views.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过“非母语”和“母语”语言来检验语言学和实验者的偏见
在心理语言学研究中有一个共识,即听陌生言语是一种具有挑战性的听力情境。在这篇评论中,我们探讨了非母语结构的问题,并询问在研究中使用这一结构是否有用,特别是将交际负担从语言学习者转移到通常占据权力地位的感知者。我们研究了影响非母语说话者感知的因素。我们通过观察并不是所有“困难”的听力条件都会带来同样的挑战来构建这个问题。鉴于此,我们想知道认知和社会因素是如何影响对不熟悉口音的感知的,以及我们的心理语言学测量所捕获的内容。最后,我们对今后的工作提出建议。我们认为,问题不在于本地与非本地的术语,而在于我们未经检验的偏见如何影响我们做出的方法论假设。我们建议,我们可以利用现有的二分法来创建研究项目,重点是教感知者更好地理解说话者。最后,我们呼吁感知者和研究人员都质疑语言是“母语”、“非母语”、“不熟悉”和“有口音”的想法,以便更好地与现实保持一致,而不是我们固有的偏见观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Applied Psycholinguistics publishes original research papers on the psychological processes involved in language. It examines language development , language use and language disorders in adults and children with a particular emphasis on cross-language studies. The journal gathers together the best work from a variety of disciplines including linguistics, psychology, reading, education, language learning, speech and hearing, and neurology. In addition to research reports, theoretical reviews will be considered for publication as will keynote articles and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
Does perceptual high variability phonetic training improve L2 speech production? A meta-analysis of perception-production connection You might want to tone down your advice: An experimental investigation of the speech act of advice in French The psycholinguistics of shining-through effects in translation: cross-linguistic structural priming or serial lexical co-activation? What contributes to fluent L2 speech? Examining cognitive and utterance fluency link with underlying L2 collocational processing speed and accuracy Language anxiety does not affect the growth of L2 reading achievement: The latent growth curve model approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1