For example, phonotactic restrictions require a word in Hawaiian to always end in a vowel ( Pukui and Elbert, 1979), whereas in German strings of up to four consonant segments can be found word-finally ( Seiler, 1962 Meinhold and Stock, 1980). Languages are well-known to differ in terms of combinatorial complexity of segments, especially consonants. Furthermore, significant interactions of formedness and session, and of existence and session, demonstrate that both factors, the sonority principle and the frequency pattern, play a role in the learning process. In particular, a general learning effect in terms of an N400 effect was found which was demonstrated to be different for sonority-obeying clusters than for sonority-violating clusters.
Sonority difference clusters windows#
EEG responses in two different time windows (adversely to behavioral responses) show linguistic processing by native speakers of Polish to be sensitive to both distinctions, in spite of the fact that Polish is rich in sonority-violating clusters. The aim was to study the role of two factors which potentially play a role in the learning of phonotactic structures: the phonological principle of sonority (ordering sound segments within the syllable according to their inherent loudness) and the (non-) existence as a usage-based phenomenon. The present paper reports on a two-session experiment in which Polish-speaking adult participants learned nonce words with final consonant clusters. Languages vary in the quantity and quality of licensed combinations, in particular sequences of consonants, with Polish being a language with a large inventory of such combinations. Phonological knowledge of a language involves knowledge about which segments can be combined under what conditions. 4Department of Linguistics, Universität Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.3Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.2Faculty of English, Adam-Mickiewicz-University, Poznan, Poland.1Institute of German Linguistics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.Using Clements' principles, which themselves actually follow from the overall theory of markedness, the interlanguage obstruent results reported by Broselow and Finer fall out automatically.Richard Wiese 1 *, Paula Orzechowska 2, Phillip M. In line with Clements' (1990) comprehensive investigation of sonority relations within the syllable, this paper argues that markedness alone suffices to account for the observed interlanguage patterns. The present paper, however, argues that it is typological markedness (Hawkins, 1987) rather than sonority distance per se which better explains L2 learners' knowledge of English clusters in syllable onsets. The object of Broselow and Finer's study was to determine whether L2 learners find clusters which are relatively more marked according to the MSD parameter to be more difficult to learn than cluster types which are relatively less marked. This parameter provides for the characterization of the various types of consonant clusters allowed in the onsets of syllables in different languages. A recent paper by Broselow and Finer (1991) proposes that markedness as defined in terms of the multivalued Minimal Sonority Distance (MSD) parameter is definitive in their subjects' knowledge of certain consonant clusters in syllable onsets. This paper is intended as a contribution to an evergrowing body of literature on the role played by principles and parameters of Universal Grammar in second-language acquisition theory.
0 kommentar(er)
