Understanding native Russian listeners’ errors on an English word recognition test: Model-based analysis of phoneme confusion

Acoustic-Phonetic Versus Lexical Processing in Nonnative Listeners Differing in Their Dominant Language

PURPOSE

Nonnative listeners have difficulty recognizing English words due to underdeveloped acoustic-phonetic and/or lexical skills. The present study used Boothroyd and Nittrouer's (1988)j factor to tease apart these two components of word recognition.

METHOD

Participants included 15 native English and 29 native Russian listeners. Fourteen and 15 of the Russian listeners reported English (ED) and Russian (RD) to be their dominant language, respectively. Listeners were presented 119 consonant-vowel-consonant real and nonsense words in speech-spectrum noise at +6 dB SNR. Responses were scored for word and phoneme recognition, the logarithmic quotient of which yielded j.

RESULTS

Word and phoneme recognition was comparable between native and ED listeners but poorer in RD listeners. Analysis of j indicated less effective use of lexical information in RD than in native and ED listeners. Lexical processing was strongly correlated with the length of residence in the United States.

CONCLUSIONS

Language background is important for nonnative word recognition. Lexical skills can be regarded as nativelike in ED nonnative listeners. Compromised word recognition in ED listeners is unlikely a result of poor lexical processing. Performance should be interpreted with caution for listeners dominant in their first language, whose word recognition is affected by both lexical and acoustic-phonetic factors.

Validating models of clinical word recognition tests for spanish/english bilinguals

PURPOSE

Shi and Sánchez (2010) developed models to predict the optimal test language for evaluating Spanish/English (S/E) bilinguals' word recognition. The current study intended to validate their conclusions in a separate bilingual listener sample.

METHOD

Seventy normal-hearing S/E bilinguals varying in language profile were included. Participants were presented with English monosyllabic and Spanish bisyllabic words in quiet and in speech-spectrum noise (+6 and 0 dB SNR). Relative success on the 2 tests was indicated by the difference in z score for each test.

RESULTS

The current group of participants was comparable to participants in Shi and Sánchez (2010) in regard to their language background and test performance. Previously developed models fit current data well. Age of English acquisition (AOAE) yielded more consistent models across test conditions than language dominance (LD). New models incorporating average proficiency rating (across domains) and relative proficiency rating (across languages) yielded best prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

Shi and Sánchez's (2010) models incorporating key linguistic variables (AOAE, LD, and average/relative proficiency ratings) can help clinicians predict bilingual clients' relative success in word recognition in Spanish versus English. These models are appropriate for current clinical work with S/E bilinguals in metropolitan areas similar to New York City.

Speech audiometry and Spanish-English bilinguals: challenges in clinical practice

PURPOSE

The Spanish-English bilingual population has been on a steady rise in the United States and is projected to continue to grow. Speech audiometry, a key component of hearing care, must be customized for this linguistically unique and diverse population.

METHOD

The tutorial summarizes recent findings concerning Spanish-English bilinguals' performance on English and Spanish speech audiometric tests in the context of the psychometric properties of the tests and the language and dialect profile of the individual (language status, history, stability, competency, and use). The tutorial also provides arguments for evaluating bilingual clients in Spanish, in English, or in both languages, which may serve as rationales in support of varied bilingual clinical practices. Last, the tutorial provides information regarding Spanish speech audiometry, including available tests, issues that clinicians may encounter when administering them, and dialectal consideration.

CONCLUSIONS

It is a challenge as well as an opportunity for clinicians to expand service to the Spanish-English bilingual community. Understanding the characteristics of the individual and the test is essential for ensuring quality services to the bilingual client.