Joseph Conrad phenomenon
reconsidered
Doc. PhDr. Magdaléna Bilá, PhD.
Department of English Language &
Literature, Faculty of Arts, the University
of Prešov
1
Joseph Conrad phenomenon
reconsidered
Outline of the lecture:
 The concept of foreign accent:
- production based and perceptual
-“Joseph Conrad phenomenon”
 Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners):
- The “Doom Hypothesis”
 Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology:
- The “Full Access Hypothesis”
 Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity
 Recent research into the area
2
Foreign accent: production-based and
perceptual, “Joseph Conrad phenomenon”
Foreign accents – “relate to … national
groups speaking the same language”
(Major, 2001).
“Foreign accent - the inability of
non-native language users to
produce the target language with
the phonetic accuracy required for
acceptance by native speakers as
native speech” (Major, 2001)
3
Foreign accent: production-based and
perceptual, “Joseph Conrad phenomenon”

The lack of ability in late/adult
learners to achieve target like
proficiency in pronunciation in an
L2 has been labeled as the
‘Joseph Conrad phenomenon’
by Scovel.
4
Foreign accent: production-based and
perceptual, “Joseph Conrad phenomenon”
Perceptual foreign accent (Strange, 1995; McAllister,
1997): “Difficulty with which adult listeners
perceive the majority of phonetic contrasts that
are not functional in their L1”.
L2 users’ difficulties in deciphering L2 speech (Garnes
and Bond, In: Celce-Murcia et al, 1996: 222-223):
 lack of background knowledge (including cultural
gaps);
 lack of knowledge of the L2 phonology, tendency to
transfer the rules and features of L1 to L2;
 incomplete knowledge of L2 grammar and vocabulary.
5
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”
Flege (Plasticity in Speech Perception,
2005): The “Doom Hypothesis”:
late/adult learners are unable to
acquire the phonology of a new
language in a native-like manner.
3 sources (Flege, PSP, 2005):
 Linguistic research;
 Neurolinguistic research and
 Speech research.
6
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”
A/ Linguistic research: phonological
grid (Trubetzkoy): L2 phonemes
perceived as phonemes of L1;
phonemic features not used
contrastively in learners’ L1 are
difficult or impossible to perceive, to
learn and to produce;
(Flege, 2005)
7
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”
(Flege, 2005)
 B/ neurolinguistic research:
Critical Period Hypothesis: Lenneberg
(1969), an early advocate: two hypotheses
combined:
i/ Chomsky’s LAD Hypothesis (language acquisition
device, i.e. a species specific innate linguistic
capacity supposed to weaken progressively with the
onset of puberty)
ii/ and Penfield’s concept of cerebral dominance
(lateralization, i.e. assigning of certain functions to
the different hemispheres of the brain).
8
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”


The underlying idea of the CPH: after
lateralization of speech centers in the
brain is complete, the ability to learn L2,
especially L2 phonology, diminishes.
Critical Period - "a biologically
determined period of life during
which maximal conditions for
language acquisition exist" (Celce Murcia, Brinton and Goodwin, 1996, p.
15). No consensus among researchers in terms of
delimiting it.
9
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”


Other possible explanation: derives
from neurology: adults are much less
successful in L2 speech learning
because of loss or atrophy of
neural “plasticity” of brain (i.e. its
ability to change and develop new
phonetic categories).
(Flege, 2005)
10
Acquisition of second language phonology
(differences between early/infant and
late/adult learners): The “Doom Hypothesis”
C/ Speech research studies: perceptual
attunement to L1 during infancy and
childhood. An individual who has become
perceptually attuned to their L1:
- incapable of perceiving L1-L2 differences;
- incapable of developing long-term
memory representations for L2 sounds.
(Flege, 2005)

11
Bilá – Džambová, 2009: study on accented speech:
pauses and emphasis (1/0475/08 Vega project)







Differences between L1 and L2 speakers
(teacher trainees – started learning their L2
after puberty) of English and German:
Total number of pauses;
Frequency of pauses;
Distribution of pauses;
Function of pauses;
Inapt emphasis and in L2 subjects´ productions
More diversity in L2 subjects´productions. 12
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”



Further research: early/infant – late/adult
learners differences: failed to be satisfactorily
explained as arising solely from maturational
constraints;
and some research studies reported native-like
mastery in L2 in late/adult learners:
MAJOR, R.: A Model for Interlanguage Phonology. In: Interlanguage Phonology: The Acquisition of
a Second Language Sound System. Eds. G. Ioup and S. H. Weinberger. New York: Newbury House,
1987, p. 101-124:
Salisbury (1962) and Sorensen (1967) report on some
native communities (in Papua New Guinea and Northwest
Amazon): multilingualism is common there since it is a
desired and necessary skill and members of communities
often learn other languages as adults and reportedly
achieve target like pronunciation.
13
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”

NEUFELD, G. G.: On the Acquisition of Prosodic and Articulatory
Features in Adult Language Learning. In: Interlanguage Phonology: The
Acquisition of a Second Language Sound System. Eds. G. Ioup and S. H.
Weinberger. New York: Newbury House, 1987, p. 321-332.
:
A program for 3 groups of English speaking
subjects to learn Japanese, Chinese or Eskimo.
Results: out of the 20 adult subjects (8 males
and 12 females), 9: ratings within the range
of ratings usually obtained by L1 speakers;
6: qualified as near native like speakers and 5
performed in the manner one would normally
expect after such a short period of instruction.
14
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”

Bongaerts, van Summeren, Planken
and Schils (1997): Age and ultimate
Attainment in the Pronunciation of a
Foreign Language. In: Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, vol. 19, 1997, no.
4, pp. 447-465.
Extremely successful speakers of English
(L1: Dutch): contributing factors: learner
characteristics or training environment.
15
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”



Purely biological factors may not be sufficient to
account for adult performance in L2 acquisition:
Neufeld (1987): the CPH does not clarify why
some adults are capable of achieving (relatively)
native like proficiency;
Neufeld (1987): the differences between adults
and children: psychological factors and
learner characteristics: due to affective
factors (psychological disposition toward the
target language and its culture) and language
learning strategies.
Bongaerts: learner characteristics and
learning environment – favorable factors in
enhancing native-like proficiency in
16
pronunciation.
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”


Research studies into the
perception of foreign-accented
speech reveal that adults retain
some ability to perceive non-native
contrasts, store them in memory
and can even reproduce them
(after a period of exposure).
PSP (2005)
17
Further research into acquisition of second
language phonology: The “Full Access Hypothesis”

Flege (1984; In: Flege, PSP 2005):
Subjects: monolingual L1 English speaking adults;
Stimuli: in pairs (one uttered by a native English speaker
and one by a native French speaker). Listeners’ task:
choose “foreign” speaker. The results: native English adults
could spot within-category differences.

Flege & Hammond : Non-distinctive phonetic differences between language varieties.
Studies in Second Lang. Acquis. 5, 1-17. 1982; In: Flege, PSP 2005):
Subjects: 1st year college students attending English classes
taught by Spanish accented English teachers; production
task: imitate Spanish accented speech (acoustic analysis
proved they could spot between category differences).
18
Full Access Hypothesis

Full Access Hypothesis:
“the processes and devices that control
successful L1 speech acquisition—including
the ability to develop new phonetic
categories— remain intact across the life
span” (Flege, PSP 2005)- brain retains its
plasticity, i.e. ability to change even at adult
age
19
Current theory of L2 perception,
phonological development, plasticity



Researchers at the Acoustical Society of
America (ASA) presented (June 2003) the
results of their brain imaging studies and
clinical experiments that reveal how the L1 we
acquire distorts the perception of any
subsequent L2 sound system.
Researchers at Boston University (Guenther): a
neural network model: how phonetic
categories develop in cortex: After neurons
correctly distinguish the phonemes of a certain
language, they reorganize and become
sensitive only to between category
differences, i.e. contrasts that are functional
in the language acquired.
The capacity of cortex to discriminate within
category differences (non-functional contrasts)
diminishes.
20
Current theory of L2 perception,
phonological development, plasticity Current
theory of L2 perception


Iverson et al. at UCL (2005): “acquiring one's
native language phoneme categories
ALTERS PERCEPTION so that individuals
become more sensitive to between- than
within-category differences for L1
phonemes; i.e. human auditory system gets
tuned up to be especially sensitive to the
details critical in our L1”.
When trying to learn another language, those
tunings may prove to be inappropriate and
interfere with one’s ability to learn new
categories – “Joseph Conrad phenomenon”.
21
Current theory of L2 perception,
phonological development, plasticity Current
theory of L2 perception

Paul IVERSON, Patricia K. KUHL,
Reiko AKAHANE-YAMADA, Eugen
DIESCH, Yoh'ich TOHKURA, Andreas
KETTERMANN, and Claudia SIEBERT:
A perceptual interference account of
acquisition difficulties for nonnative
phonemes. In. Speech, Hearing and
Language: work in progress, Volume
13: 107-118:
22
Current theory of L2 perception,
phonological development, plasticity Current
theory of L2 perception



Maps of the human hearing apparatus:
the input of synthesized sounds that
extend over the continuum between the
American English phonemes /ra/ and /la/;
The English, German and Japanese
subjects - instructed to identify each
phoneme and to provide quality ratings.
The outcome: a map (our experience with
language distorts what we suppose we
hear): different perceptual patterns in
Japanese listeners.
23
Paul IVERSON, Patricia K. KUHL, Reiko AKAHANE-YAMADA, Eugen DIESCH,
Yoh'ich TOHKURA, Andreas KETTERMANN, and Claudia SIEBERT: A perceptual
interference account of acquisition difficulties for nonnative phonemes. In.
Speech, Hearing and Language: work in progress, Volume 13: 107-118:
24
Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity Current theory of L2
perception (Iverson et al. and Kuhl)
Infants: born with the capability of learning any
language; language general pattern of perception;
due to exposure to speech during childhood:
changes in perceptual processing:
These changes interfere with the acquisition of L2:
 the L2 speech: difficult to segment into words and
phonemes,
 different phonemes in the second language - sound
as if they are the same as L1 phonemes.
 Inappropriate perceptual processing: second language
production affected: the motor articulations of L2
difficult to reproduce.
25
Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity Current theory of L2
perception (Iverson et al. and Kuhl)
What is the core of the transition from a languagegeneral to a language-specific pattern of perception?




Early research: newborn infants are innately endowed
with a universal set of phonetic feature detectors
Due to maturation and lack of use: atrophy - adults
eventually develop language specific phonetic
feature detectors.
This early conception of perceptual development - false:
Infants’ perceptual abilities: auditory processing, not
innate linguistic structures;
Adults: retain the ability to detect some non-native
phonemes to which they have had little exposure, and
lose the ability to distinguish some non-native
phonemes to which they have been exposed in the
allophonic variation of their native language
(Example: r/l differences in Japanese and Chinese
26
speakers).
Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity Current theory of L2
perception (Iverson et al. and Kuhl)

The initial perceptual abilities of infants
ARE ACTIVELY CHANGED BY
LANGUAGE EXPOSURE:
Their ability to differentiate withincategory differences for L1
phonemes diminishes.
27
Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity Current theory of L2
perception (Iverson et al. and Kuhl)
Which levels of processing are
changed by language exposure during
infant L1 acquisition?


Iverson (2005): More recent evidence:
language exposure may AFFECT
AUDITORY PROCESSING.
These perceptual changes: prior to
the recognition or categorization of
speech in terms of higher level
linguistic units.
28
Current theory of L2 perception, perceptual
development, plasticity Current theory of L2
perception (Iverson et al. and Kuhl)

Kuhl’s hypothesis (1998; 2000): the CP for
language acquisition results more from
the interference of PREVIOUS
EXPERIENCE than from AGE.
Adults: NEURALLY COMMITTED (Kuhl,
2000) to a particular network structure
(underlying phonological representation –
cortical representations) for decoding
language, more due to this type of
perceptual interference than to any
maturational constraints.
29
Current theory of L2 perception,
phonological development, plasticity Current
theory of L2 perception

THE DECLINE IN SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
ABILITIES FROM CHILDHOOD
THROUGH PUBERTY
A PROGRESSIVELY STRONGER
NEURAL COMMITTMENT TO ONE'S
NATIVE LANGUAGE (Kuhl, 2000).
30
Even though an adult learning a second language could be
exposed to the same ACOUSTIC DISTRIBUTION of speech
sounds as an infant learning the same language, the
AUDITORY DISTRIBUTION of those sounds would be different
for an adult due to prior perceptual changes.
Acoustic distribution
Auditory distribution in
an infant
Auditory distribution in
an adult (Joseph Conrad)
31
Current view of phonological learning

(McAllister, 1997: 206): THE CURRENT VIEW
OF L2 PHONOLOGICAL LEARNING:
“THE KEY TO THE MASTERY OF L2 SPEECH IS THE
SUCCESSFUL RESTRUCTURING OF THE L1
CATEGORICAL SYSTEM AND THE RESULTING
PERCEPTUAL RE-CATEGORIZATION OF THE
ARRANGEMENT OF ACOUSTIC INPUT STIMULI THAT
FIT THE PHONETIC CATEGORIES OF THE TARGET
LANGUAGE”.
32
Current view of phonological learning



L2 learners:
Change their auditory processing of L2 speech
(= perceptual re-categorization);
Build new underlying categories (cortical
representations) for L2 sounds, i.e. a new
network structure (= restructuring of L1
categorical system).
33
Recent research into the area
Ongoing discussion:
 Which linguistic, psychological
and social factors influence the
success or failure of an L2 learner
in this restructuring process?
 What are the causes of intersubject variability ?(see also Flege,
PSP 2005).
34
Recent research into the area
The effect of a number of language and learner
variables of the perception of non-native phonemic
contrasts:


the learner’s length of exposure to L2
initial age of acquisition (AOA)
degree of ongoing use of L1
inherent ‘skill’ in language acquisition
the phonological status of L2 sounds in the learner’s L1
(e.g., Best, 2001)
the inherent acoustic salience of L2 sounds, (OrtegaLlebaria, Faulkner & Hazan, PSP: 2005).
Learner variables: cross-language research has
emphasized the initial age of L2 acquisition and
amount of exposure to L2 as determining factors in
the ability to perceive and produce a foreign
language (B. G. Evans and P. Iverson (UCL): Plasticity in speech production and perception: A study of accent change
in young adults (PSP 2005) Speech, Hearing and Language: work in progress. Volume 14, 2002, pp.18-38).
35
Bilá, 2005: Study on perception of impoverished
reduced input through ‘gated speech’


Shockey (2002): A natural speech recording in which
the time-domain waveform is ‘gated’ so that only a
fraction of 50 ms of the signal is heard by the
listeners, the duration of this gated fraction is
progressively increased to a point at which the signal
is likely to be unfailingly identified by L1 listeners.
The presented graph illustrates the statistical
analysis (correspondence analysis) showing the
relationship between the AOA (age at which the
subjects -1st year ELT trainees started learning their
L2 – English) and the number of words they
identified in the last gate (total number of words:
10).
36
Bilá, 2005: Study on perception of impoverished
reduced input through ‘gated speech’


The subjects who started to learn
L2 at an earlier age performed
better.
Impossible to interpret: 3 (10-11
yrs): explanation: may have studied
English at secondary schools as false
beginners (questionnaire)
37
Bilá, 2005: Study on perception of impoverished
reduced input through ‘gated speech’

Age of acquisition and perceptual performance
2 (6-9 yrs): 6-9 words
3 (10-11 yrs): impossible to interpret
4 (12-15 yrs): 4-5 words
2D graf řádkových a sloupc. souřadnic; Dimenze:
1x 2
Vstupní tab. (řádky x sl.) : 3 x 11
Standardizace: Profily řádků a sloupců
0,6
10
0
0,4
1
8
3
0,2
7
0,0
3
5
4
6
-0,2
4
9
-0,4
2
-0,6
2
Dimenze 2; Vl. číslo: ,10102 (30
-0,8
-1,0
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
Dimenze 1; Vl. číslo: ,23483 (69,92% inerce
1,5
2,0
Řád.souř.
Sloup.sou.
)
38
Bilá, 2005: Study on perception of impoverished
reduced input through ‘gated speech’


The presented graph illustrates the
statistical analysis (correspondence
analysis) showing the relationship
between the LOR (length of residence in
an L2 country) and the number of words
the subjects identified in the last gate
(total number of words: 10).
The subjects who experienced a
prolonged stay in an L2 country
performed better.
39
Recent research into the area

Bilá, 2005: 3 - several months: 8-10 words
4 – a year: 0-3 or 7-9 words
5 – several years: 8-10 words.
2D graf řádkových a sloupc. souřadnic; Dimenze:
1x 2
Vstupní tab. (řádky x sl.) : 3 x 11
Standardizace: Profily řádků a sloupců
1,0
3
0,8
0,6
10
8
0,4
0,2
2
1
0
4
3
4
0,0
7
9
-0,2
5
-0,4
-0,6
6
5
Dimenze 2; Vl. číslo: ,20214 (2
-0,8
-1,0
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
Dimenze 1; Vl. číslo: ,58212 (74,23% inerce
2,0
2,5
Řád.souř.
Sloup.sou.
)
40
Recent research into the
area: PSP 2005
THE STUDIES PRESENTED AT PSP workshop
(2005):


THE ADULT PERCEPTUAL SYSTEM MAY BE MORE
PLASTIC THAN FORMERLY THOUGHT: even
adults can build new cortical representations.
FURTHER INSIGHT INTO:
A/ THE EFFECT OF SOME LINGUISTIC,
PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL FACTORS
ON ACQUISITION OF L2 PHONOLOGY AND
B/ POSSIBLE CAUSES OF INTERSUBJECT
VARIABILITY.
41
Recent research: PSP 2005


Patricia K. Kuhl University of Washington, Barbara Conboy
University of Washington: Infants' brain and behavioral
responses to speech: Implications for the Critical Period.
Results: (a) a negative correlation between infants' early
native versus nonnative phonetic discrimination skills, and
(b) that native- and nonnative-phonetic discrimination skills
at 7.5 months differentially predict future language ability.
Better native-language discrimination at 7.5 months
predicts accelerated later language abilities, whereas
better nonnative-language discrimination at 7.5
months predicts reduced later language abilities.
42
PSP 2005:B. G. Evans and P. Iverson (UCL): Plasticity in
speech production and perception: A study of accent change in young
adults. In: Speech, Hearing and Language: work in progress. Volume
14, 2002, pp.18-38; In: PSP 2005: 71.



Subjects changed their spoken accent
after experience of attending university.
Changes: linked to exposure and to
sociolinguistic factors (motivation to fit
in with their university community).
Implications for cross-language research:
the age and amount of exposure as
determining factors in the ability to perceive
and produce a foreign language (Flege et
al., 1999).
But losing one’s accent may also be affected
by one’s willingness to be identified as a
member of the same culture as a native
speaker of that language.
43
Recent research into the
area: PSP 2005




Lengthy periods of auditory training,
as long as appropriate methods are
used: identification tasks with
feedback;
use of a diversity of materials from
multiple speakers.
Engagement with the training task critically important (providing the maximum
challenge for a given individual and
targeting that challenge towards specific
tasks).
44
Recent research: PSP 2005

Much inter-subject variability in L2 learners, especially late
learners (e.g., Hazan et al. 2002); many different explanations
.
offered but poorly understood
Auditory acuity, language learning aptitude,
phonological short-term memory,
identification with L2 culture, native speaker input, total input,
musical ability, bilingual balance, language dominance,
amount of L1 use, gender, L1, anxiety, integrative motivation,
instrumental motivation, strength of concern for pronunciation,
introversion, age, mimicry ability
What causes variation in individual performance?
45
Recent research into the
area: PSP 2005



Most inter-subject variability: due to variation in the
quantity and/or quality of L2 input received: “If L2
learners strongly motivated to speak L2 well - receive much
native-speaker input. Maybe what are thought of as
“motivational” differences are really input differences”
Flege (PSP 2005: 1-20).
My comment: If L2 learners are strongly motivated to
attain a good command of L2, they will seek to be
exposed to L2 in question and, consequently, receive
an abundance of native-speaker input and use it in a
way (personal engagement) that will contribute to
learning (intake).
Bilinguals: reduced degree of L1 activation - reduced L1- L2
interference (Flege, PSP 2005).
46
Most recent research into
the area



NeuroImage , 46 (2009) 226–240
Neural signatures of phonetic learning in
adulthood: A magnetoencephalography study
Yang Zhang, Patricia K. Kuhl , Toshiaki
Imada, Paul Iverson, John Pruitt , Erica B.
Stevens , Masaki Kawakatsu, Yoh'ichi
Tohkura, Iku Nemoto
47
Neural signatures of phonetic learning in adulthood:
A magnetoencephalography study



Underlying assumption: application of
principles of L1 learning: IDS (infant directed
speech or “motherese”)
Use of magnetoencephalography (MEG) –
brain images -- to study perceptual learning
A training software program: based on the
principles of infant phonetic learning
(systematic acoustic exaggeration, multi-talker
variability, visible articulation, and adaptive
listening – immitation of motherese).
48
Recent research


The program: intended to help Japanese
listeners utilize an acoustic dimension relevant
for phonemic categorization of /r–l/ in English
(for Japanese subjects – allophones, i.e. within
category differences with regard to their L2).
Results: significant identification
improvement over 12 hours of training and
positive transfer of skills to novel stimuli.
49
Recent research


Important outcome: not only focus on key
features of the material but also to overcome
neural commitment, i.e. prior learning.
Therefore: important – development of
methods.
50
Conclusion

Good news: Biology (age) is not a destiny and given
appropriate stimulus the brain can be retrained
(Flege, 2005; Iverson et al., 2005, 2009) -

How? Exposure/ manipulating the input by
using the principles of L1 acquisition (exaggerated
input, a variety of input, providing visible
articulation cues), training: appropriate methods
and stimuli are used, personal engagement.
51
Conclusion

“It is possible to teach the old
Joseph Conrad new
(pronunciation) tricks”.
52