音声研究 第 23 巻 148–156 頁 Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan 2019 年 Vol. 23, pp. 148–156, 2019

特 集 ノート Misperception of Italian Singleton and Geminate Obstruents by Native Japanese Speakers

, Kimiko TSUKADA* ** and John HAJEK**

日本語母語話者によるイタリア語長短阻害音の誤知覚

SUMMARY: Misperception of voiced and voiceless obstruent length in Italian by native Italian and native Japanese speakers was compared. Both Italian and Japanese use consonant length contrastively. This may lead to the expectation that there is a positive first language transfer for the native Japanese speakers. While the native Japanese listeners’ misper- ception of Italian length categories was limited, they still made significantly more errors than the native Italian listeners. The native Japanese listeners’ length misperception was more noticeable when the word-medial obstruent was short than when it was long and when it was voiced than when it was voiceless.

Key words: cross-language misperception, consonant length, singleton/geminate, voiced and voiceless obstruents, Ital- ian, Japanese, positive transfer

1. Introductions Italian uses length contrasts for a wide variety of pho- nemes (/p b t d k ɡ m n r ʧ ʤ f v s l/) differing in voic- So-called quantity languages such as Italian and ing, place and manner of articulation and these appear Japanese use consonant length contrastively. For ex- freely in native lexicon (e.g. Esposito and Di Benedetto ample, in Italian, eco means ‘echo’ and ecco means 1999, Payne 2005, Rogers and d’Arcangeli 2004). This ‘here (it is)’. This is an area of pronunciation that is is not the case in Japanese where, unlike voiced so- known to pose difficulties to non-native speakers (e.g. norants /m n/ and voiceless obstruents such as /p t k/ De Clercq, Simon and Crocco 2014). In our previous for instance, voiced obstruent geminates are strongly study (Tsukada, Cox, Hajek and Hirata 2018), which disfavoured and their occurrence is limited mostly to investigated if and how first language (L1) knowledge loanwords (e.g. Hussain and Shinohara 2019, Kawa- of consonant length might affect the (mis)perception of hara 2015, Kubozono 2013). In addition, while vowels singleton/geminate contrasts in unfamiliar languages, preceding geminates are known to be shorter (by up to we reported that native speakers of Italian and Japanese 37％) than vowels preceding singletons in Italian (e.g. accurately perceived the consonant length category in Hajek, Stevens and Webster 2007, Payne 2005), the their L1 but were slightly less accurate in each other’s exact opposite has been reported for Japanese. In other language. In the present research, we conducted ad- words, in Japanese, vowels tend to be phonetically ditional analyses to gain further insights into native vs longer before geminates than before singletons (e.g. non-native differences when native Japanese listeners Han 1992, Hussain and Shinohara 2019, Idemaru and perceive consonant length in Italian. Guion 2008, Kawahara 2015). Furthermore, it has been Although consonant length is nominally contrastive suggested that length contrasts may differ phonetically in both Italian and Japanese, there are various cross- in mora-timed (Japanese) and syllable-timed (Italian) linguistic differences in how exactly length is phoneti- languages (Ham 2001, Idemaru and Guion 2008). cally encoded in the two languages in addition to rich These cross-linguistic distributional and phonetic variability inherent in natural speech. Perhaps one of differences may affect how native Japanese listeners the most prominent differences between Italian and process Italian singleton vs geminate contrasts. For Japanese with respect to consonant length is the range instance, native Japanese listeners may perceive Ital- of consonants that occur as geminates in each language. ian consonant length categories more accurately when

* Macquarie University（マコーリー大学） ** The University of Melbourne（メルボルン大学）

— 148 — Misperception of Italian Singleton and Geminate Obstruents by Native Japanese Speakers the target consonants are voiceless than when they are Hirata and Roengpitya 2014) found that native Ital- voiced, i.e. when they are aligned with L1 expectations. ian listeners with knowledge of contrastive consonant Previous studies focusing on the processing of non- length but not vowel length in their L1 were less accu- native vowels and consonants showed that successful rate than American English listeners in discriminating L1 transfer is not always guaranteed (e.g. Hallé, Best unfamiliar Japanese vowel length contrasts, suggesting and Levitt 1999, Tsukada 2006, Tsukada, Nguyễn, that experience with consonant length in L1 did not Roengpitya and Ishihara 2007) even when L1 and transfer positively to the cross-language perception (second language) L2 nominally share speech sounds. of vowel length. This finding is in contrast with what For instance, Hallé and his colleagues demonstrated was reported by Altmann, Berger and Braun (2012), that the L1 phonology could overestimate listeners’ in which native Italian listeners with no knowledge of responses to non-native sound categories and interfere German perceived German vowel length contrasts as with the positive transfer. Specifically in their study, accurately as native German listeners. they looked at four consonants, /w j r l/ which occur As briefly reviewed above, empirical phonetic re- in French with varying degrees of similarity to the search focusing on the processing of non-segmental corresponding English sounds. Despite the expectation features such as length is increasing (e.g. Altmann that native French listeners would be able to perceive et al. 2012, McAllister, Flege and Piske 2002, Tsukada English approximants accurately, they were found to et al. 2018), but is still limited in many respects. Given have some perceptual difficulties with the English /r/ the lack of agreement regarding the positive or nega- due to the marked articulatory-phonetic differences tive role of previous linguistic experience, we hope between the English and French /r/ (i.e. phonetically re- to increase our current understanding on the cross- alized as a central approximant in English and a uvular language perception of consonant length by comparing approximant in French). Of the three contrasts tested native and non-native listeners from different quantity (/w/-/j/, /r/-/l/, /w/-/r/), the French listeners had most language backgrounds, specifically in this case, Italian difficulty with /w/-/r/ and tended to hear the English /r/ and Japanese. As both Italian and Japanese use conso- as /w/-like. nant length contrastively, we predict that this type of In our own work on word-final stop place contrasts L1 experience is facilitative and there is a positive L1 in English and Thai (Tsukada and Ishihara 2007, transfer for native Japanese speakers in comparison to Tsukada and Roengpitya 2008), we reported that the perception of Italian consonant length by speak- Australian English (OZ) listeners were less accurate ers whose L1 does not have an underlying consonant in discriminating unreleased Thai place contrasts (e.g. length contrast. /t/-/k/, which is phonetically [t̚] vs. [k̚]) than native Our aim in this study is to determine in the first Thai listeners even though final stops can be unreleased instance the extent to which prior L1 experience of a in English and are therefore not completely foreign to consonant length contrast may be facilitative for native English-speaking listeners. It needs to be pointed out, Japanese listeners with respect to the contrast in Ital- however, that although OZ listeners’ discrimination of ian. In addition, we are also interested in knowing if unreleased Thai stops was not optimal, they were more there is a discernible effect of differences in respective accurate compared to native Japanese listeners whose systems, specifically the relative frequency and status experience with final stops is even more limited in their of individual contrasts (here disfavoured voiced obstru- L1. If the equivalence at the traditional phonologi- ent gemination in Japanese) and/or of differences in cal level predicts cross-linguistic perception patterns, the effect of a secondary acoustic cue (here predictable neither French nor OZ listeners would have difficulties vowel duration differences in Italian) on the successful with the above-mentioned English or Thai consonants perception by native Japanese listeners of the Italian respectively. geminate contrast. Research on vowel perception has also found that, despite experience with vowel length contrasts in their 2. Methods L1, both native Arabic and native Japanese listeners are clearly less accurate in discriminating vowel length 2.1 Stimuli Preparation contrasts in each other’s language (Tsukada 2011, 2.1.1 Speakers 2012a, 2012b). Further, they show no advantage over Three (2 males, 1 female) native Italian speakers OZ listeners who have limited experience with vowel in their 50–60s participated in the recording sessions length contrasts in their L1. Another study (Tsukada, lasting between 45 and 60 minutes. The three speakers

— 149 — ●●●●●特集「ロマンス諸語の音声」論文種別（Type）●●●●● originally came from different parts of Italy (includ- items, 56 had voiceless obstruents word-medially and ing Rome and Sicily) and were long-term residents of 16 had voiced obstruents in the same context. In ad- Sydney, Australia. All of them were highly experienced dition to the duration of the first vowel and the target university teachers of Italian with a clear understand- singleton/geminate consonant, the duration of each ing of pronunciation norms. The second author with (non)word was measured by inspection of wide-band expertise in phonetics/phonology of Italian auditorily spectrograms and time domain waveforms so that the confirmed that all three speakers clearly differentiated durational proportion of the intervocalic consonant the singleton and geminate consonants by duration. The within each (non)word can be calculated. The onset and speakers were recorded in a recording studio at a uni- offset of the vowel were determined by identifying the versity where they teach. They received $20 for their timepoint where formant structures indicating periodic- participation. None of these native Italian speakers ity clearly begin and end. The vowel offset was taken participated in the perception experiment. According to to be the onset of the target consonant. For intervocalic self-report, they had normal hearing. fricatives and affricates, the end of frication noise was 2.1.2 Speech Materials marked as the end of the consonant. For intervocalic Table 1 shows the Italian words and non-words stops, the end of consonantal closure was marked as used in this study. The /(C)VC(C)V/ tokens (where C the end of the consonant. For (non)words starting with is a consonant and V is a vowel) contained singleton a voiceless stop, the beginning of the release burst was or geminate obstruent consonants intervocalically. As marked as the start of the consonant, excluding the briefly mentioned above, consonant length is contras- closure (silence) phase. For (non)words starting with tive for a wide variety of phonemes including the a voiced stop, the beginning of voicing was marked as voiced obstruents. We presented a total of 72 items the start of the consonant. The mean duration of single- (/(C)VC(C)V/ where the target consonant was /p b t d tons was 100.6 ms (sd＝34.4 ms) and the mean duration k ɡ ʤ f v s/). Fifty-six items had voiceless consonants of geminates was 257.3 ms (sd＝51.4 ms). This means word-medially and sixteen items had voiced conso- that geminates were 2.5 times as long as singletons. nants word-medially. All of them carried a primary Proportionately, singletons took up 14.1％ of the entire stress on the first syllable. As the native Japanese lis- duration of (non)words while geminates took up 37.1％. teners without prior knowledge of Italian are unable to Durational compensation reported in previous work access lexical information in Italian, the use of items (Hajek et al. 2007, Payne 2005) is clearly visible in differing in lexical status (i.e. words and non-words) Figure 1 for both voiceless and voiced obstruents. Av- will not be susceptible to the Ganong effect, i.e. per- eraged across voicing, the mean duration of the vowels ceiving ambiguous speech signal in favour of a real preceding geminates was 141.6 ms (sd＝28.0 ms) and word as opposed to a fake word (Ganong III 1980, cf. the mean duration of the vowels preceding singletons Gianakas and Winn 2016). was 280.6 ms (sd＝84.1 ms). Based on these acoustic In the recording session, each item was presented on values, it is expected that consonantal duration alone a computer screen in random order and was produced would be helpful in predicting length category percep- in two separate conditions: one in isolation and the tion for both native and non-native listeners from quan- other in a carrier sentence (/diko X di nwɔvo/ ‘I say X tity language backgrounds such as Italian and Japanese. again’). The pace of presentation was controlled by the The mean difference of 139 ms in vowel duration may experimenter (the first author). The speech materials be large enough to play a role as a secondary cue in were digitally recorded at a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz consonant length perception—positively for native and the target words and non-words were segmented Italian listeners but potentially confounding for native and stored in separate files. To avoid inter-speaker Japanese listeners, given the different patterning of variation in fluency (specifically, the duration of a phonetic vowel duration before short and long conso- pause before and after the target word), only tokens nants across the two languages. produced in isolation were used as experimental stimuli in this study. 2.2 Participants 2.1.3 Stimuli Characteristics Two groups of listeners participated in a forced- Figure 1 shows the durational distributions of the choice perception experiment. The first group (L1 vowels that precede the target consonant and the Italian) consisted of 14 (7 males, 7 females) native durational distributions of the target consonants for Italian listeners with a mean age of 28.9 years (sd＝7.6 tokens containing singletons or geminates. Of the 72 years). Three of them participated in our earlier study

— 150 — Misperception of Italian Singleton and Geminate Obstruents by Native Japanese Speakers

Table 1 Italian words and non-words used in this study.

Voicing Phoneme Singleton gloss Geminate gloss

Voiced (n＝16) /b/ /bobo/ (non-word) /bobːo/ (non-word) /d/ /dede/ (non-word) /dedːe/ (non-word) /dɔdo/ dodo /dodːo/ (non-word) /ɡ/ /ɡaɡa/ (non-word) /ɡaɡːa/ (non-word) /ɡoɡo/ (non-word) /ɡoɡːo/ (non-word) /leɡo/ I tie /lɛɡːo/ I read /ʤ/ /aʤo/ ease /adːʒo/ premium /v/ /beve/ drink /bevːe/ drank

Voiceless (n＝56) /p/ /kapa/ head (regional, sub-standard form) /kapːa/ mantle /papa/ pope /papːa/ mush /pipi/ you smoke a pipe /pipːi/ (non-word) /popo/ (non-word) /popːo/ (non-word) /pupu/ (non-word) /pupːu/ (non-word) /t/ /fato/ fate /fatːo/ fact /nɔte/ note (plural) /nɔtːe/ night /sata/ (non-word) /satːa/ (non-word) /sete/ thirst /sɛtːe/ seven /siti/ sites (plural) /sitːi/ (non-word) /sutu/ (non-word) /sutːu/ (non-word) /tata/ nanny /tatːa/ (non-word) /titi/ (non-word) /titːi/ (non-word) /tɔto/ (non-word) /totːo/ (non-word) /tutu/ (non-word) /tutːu/ (non-word) /k/ /ɛko/ echo /ɛkːo/ here (it is) /keke/ (non-word) /kekːe/ sissy (plural) /kiki/ (non-word) /kikːi/ grain, grape (plural) /koko/ cross-eyed (arch.) /kɔkːo/ coconut /kuku/ (non-word) /kukːu/ (non-word) /f/ /tufo/ volcanic stone /tufːo/ dive /s/ /rosa/ pink /rosːa/ red /kasa/ house /kasːa/ case /sasa/ (non-word) /sasːa/ (non-word) /sese/ (non-word) /sesːe/ (non-word) /sisi/ (non-word) /sisːi/ (non-word) /soso/ (non-word) /sosːo/ (non-word) /susu/ (non-word) /susːu/ (non-word) which was conducted in Sydney, Australia. The rest included (C)VC(C)V words and non-words where the of the native Italian participants were students at medial C was always an obstruent in this set: /p t k b d a university in Turin, Italy. The second group (L1 g ʤ f v s/. The listeners’ task was to decide whether the Japanese) consisted of 10 (5 males, 5 females) native medial consonant was short/singleton or long/geminate Japanese listeners with a mean age of 25.5 years (sd＝ and indicate their choice on the computer. The listeners 6.9 years). They were recruited from the student/staff were allowed to replay the stimulus tokens multiple populations at universities in Australia (n＝6) or Japan times in order to reduce their anxiety and were asked to (n＝4). None of the native Japanese listeners reported guess if uncertain. Once a choice was made, the listen- knowledge of Italian. According to self-report, both ers were unable to change their decision and the next groups of listeners had normal hearing and identified token was presented automatically. All listeners were themselves as native speakers of their L1. tested individually in a sound-attenuated booth or quiet classroom on the university campus in their country of 2.3 Procedures residence. The experimental session was self-paced, The listeners responded to 72 Italian tokens which but typically lasted between 30 and 40 minutes. They

— 151 — ●●●●●特集「ロマンス諸語の音声」論文種別（Type）●●●●●

Figure 1 The durational distributions of vowel preceding the target consonant (left panel) and the durational distributions of target consonant (right panel) as a function of length category and voicing of the target obstruent. heard the stimuli at a self-selected, comfortable am- to Italian singleton vs geminate contrasts, both groups plitude level over the headphones on a computer and of OZ listeners misperceived Italian consonant length received $20 (or equivalent) for their participation. much more frequently than our native Japanese listen- ers. In the following sections, we provide further details 3. Results of how the native Italian and native Japanese listeners responded to the Italian length contrasts. 3.1 Overall Results We used R version 3.4.3 for all statistical analyses 3.2 Direction of Misperception reported below (R Core Team 2017). As expected, the Figure 2 shows the distributions of percentages of L1 Italian group was highly homogeneous and hardly misperception by the two groups of listeners as a func- ever misperceived L1 length categories (0.3％). The tion of direction of misperception and voicing of the L1 Japanese group also misperceived very few tokens target obstruent. Based on differences in the distribu- of unfamiliar Italian (non)words (6％), but there was tion of phonetic vowel duration in Italian and Japanese greater variability in this group. A Welch’s t-test indi- with respect to the consonant length contrast, we expect cated that the native Italian listeners made significantly that native Japanese listeners may be more prone to less misperceptions than the native Japanese listeners misperceive Italian singletons as long. While the L1 [t(39.5)＝－ 3.25, p＜.01, Cohen’s d＝.72]. Thus, the Italian group hardly ever misperceived any tokens, the native Japanese listeners misperceived very little, but L1 Japanese group was in fact slightly more variable they were not native-like. Still, this is remarkable in in their response patterns especially for singletons comparison to the perception of the same stimuli by the (mean＝6.6, Interquartile range (IQR)＝11.2) than OZ listeners previously reported (Tsukada, Cox, Hajek geminates (mean＝4.7, IQR＝3.6). However, as Figure and Hirata 2014, 2015, 2018). In our previous research, 2 (right panel) shows, native Japanese listeners’ pattern we reported the perception of Italian consonant length of length misperception varied depending on the voic- by OZ listeners with (n＝12) or without (n＝8) Japanese ing of the obstruents learning experience. The former group had a mean A three-way repeated-measures analysis of vari- misperception rate of 17％ (sd＝16.3％) and the latter ance (ANOVA) with Listener Group (G: L1 Italian, L1 group, 38％ (sd＝11.9％), respectively. While we can in- Japanese) as a between-subjects factor and Direction fer that learning Japanese and gaining awareness of the of Misperception (D: singleton as geminate, geminate concept of consonant length was facilitative in listening as singleton) and Voicing (V: voiceless, voiced) as

— 152 — Misperception of Italian Singleton and Geminate Obstruents by Native Japanese Speakers

Figure 2 Percentages of misperception by L1 Italian (left panel) and L1 Japanese (right panel) groups as a function of direction of misperception (G－＞S Error: geminate misperceived as singleton, S－＞G Error: singleton misper- ceived as geminate) and voicing of the target obstruent. within-subjects factors yielded significant main effects misperceive any of the tokens with voiced obstruents, of Group and Group×Voicing interaction only [G: i.e. no variability, but did misperceive a small number 2 F(1, 22)＝19.0, p＜.001, ηG＝.15, G×V: F(1, 22)＝7.5, of voiceless tokens (0.6％), i.e. in the opposite direc- 2 p＜.05, ηG＝.04]. The significant two-way interaction tion predicted and noted for the L1 Japanese group. will be explored in the next section. Although the native Japanese listeners misperceived the length category more frequently when the target 3.3 Voiceless vs Voiced Obstruent Consonants obstruents were voiced (8.1％) than when they were Figure 2 shows the native Italian listeners (left panel) voiceless (3.2％), the difference did not reach statistical never misperceived the length category of voiced significance, possibly due to large inter-listener varia- singletons, while this was precisely the category the tion. This differing effect of voicing presumably caused native Japanese listeners (right panel) were more likely the significant two-way interaction. Despite the native to misperceive. Japanese listeners’ familiarity with voiceless geminates A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA with Lis- in their L1 Japanese, they misperceived the length cat- tener Group (G: L1 Italian, L1 Japanese) as a between- egory more frequently than did the native Italian listen- subjects factor and Voicing (V: voiceless, voiced) as ers for both voiceless and voiced obstruents. a within-subjects factor yielded a significant main effect of Group and a significant two-way interaction 4. Discussion and Conclusions 2 effect [G: F(1, 22)＝19.0, p＜.001, ηG＝.34, G×V: 2 F(1, 22)＝7.5, p＜.05, ηG＝.12]. Welch’s t-tests with This study examined the perception of Italian con- Group as the independent variable reached significance sonant length by two groups of listeners from different for both voiceless [t(21.3)＝－ 2.3, p＜.05, Cohen’s quantity language backgrounds: Italian and Japanese. d＝.73] and voiced [t(19)＝－ 2.7, p＜.05, Cohen’s d＝not While our expectation was that the native Japanese calculable] obstruents. In both contexts, the native Jap- listeners were likely to do well given their prior L1 anese listeners misperceived the length category more experience of contrastive consonant length (singleton frequently than did the native Italian listeners. Welch’s vs geminate) in Japanese, we were particularly inter- t-tests with Voicing as the independent variable reached ested in determining precisely the extent to which the significance only for the L1 Italian group [t(27)＝ native Japanese listeners approximated to or diverged －2.4, p＜.05, Cohen’s d＝not calculable] who did not from the native Italian listeners in perceiving conso-

— 153 — ●●●●●特集「ロマンス諸語の音声」論文種別（Type）●●●●● nant length category in Italian. At the same time, given result, a native Japanese listener hearing a lengthened previously identified differences between the two lan- vowel may inadvertently perceive the following Italian guages with respect to the consonant length contrast, singleton as long. A greater tendency to misperception we also wished to determine the effect these might im- of voiced obstruent length (8.1％) we suggest may pact in some way on the ability of the native Japanese be related to the lack of sufficient experience hearing listeners to successfully perceive the consonant length length contrasts for voiced as opposed to voiceless category in Italian. obstruents in their own L1 Japanese as mentioned in Overall, our results show that the native Japanese the Introduction. listeners misperceive very few long and short obstru- Based on our results, it appears that native Japanese ents in Italian (6％), suggesting that they are able to listeners of Italian are able to rely on their prior L1 use their existing L1 knowledge and experience of experience of consonant duration for the accurate per- consonant duration differences – albeit not quite to the ception to the exclusion of other factors in most cases, overall level of the native Italian listener misperception but not always. The question then becomes why is it (0.3％). Given other differences between Japanese and that in only a relatively small proportion of cases, na- Italian, this outcome confirms in the first instance the tive Japanese listeners are not able to rely on consonant perceptual primacy of consonant duration in encoding duration to override any secondary L1 confounding ef- the consonant length category in L1 and L2 (see, e.g. fect. Further research is needed on this point. Esposito and Di Benedetto 1999, Kawahara 2015). Finally, whether or not native Japanese listeners Our results also indicate that while the native Japa- ever attain the native Italian level in perceiving Italian nese listeners misperceived very few Italian singleton consonant length needs to be confirmed with native and geminate obstruents and much less so than the Japanese learners of Italian. As reported by McAllister listeners from the OZ background (Tsukada et al. 2018) et al. (2002), native speakers of Estonian, whose L1 they failed to achieve the level of misperception uses vowel duration contrastively, were native-like in expected of native Italian speakers in two specific perceiving Swedish vowel length contrasts. However, ways: the native Japanese listeners’ misperception of they had lived in Sweden for at least 10 years and were consonant length was more noticeable for singletons highly proficient in Swedish, suggesting that even and for voiced obstruents. While the difference in con- learners who are deemed to have an L1 advantage need sonantal duration for singleton (100.6 ms) vs geminate an enormous amount of high-quality, authentic input in (257.3 ms) obstruents in our sample seems sufficiently the natural environment before they learn to perform at large and consonantal duration is known to be the a level comparable to that of native speakers of the tar- primary cue in consonant length perception across lan- get language. From a theoretical perspective, it would guages (cf. Kawahara 2015), our results also suggest be interesting to examine if speakers of other typologi- that secondary differences between language systems cally unrelated quantity languages such as Arabic or may play some role in occasionally confounding native Finnish might perceive Italian consonant length more Japanese listeners’ ability to perceive short and long or less accurately than native Japanese listeners. Find- consonants correctly in Italian. These language-specific ing answers to these questions would help us to better characteristics at phonetic and phonological levels may understand universal and language-specific nature of lead to different expectations in cross-linguistic speech cross-language speech perception. perception and there may have been more uncertainty for the native Japanese listeners when they heard Ital- Acknowledgments ian singletons than when they heard Italian geminates. Their increased misperception of singletons (right This research was supported by the 2018 Endeav- panel in Figure 2) can be related to cross-linguistic our Research Fellowship to the first author. We thank phonetic differences between Italian and Japanese in Valentina De Iacovo for research assistance and partici- how the consonant length interacts with the duration pants for their co-operation. Finally, we thank the Edi- of the preceding vowel. In Italian, as we saw earlier tor in Chief of Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan (Figure 1), consonantal duration covaries with the dura- and two anonymous reviewers for their time and input. tion of the preceding vowel. In Japanese, singletons can be preceded by a phonologically short or long vowel whereas geminates are typically preceded by a phono- logically short (but phonetically longer) vowel. As a

— 154 — Misperception of Italian Singleton and Geminate Obstruents by Native Japanese Speakers

speakers of Spanish, English and Estonian.” Journal of References Phonetics 30, 229–258. Altmann, H., I. Berger and B. Braun (2012) “Asymmetries Payne, E. M. (2005) “Phonetic variation in Italian consonant in the perception of non-native consonantal and vocalic gemination.” Journal of the International Phonetic As- length contrasts.” Second Language Research 28, 387– sociation 35, 153–181. 413. R Core Team (2017) “R: A language and environment for De Clercq, B., E. Simon and C. Crocco (2014) “Rosa versus statistical computing.” R Foundation for Statistical Com- rossa: The acquisition of Italian geminates by native puting, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project. speakers of Dutch.” Phrasis: Studies in Language and org/ Literature 2, 3–29. Rogers, D. and L. d’Arcangeli (2004) “Italian.” Journal of Esposito, A. and M. G. Di Benedetto (1999) “Acoustical and the International Phonetic Association 34, 117–21. perceptual study of gemination in Italian stops.” Journal Tsukada, K. (2006) “Cross-language perception of word-final of the Acoustical Society of America 106, 2051–2062. stops in Thai and English.” Bilingualism: Language and Ganong III, W. F. (1980) “Phonetic categorization in auditory Cognition 9, 309–318. word perception.” The Journal of Experimental Psychol- Tsukada, K. (2011) “The perception of Arabic and Japanese ogy: Human Perception and Performance 6, 110–125. short and long vowels by native speakers of Arabic, Gianakas, S. P. and M. Winn (2016) “Exploiting the Ganong Japanese and Persian.” Journal of the Acoustical Society effect to probe for phonetic uncertainty resulting from of America 129, 989–998. hearing loss.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of Amer- Tsukada, K. (2012a) “Comparison of native vs. non-native ica 140, 3440. perception of vowel length contrasts in Arabic and Japa- Hajek, J., M. Stevens and G. Webster (2007) “Vowel dura- nese.” Applied Psycholinguistics 33, 501–516. tion, compression and lengthening in stressed syllables Tsukada, K. (2012b) “Non-native Japanese listeners’ percep- in Italian.” Proceedings of the 16th International Con- tion of vowel length contrasts in Japanese and Modern gress of Phonetic Sciences, 1057–1060. Standard Arabic (MSA).” Second Language Research Hallé, P. A., C. T. Best and A. Levitt (1999) “Phonetic vs. 28, 151–168. phonological influences on French listeners’ perception Tsukada, K., F. Cox, J. Hajek and Y. Hirata (2014) “Percep- of American English approximants.” Journal of Phonet- tion of Italian and Japanese consonant length by na- ics 27, 281–306. tive speakers of Australian English and Italian: A pilot Ham, W. H. (2001) Phonetic and phonological aspects of study.” Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Interna- geminate timing. New York, NY: Routledge. tional Conference on Speech Science and Technology Han, M. S. (1992) “The timing control of geminate and single 2014 (SST 2014), 215–218. stop consonants in Japanese: A challenge for non-native Tsukada, K., F. Cox, J. Hajek and Y. Hirata (2015) “Percep- speakers.” Phonetica 49, 102–127. tion of Italian and Japanese singleton/geminate conso- Hussain, Q. and S. Shinohara (2019) “Partial devoicing of nants by listeners from different language backgrounds.” voiced geminate stops in Tokyo Japanese.” Journal of Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of the Acoustical Society of America 145, 149–163. Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow, UK: the University of Idemaru, K. and S. G. Guion (2008) “Acoustic covariants of Glasgow. ISBN 978-0-85261-941-4. Paper number length contrast in Japanese stops.” Journal of the Inter- 165.1-5 retrieved from http://www.icphs2015.info/pdfs/ national Phonetic Association 38, 167–186. Papers/ICPHS0165.pdf Kawahara, S. (2015) “The phonetics of sokuon, or geminate Tsukada, K., F. Cox, J. Hajek and Y. Hirata (2018) “Non- obstruents.” In H. Kubozono (ed.) Handbook of Japa- native Japanese learners’ perception of consonant length nese phonetics and phonology, 43–78. Berlin: Walter de in Japanese and Italian.” Second Language Research 34, Gruyter. 179–200. Kubozono, H. (2013) “Introduction to the special issue on Tsukada, K., Y. Hirata and R. Roengpitya (2014) “Cross- Japanese geminate obstruents.” Journal of East Asian language perception of Japanese vowel length contrasts: Linguistics 22, 303–306. Comparison of listeners from different first language (L1) McAllister, R., J. E. Flege and T. Piske (2002) “The influence backgrounds.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hear- of L1 on the acquisition of Swedish quantity by native ing Research 57, 805–814.

— 155 — ●●●●●特集「ロマンス諸語の音声」論文種別（Type）●●●●●

Tsukada, K. and S. Ishihara (2007) “The effect of first lan- Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 1781–1784. guage (L1) in cross-language speech perception: Com- Tsukada, K. and R. Roengpitya (2008) “Discrimination of parison of word-final stop discrimination by English, English and Thai words ending with voiceless stops by Japanese and Thai listeners.” Journal of the Phonetic native Thai listeners differing in English experience.” Society of Japan 11, 82–92. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 38, Tsukada, K., T. T. A. Nguyễn, R. Roengpitya and S. Ishihara 325–347. (2007) “Cross-language perception of word-final stops: Comparison of Cantonese, Japanese, Korean and Viet- (Received Mar. 25, 2019, Accepted Jun. 10, 2019, namese listeners.” Proceedings of the 16th International e-Published Aug. 31, 2019)

— 156 —