Use of L1 phonotactics in initial foreign-language speech segmentation Katie Von Holzen, Sophia Wulfert & Holger Hopp Technische Universität Braunschweig, Germany | English and American Studies k.vonholzen@tu-braunschweig.de Speech Segmentation ■Identification of words in incoming speech stream ■Segmentation strategies are learned and language specific1 References 1. Cutler A. Listening to a second language through the ears of a first. Int J Res Pract Interpret. 2001;5(1):1-23. doi:10.1075/intp.5.1.02cut 2. Hu, C. F. (2014). Extracting phonological patterns for L2 word learning: The effect of poor phonological awareness. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 43(5), 569–585. doi: 10.1007/s10936-013-9269-z 3. Earle, F. S., & Arthur, D. T. (2017). Native phonological processing abilities predict post-consolidation nonnative contrast learning in adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(6), EL525–EL531. doi: 10.1121/1.5013141 4. Finn AS, Hudson Kam CL. The curse of knowledge: First language knowledge impairs adult learners’ use of novel statistics for word segmentation. Cognition. 2008;108(2):477-499. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.002 5. Weber A, Cutler A. First-language phonotactics in second-language listening. J Acoust Soc Am. 2006;119(1):597-607. doi:10.1121/1.2141003 6. Graf Estes, K., Gluck, S. C.-W., & Grimm, K. J. (2016). Finding patterns and learning words: Infant phonotactic knowledge is associated with vocabulary size. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 146, 34–49. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.01.012 7. Haman, E., Miller, A., Wodniecka, Z., Koegler, H., & Łuniewska, M. (2017). Crosslinguistic Lexical Tasks: American English version (CLT-AM-EN). A part of LITMUS COST IS0804 Battery. Unpublished material. 8. Weber, J., Marx, P., & Schneider, W. (2007). Die Prävention von Lese-Rechtschreibschwierigkeiten bei Kindern …. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(1), 65–75 9. Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS). doi: 10.1037/t15082-000 Phonotactic Cues ■Probability that certain sequences of phones align with word boundaries ■Advanced adult L2 learners continue to apply L1 phonotactic cues when segmenting speech in their L24,5 Participants ■n = 114; 1st and 2nd graders in Germany Age M = 7;6; SD = 0;9; range = 6-10 years ■Language Background: 83 L1 German 31 German + Lx (Arabic, Bulgarian, Chinese, French, Italian, Catalan, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, Turkish, Urdu) ■English experience: < 10% passive exposure and unable to complete Production CLT in English7 L1 Skills ■Young children‘s L1 skills influence their processing of novel phonotactic forms6 Paradigm We searched for the merse nart profoundly. nart nuttiff Sentence: Word: % word acceptance The lies about my doon roshaf persist (Target) (Lure) Stimuli Speech Segmentation L1 skills Clear Boundary: doon_roshaf Clear L1 phonotactic cue to word boundary Length: Short: roshaf Long: nroshaf Ambiguous Boundary: dook_roshaf Ambiguous L1 phonotactic cue to word boundary Length: Short: roshaf Long: kroshaf Phonological Awareness RQ2: Do pre-EFL students use phonotactic cues from their L1 German to segment words from English? RQ3: Is pre-EFL students’ ability to segment words from English speech influenced by their phonological awareness skills? Phonological Awareness ■Ability to reflect on and manipulate phonemic segments ■Support learning of L2 phonological contrasts and words2,3 RQ4: Is pre-EFL students’ use of phonotactic cues from their L1 German to segment words from English influenced by their L1 skills?  Word Status Effect: Word acceptance greater for short Target compared with short Lure words RQ1: Pre-EFL students can segment words from English, before receiving instruction in English  Interaction between Word Status and Phoneme Manipulation Score8: Word Status Effect increases with higher phoneme manipulation scores Phonotactic Cues  Length Effect: Word accepta