Tesis doctoral en la redInfoling 2.56 (2020)

Autor/ra:Cerda-Oñate, Karina
Fecha de lectura o defensa:20 de diciembre de 2019
Título de la tesis:Testing the effect of synchronous speech tasks in the production of L2 speech rhythm in learners of Spanish as a second language
Director/a de la tesis:Gloria Toledo Vega
Codirección:Mikhail Ordin
Universidad:Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Departamento:Facultad de Letras
Descripción de la tesis

The following study tested the effect of synchronous and non-synchronous speech conditions in the production of L2 speech rhythm in Spanish. Namely, it assessed the production of American English speakers of Spanish with intermediate and upper-intermediate levels of competence in Spanish (n = 31) in comparison to the L1 speech rhythm of a control group of native speakers of Spanish (n = 32). For this purpose, speech samples were elicited from a reading aloud task, including four speech conditions: 1) Synchrony live condition; 2) Synchrony with the recording from the live condition; 3) Synchrony with a recording from a non-live condition; and, 4) Solo recording condition. The analysis of the results showed that the speech rhythm of the experimental group and the control group was modulated by the different conditions of the experimental task. Notably, non-native participants produced longer vocalic and consonantal intervals and higher vowel percentages than the native speakers of Chilean Spanish across conditions. The theoretical and pedagogical implications concerning the use of synchronous speech in the production of L2 speech rhythm are assessed and discussed. Keywords: Speech rhythm, L2 speech rhythm, SFL, synchronous speech.

Área temática:Español como lengua extranjera (ELE), Español como segunda lengua (EL2), Fonética, Psicolingüística

List of tables   
List of figures   
List of abbreviations and symbols   






1 Introduction  
1.1 L2 speech   
1.1.1 Perceptual issues in the acquisition of L2 speech   
1.1.2 Production issues in the acquisition of L2 speech   
1.2 Other issues concerning the acquisition of L2 speech  
1.2.1 The disconnection between the scientific community and the foreign language teaching communities
1.2.2 L2 classrooms and prosody   
1.3 Exploring the production of L2 Spanish speech rhythm using a synchronic speech production task
1.3.1 English and Spanish: Two different speech rhythm systems   
1.3.2 Researching about prosody and specifically about speech rhythm   
1.3.3. Synchronic speech and its relationship with the production of L2 speech rhythm
1.3.4 Assessing the effect of synchronized-speech in terms of teaching methodologies for the acquisition and production of L2 speech rhythm


2 Theoretical framework and state of the art   
2.1. Prosody as an acoustic phenomenon and a suprasegmental feature of speech   
2.2. The study of speech rhythm as a prosodic feature of speech     
2.2.1. The evolution of the study of speech rhythm 
2.3. The study of suprasegmentals and speech rhythm as an interactional resource  
2.3.1. Speech rhythm and synchronized speech: an interactional view of rhythm 
2.4. Models to understand the perception and production of L2 speech   
2.4.1. Archibald (1994). A formal model of learning L2 prosodic phonology   
2.4.2. Major (2001). The Ontogeny Phylogeny Model   
2.4.3. MacWhinney (2005). A unified model of language acquisition   
2.5. State of the art: Empirical research of L2 speech rhythm as a prosodic feature of speech and as an interactional phenomenon using synchronized speech 
2.5.1. Empirical research about L2 speech rhythm as a prosodic feature of speech   
2.5.2. Empirical research about L2 speech rhythm as a synchronous phenomenon   


3. Research questions and objectives   
3.1 Research questions   
3.2 Objectives   
3.2.1 General objective   
3.2.2 Specific objectives   
3.3 Methods and materials   
3.4 Type of research   
3.5 Dependent variables   
3.6 Independent variables   
3.7 Participants   
3.7.1 Native group   
3.7.2 Non-native group   
3.8 Design   
3.8.1 Experimental conditions   
3.8.2 Materials   
3.9 Procedures   
3.10 Data analysis   
3.10.1 Assessment of temporal patterns   
3.10.2 Assessment of speaker synchronization   


4. Results   
4.1. Vowel measurements  
4.1.1. Vowel percentage in non-native participants   
4.1.2. Vowel percentage in native participants   
4.1.3. Comparison of the results for V% for non-native and native participants   
4.1.4. VarcoV in non-native participants   
4.1.5. VarcoV in native participants   
4.1.6. Comparison of the results for VarcoV for non-native and native participants  
4.1.7. VnPVI in non- native participants   
4.1.8. VnPVI in native participants   
4.1.9. Comparison of the results for VnPVI for non-native and native participants   
4.1.10. Summary for vocalic intervals for native and non-native participants   
4.2. Consonants   
4.2.1. Varco C in non-native participants   
4.2.2. VarcoC in native participants   
4.2.3. Comparison of the results for VarcoC for non-native and native participants   
4.2.4. CnPVI in non-native participants   
4.2.5. CnPVI in native participants   
4.2.6. Comparison of the results for CnPVI for non-native and native participants   
4.2.7. Summary of statistically significant results for consonant measurements   
4.3. Synchrony data   
4.3.1. Onset synchrony in non-native participants   
4.3.2. Onset synchrony in native participants   
4.3.3. Comparison of the results for onset synchrony for non-native and native participants   
4.3.4. Summary for onset synchrony measurements   


5. Discussion of the results   
5.1. The effect of synchrony and asynchrony conditions in the speech rhythm production of non-native and native participants   
5.1.1. Rhythm measurements and synchrony conditions 
5.1.1. Text type and synchrony conditions   
5.2. The effect of live human interaction   
5.3. The link between perception and production in L2 speech rhythm   
5.4. Discussion in light of different acquisition models  
5.4.1. Major’s model (2001)   
5.4.2. Archibald’s model (1994)   
5.4.3. MacWhinney’s model (2005)   
5.5. Pedagogical implications of the findings of this study   


6. Conclusions   


7. References   


8. Appendices   
8.1 Instrument 0: List of sentences  
8.2 Instrument 1: Narrative text  
8.3 Instrument 2: Text with meter  
8.4 Consent form for non-native participants  
8.5 Consent form for native participants  
8.6 Questionnaire for non-native participants  
8.7 Questionnaire for native participants  
8.8 Script to measure onset synchrony data  

Número de págs.:117

Fecha de publicación en Infoling:29 de febrero de 2020
Karina Cerda-Oñate
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile