title: Phonetic convergence in spontaneous conversations as a function of interlocutor language distance.
abstract: This study explores phonetic convergence during conversations between pairs of talkers with varying language distance. Specifically, we examined conversations within two native English talkers and within two native Korean talkers who had either the same or different regional dialects, and between native and nonnative talkers of English. To measure phonetic convergence, an independent group of listeners judged the similarity of utterance samples from each talker through an XAB perception test, in which X was a sample of one talker's speech and A and B were samples from the other talker at either early or late portions of the conversation. The results showed greater convergence for same-dialect pairs than for either the different-dialect pairs or the different-L1 pairs. These results generally support the hypothesis that there is a relationship between phonetic convergence and interlocutor language distance. We interpret this pattern as suggesting that phonetic convergence between talker pairs that vary in the degree of their initial language alignment may be dynamically mediated by two parallel mechanisms: the need for intelligibility and the extra demands of nonnative speech production and perception.
authors: Midam
authors: M
authors: Kim
authors: William S
authors: WS
authors: Horton
authors: Ann R
authors: AR
authors: Bradlow
references: Behav Brain Sci. 2004 Apr;27(2):169-90; discussion 190-226
references: 15595235
references: Cogn Psychol. 2003 Sep;47(2):204-38
references: 12948518
references: Cognition. 2000 May 15;75(2):B13-25
references: 10771277
references: Psychol Rev. 1998 Apr;105(2):251-79
references: 9577239
references: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 Nov;72(8):2254-64
references: 21097867
references: Cognition. 2008 Feb;106(2):707-29
references: 17532315
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Jun;74(6):1464-80
references: 9654756
references: Child Dev. 1990 Oct;61(5):1584-95
references: 2245748
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 1994 Mar;95(3):1581-92
references: 8176061
references: J Speech Hear Res. 1985 Mar;28(1):96-103
references: 3982003
references: Phonetica. 2007;64(2-3):145-73
references: 17914281
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Apr;119(4):2382-93
references: 16642851
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 May;125(5):3306-16
references: 19425672
references: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Aug;71(6):1207-18
references: 19633336
references: Percept Psychophys. 1998 Apr;60(3):355-76
references: 9599989
references: Psychol Sci. 1994 Jan 1;5(1):42-46
references: 21526138
references: Cognition. 1987 Nov;27(2):181-218
references: 3691025
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Aug;11(4):716-22
references: 15581123
references: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 Aug;72(6):1614-25
references: 20675805
references: Lang Linguist Compass. 2009 Jan 1;3(1):236-264
references: 20046964
references: Percept Psychophys. 2005 Feb;67(2):224-38
references: 15971687
references: Lang Speech. 2010;53(Pt 4):510-40
references: 21313992
references: J Acoust Soc Am. 2007 Jun;121(6):3814-26
references: 17552729
references: Cogn Psychol. 2005 Sep;51(2):141-78
references: 16095588
references: Percept Psychophys. 2004 Apr;66(3):422-9
references: 15283067
references: Cognition. 2008 Apr;107(1):54-81
references: 17803986