Discrimination of Uncategorized-Categorized and Uncategorized-Uncategorized Greek consonantal contrasts by Russian speakers

IF 0.2 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Topics in Linguistics Pub Date : 2020-06-01 DOI:10.2478/topling-2020-0005
G. Georgiou
{"title":"Discrimination of Uncategorized-Categorized and Uncategorized-Uncategorized Greek consonantal contrasts by Russian speakers","authors":"G. Georgiou","doi":"10.2478/topling-2020-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the discriminability of two different assimilation types, the Uncategorized-Categorized (UC) and the Uncategorized-Uncategorized assimilation (UU) (Best and Tyler, 2007), as reflected in the discrimination accuracy and reaction times towards non-native contrasts by Russian speakers. The discriminability of these assimilation types varies in the literature. To this purpose, the same Russian speakers who evaluated Greek consonantal contrasts as UC and UU types in an assimilation test of a previous study completed an AXB discrimination test in this study to detect the discriminability of these assimilation types. The findings demonstrated that most of the UU non-overlapping (UU-N) types, and specifically those with focalized-focalized responses, were more accurately discriminated and had faster RTs than the UC non-overlapping (UC-N) type. However, one UU-N type with clustered-clustered responses did not differ in terms of discrimination accuracy and reaction times with the UC-N type. It is suggested that despite having the same overlapping parameters (non-overlapping), UU types might be more discriminable than UC types with respect to consonants. Also, similarity of uncategorized phones with other assimilated phones (e.g., focalized, clustered, dispersed) might shape the UC-UU type relationship. Finally, it is assumed that the discriminability of UC-UU types might be consonant-specific.","PeriodicalId":41377,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2020-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the discriminability of two different assimilation types, the Uncategorized-Categorized (UC) and the Uncategorized-Uncategorized assimilation (UU) (Best and Tyler, 2007), as reflected in the discrimination accuracy and reaction times towards non-native contrasts by Russian speakers. The discriminability of these assimilation types varies in the literature. To this purpose, the same Russian speakers who evaluated Greek consonantal contrasts as UC and UU types in an assimilation test of a previous study completed an AXB discrimination test in this study to detect the discriminability of these assimilation types. The findings demonstrated that most of the UU non-overlapping (UU-N) types, and specifically those with focalized-focalized responses, were more accurately discriminated and had faster RTs than the UC non-overlapping (UC-N) type. However, one UU-N type with clustered-clustered responses did not differ in terms of discrimination accuracy and reaction times with the UC-N type. It is suggested that despite having the same overlapping parameters (non-overlapping), UU types might be more discriminable than UC types with respect to consonants. Also, similarity of uncategorized phones with other assimilated phones (e.g., focalized, clustered, dispersed) might shape the UC-UU type relationship. Finally, it is assumed that the discriminability of UC-UU types might be consonant-specific.
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
俄语使用者对未分类分类和未分类希腊语辅音对比的辨析
摘要本研究的目的是调查两种不同同化类型的可辨别性,即未分类分类同化(UC)和未分类未分类同化(UU)(Best和Tyler,2007),这反映在俄语使用者对非母语对比的辨别准确性和反应时间上。这些同化类型的可辨别性在文献中各不相同。为此,在先前研究的同化测试中,将希腊语辅音对比评估为UC和UU类型的俄语使用者在本研究中完成了AXB判别测试,以检测这些同化类型的可辨别性。研究结果表明,与UC非重叠(UC-N)型相比,大多数UU非重叠(UU-N)型,特别是那些具有聚焦-聚焦反应的UU-N型,能够更准确地区分,并且具有更快的RT。然而,一种具有聚集聚集反应的UU-N型在辨别准确性和反应时间方面与UC-N型没有差异。有人认为,尽管具有相同的重叠参数(非重叠),但就辅音而言,UU类型可能比UC类型更容易辨别。此外,未分类手机与其他同化手机的相似性(例如,聚焦、聚集、分散)可能会形成UC-UU类型的关系。最后,假设UC-UU类型的可辨别性可能是辅音特定的。
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
Topics in Linguistics
Topics in Linguistics LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
The semantic complexity of Hausa kinship terms The mental consideration of resilience as a relevant social concept (a corpus-based research of American English) Austin in the Lab: Empirically reconsidering the constative-performative distinction The ADV speaking-construction in American English: A quantitative corpus-based investigation The morphological and syntactic functions of Dagbani nominal suffixes
×
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