240 likes | 247 Views
Talking to Nonnative Speakers: Investigating language-specific audience design and cognate use. Jessi Jacobsen 04.29.17. Jessi Jacobsen 05.06.17. “Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design:. “Foreigner Talk”: Louder Slower pace of speech More repetition. “Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design:.
E N D
Talking to Nonnative Speakers:Investigating language-specific audience design and cognate use Jessi Jacobsen 04.29.17 Jessi Jacobsen 05.06.17
“Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design: • “Foreigner Talk”: • Louder • Slower pace of speech • More repetition
“Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design: • “Foreigner Talk”: • Louder • Slower pace of speech • More repetition • All language general—What about language-specific adaptations?
Cognates: • Psycholinguistic perspective: translation equivalents that share significant phonological/orthographic overlap between languages • Insectos-insects • Sofá-sofa • Prisión-prison • Restaurante-restaurant • Some of the easiest words to learn and remember in a new language (Lotto & de Groot, 1998)
Cognates as Audience Design? • Do native speakers (NS) use more cognates when talking to a nonnative speaker (NNS) than a fellow native speakers?
Experiment 1: Method • Participants: 32 native Spanish speakers (English = nonnative language) • Playing game of telephone • 30 concepts that could be referred to by either a cognate (C; e.g., insectos) or a non-cognate (NC; e.g., bichos ) • Incorporated into 4-sentence story (2 Cs/2 NCs per story)
Experiment 1: Method (Cont.) • Participant hears story • Does multiplication distractor task • Records story for future audience Hola….um soy Americana... Confederate Participant Confederate Participant
Experiment 1: Results • Tally # Cs and NCs each participant uses over course of experiment • 2 (Cognate, Non-Cognate) X 2 (NNS, NS) No Main Effect: of Word Type No Interaction Main Effect: More Words Used Overall in NNS Condition, F(1, 15)=5.07, p=.03
Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations • Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS
Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations • Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS • But maybe this task is just weird?
Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations • Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS • But maybe this task is just weird? • Forgetting about partner
Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations • Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS • But maybe this task is just weird? • Forgetting about partner • Repetition does not require comprehension
Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations • Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS • But maybe this task is just weird? • Forgetting about partner • Repetition does not require comprehension • Do the participants know which words are cognates?
Experiment 2: Method • 42 Native English Speakers (all fulfilled Carleton’s language requirement for Spanish) • Referential communication task with 26 items that could be referred to with either a C (e.g., insects) or an NC (e.g., bugs)
Experiment 2: Method (Cont.) • Procedure: • Video Introductions • Record Instructions for ”Matching Game” • Demographic/ Proficiency Info ”Spaniard” NNS Condition NS Condition
Experiment 2: Results • Tally number of cognates each participant uses across experiment t(40)=1.83, p = .075, d= 0.56
Experiment 2: Results • Tally number of cognates each participant uses across experiment • Using individualized definition of cognate t(40)=1.83, p = .075, d= 0.56 t(40)=2.19, p = .035, d= 0.6
Discussion/Takeaways • NS do seem to use more cognates with NNS than NS • Effect more reliable when using individualized cognate definition
Discussion/Takeaways • NS do seem to use more cognates with NNS than NS • Effect more reliable when using individualized cognate definition • Many differences between Experiments 1 and 2 • Language difference • Priming difference • Individualized cognate definition etc.
Discussion/Takeaways • Future directions • Strategic v. automatic? • Comprehension studies • People can account for language-specific information when engaging in foreigner talk!!
THANK YOU! • My amazing mentors at Carleton, especially my advisor Mija Van Der Wege, my 2nd reader Cherlon Ussery, and CogSci Chair Extraordinaire Kathie Galotti. • The wonderfully helpful staff and researchers at the BCBL, especially Jon Andoni Duñabeitia • All my awesome participants • YOU for being a great audience!