» Articles » PMID: 29777983

Young Infants' Discrimination of Subtle Phonetic Contrasts

Overview
Journal Cognition
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Psychology
Date 2018 May 20
PMID 29777983
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

It is generally accepted that infants initially discriminate native and non-native contrasts and that perceptual reorganization within the first year of life results in decreased discrimination of non-native contrasts, and improved discrimination of native contrasts. However, recent findings from Narayan, Werker, and Beddor (2010) surprisingly suggested that some acoustically subtle native-language contrasts might not be discriminated until the end of the first year of life. We first provide countervailing evidence that young English-learning infants can discriminate the Filipino contrast tested by Narayan et al. when tested in a more sensitive paradigm. Next, we show that young infants learning either English or French can also discriminate comparably subtle non-native contrasts from Tamil. These findings show that Narayan et al.'s null findings were due to methodological choices and indicate that young infants are sensitive to even subtle acoustic contrasts that cue phonetic distinctions cross-linguistically. Based on experimental results and acoustic analyses, we argue that instead of specific acoustic metrics, infant discrimination results themselves are the most informative about the salience of phonetic distinctions.

Citing Articles

Learning to Perceive Non-Native Tones via Distributional Training: Effects of Task and Acoustic Cue Weighting.

Liu L, Yuan C, Ong J, Tuninetti A, Antoniou M, Cutler A Brain Sci. 2022; 12(5).

PMID: 35624946 PMC: 9138676. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12050559.


Impacts of acoustic-phonetic variability on perceptual development for spoken language: A review.

Quam C, Creel S Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2021; 12(5):e1558.

PMID: 33660418 PMC: 9836025. DOI: 10.1002/wcs.1558.


Infants' discrimination of consonant contrasts in the presence and absence of talker variability.

Quam C, Clough L, Knight S, Gerken L Infancy. 2020; 26(1):84-103.

PMID: 33063948 PMC: 9794002. DOI: 10.1111/infa.12371.

References
1.
EIMAS P, SIQUELAND E, Jusczyk P, Vigorito J . Speech perception in infants. Science. 1971; 171(3968):303-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.171.3968.303. View

2.
Best C, McRoberts G . Infant perception of non-native consonant contrasts that adults assimilate in different ways. Lang Speech. 2004; 46(Pt 2-3):183-216. PMC: 2773797. DOI: 10.1177/00238309030460020701. View

3.
Eilers R, Gavin W, Wilson W . Linguistic experience and phonemic perception in infancy: a crosslinguistic study. Child Dev. 1979; 50(1):14-8. View

4.
Polka L, Colantonio C, Sundara M . A cross-language comparison of /d/-/th/ perception: evidence for a new developmental pattern. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 109(5 Pt 1):2190-201. DOI: 10.1121/1.1362689. View

5.
Kuhl P, Stevens E, Hayashi A, Deguchi T, Kiritani S, Iverson P . Infants show a facilitation effect for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months. Dev Sci. 2006; 9(2):F13-F21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00468.x. View