Search results

1

Acoustic analysis of monophthongs, diphthongs, and triphthongs in Mandarin for 3- to 5-year-old children with articulatory phonological disorders

100%

Chu M.-n., Syu J.-l.

Linguistics Beyond and Within

|

2018

|

vol. 4

7-21

EN

Ten 3- to 5-year old children (5M, 5F) who were diagnosed as children with articulatory phonological disorders (CWAPD) and attending a therapy program were recruited to participate in a ‘repeat-after-her’ experiment. They were asked to produce a total of 85 real Mandarin words, including 28 monophthongs, 41 diphthongs, and 16 triphthongs. The results indicated that CWAPD have no problem producing monophthongs. However, attempts to articulate diphthongs and triphthongs induced more errors. CWAPD showed more errors when producing words with 1st sonorant diphthongs than words with 2nd sonorant diphthongs-this is because the least sonorant segment in the last position is prone to distortion. Similar phenomena were found in other triphthongs, except with /iai/ and /iou/, which did not see deviant pronunciation. Comparing our study to the information provided by two therapists showed that the participating CWAPD encountered difficulties in producing multi-vowel syllables, where the position and sonorant matters. In addition, our results also reveal a similar vowel acquisition order among CWAPD as among normal children.

2

‘Almost people’: A Learner Corpus Account of L2 Use and Misuse of Non-numerical Quantification

86%

Crosthwaite P., Choy L. L. Y., Bae Y.

Open Linguistics

|

2016

|

vol. 2

|

issue 1

EN

We present an Integrated Contrastive Model of non-numerical quantificational NPs (NNQs, i.e. ‘some people’) produced by L1 English speakers and Mandarin and Korean L2 English learners. Learner corpus data was sourced from the ICNALE (Ishikawa, 2011, 2013) across four L2 proficiency levels. An average 10% of L2 NNQs were specific to L2 varieties, including noun number mismatches (*‘many child’), omitting obligatory quantifiers after adverbs (*‘almost people’), adding unnecessary particles (*‘all of people’) and non-L1 English-like quantifier/noun agreement (*‘many water’). Significantly fewer ‘openclass’ NNQs (e.g a number of people) are produced by L2 learners, preferring ‘closed-class’ single lexical quantifiers (following L1-like use). While such production is predictable via L1 transfer, Korean L2 English learners produced significantly more L2-like NNQs at each proficiency level, which was not entirely predictable under a transfer account. We thus consider whether positive transfer of other linguistic forms (i.e. definiteness marking) aids the learnability of other L2 forms (i.e. expression of quantification).

3

How to Create a Language for the Whole People? On the Codification of Putonghua Pronunciation

58%

Kurpaska M.

Roczniki Humanistyczne

|

2019

|

vol. 67

|

issue 9: Sinologia

89-100

EN

The process of creating a modern national standard language for the whole of China has been long. It started in the beginning of the 20th century, when it became clear that a common spoken tongue was needed to unite the Chinese people. Thus the concept of Guóyǔ — ‘national language’ — was created. After the founding of People’s Republic of China, the work was taken up anew, the standard was renamed Pŭtōnghuà — ‘common speech.’ Its pronunciation is based on the dialect of Beijing, the Mandarin dialects have been the source of lexicon, and grammar has been founded on “model works in báihuà.” But how exactly did the work on creating the new standard look like? This paper intends to show the process of codification of the pronunciation of what we now know as Pŭtōnghuà. How it was decided to choose the speech of Beijing as the starting point, how the work was carried out, and also how the standard is changing.

PL

Proces tworzenia nowoczesnego języka narodowego dla całych Chin był długi. Zaczął się na początku XX wieku, kiedy stało się jasne, że potrzebny jest wspólny język, by zjednoczyć Chińczyków. W ten sposób powstała koncepcja Guóyǔ — „języka narodowego”. Po założeniu Chińskiej Republiki Ludowej prace zostały wznowione, standard został przemianowany na Pǔtōnghuà — „wspólną mowę”. Jego wymowa opiera się na dialekcie Pekinu, dialekty mandaryńskie były źródłem leksyki, a gramatykę oparto na „modelowych pracach w báihuà”. Jak jednak dokładnie wyglądały prace nad stworzeniem nowego standardu? Ten artykuł ma na celu pokazanie procesu kodyfikacji wymowy tego, co obecnie znamy jako Pǔtōnghuà. Dlaczego postanowiono wybrać mowę Pekinu jako punkt wyjścia, jak przebiegały prace, a także jak zmieniał się sam standard?

Refine search results

1 Linguistics Beyond and Within

1 Open Linguistics

1 Roczniki Humanistyczne

1 Bae Y.

1 Choy L. L. Y.

1 Chu M.-n.

1 Crosthwaite P.

1 Kurpaska M.

1 Syu J.-l.

1 2019

1 2018

1 2016

Acoustic analysis of monophthongs, diphthongs, and triphthongs in Mandarin for 3- to 5-year-old children with articulatory phonological disorders

‘Almost people’: A Learner Corpus Account of L2 Use and Misuse of Non-numerical Quantification

How to Create a Language for the Whole People? On the Codification of Putonghua Pronunciation