oa First language effects on the identification and evaluation of second language speech

References

1. Baelen, M. (2011). I[z] dat [s]o?Productie van stemassimilatie in het Nederlands van Franstalige vreemdetaalleerders. PhD Dissertation. Université Catholique de Louvain.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Beheydt, L. (2011). Uitspraakonderwijs Nederlands en normativiteit. In: L.Rasier, V.van Heuven, B.Defrancq & P.Hiligsmann (eds.). Lage Landen Studies2, 101-118.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bent, T. & A.R.Bradlow (2003). The interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America114(3), 1600-1610.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bosker, H.R., A.F.Pinget, H.Quené, T.Sanders & N.H.De Jong (2013). What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs. Language Testing30(2), 159-175.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bradlow, A.R. & T.Bent (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition106(2), 707-729.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Burgos, P. (2018). Patterns of learner variation in Spanish accented Dutch. PhD Dissertation Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Utrecht: LOT.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Buyl, A. & A.Housen (2014). Factors, processes and outcomes of early immersion education in the Francophone Community in Belgium. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism17(2), 178-196.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Carey, M.D., R.H.Mannell & P.K.Dunn (2011). Does a rater’s familiarity with a candidate’s pronunciation affect the rating in oral proficiency interviews?Language Testing28(2), 201-219
   [Google Scholar]
9. Carroll, J.B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In: K. C.Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 83-118.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Catelyn, E. (2015). Het Nederlands van Turkse Gentenaars. Een perceptie- en attitudeonderzoek naar exogene taalvariatie bij Gentse jongeren. Masterproef. Universiteit Gent.
    [Google Scholar]
11. CBS (27/09/2019). Bevolking; geslacht, leeftijd, generatie en migratieachtergrond op 1 januari. <https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/cijfers/detail/37325>
    [Google Scholar]
12. Clarke, C.M. & M.F.Garrett (2004). Rapid adaptation to foreign-accented English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America116(6), 3647-3658.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Clyne, M. (Ed.) (2012). Pluricentric languages: Differing norms in different nations. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Council of Europe (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. <https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989>
    [Google Scholar]
15. Cutler, A. (2012). Native listening: Language experience and the recognition of spoken words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Derwing, T. & M.Munro (1997). Accent, intelligibility, and comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in second language acquisition19(1), 1-16.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Derwing, T., M.Rossiter, M.Munro & R.Thomson (2004). L2 fluency: Judgments on different tasks. Language Learning54, 655-679.
    [Google Scholar]
18. van den Doel, R. & H.Quené (2013). The endonormative standards of European English: Emerging or elusive?English World-wide34(1), 77-98.
    [Google Scholar]
19. van den Doel, R. & A.Walpot (2021). Is there an interlanguage speech acceptability deficit? In: H.Van de Velde, N.H.Hilton & R.Knooihuizen (eds.), Language Variation – European Perspectives VIII. Selected Papers from the Tenth International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 10, Leeuwarden, June 2019). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Duijm, K., Schoonen, R. & J.H.Hulstijn (2018). Professional and non-professional raters’ responsiveness to fluency and accuracy in L2 speech: An experimental approach. Language Testing35(4), 501-527.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Edwards, A. (2016). English in the Netherlands: Functions, forms and attitudes. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Gass, S. & E.Varonis (1984). The effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of non-native speech. Language Learning34, 65-89.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Harding, L. (2011). Accent and listening assessment: A validation study of the use of speakers with L2 accents on an academic English listening test. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Hendriks, B., F.van Meurs & A.Reimer (2018). The evaluation of lecturers’ non-native- accented English: Dutch and German students’ evaluations of different degrees of Dutch-accented and German-accented English of lecturers in higher education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes34, 28-45.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Hiligsmann, P. & S.Theissen (1997). Het onderwijs van het Nederlands in Franstalig België. Ons erfdeel40(5), 703.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hiligsmann, P. (1997). Linguïstische aspecten en pedagogische implicaties van de tussentaal van Franstalige MO-leerders van het Nederlands. Genève: Droz.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Hosmer, D.W. & S.Lemeshow (2000). Applied Logistic Regression. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Huang, B.H. (2013). The effects of accent familiarity and language teaching experience on raters’ judgments of non-native speech. System41(3), 770-785.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Hulstijn, J.H., R.Schoonen, N.H.De Jong, M.P.Steinel, & A.Florijn (2012). Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Language Testing29(2), 203-221.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. De Jong, N.H., M.P.Steinel, A.F.Florijn, R.Schoonen & J.H.Hulstijn (2012). Facets of speaking proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition34(1), 5-34.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Kennedy, S. & P.Trofimovich (2008). Intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness of L2 speech: the role of listener experience and semantic context. The Canadian Modern Language Review64(3), 459-489.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Kristiansen, G., E.Zenner & D.Geeraerts (2018). English as a lingua franca in Europe: The identification of L1 and L2 accents: A multifactorial analysis of pan-European. Review of Cognitive Linguistics16(2), 494-518.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Li, S. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude. Studies in Second Language Acquisition38(4), 801-842.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Marian, V., H.K.Blumenfeld & M.Kaushanskaya (2007). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research50, 940-967
    [Google Scholar]
36. Mettewie, L. (2004). Attitudes en motivatie van taalleerders in België Een sociaal- psychologisch onderzoek naar het verwerven van de eerste en tweede taal door Nederlandstalige, Franstalige en tweetalige leerlingen in het secundair onderwijs in België. PhD Dissertation Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Brussels: VUB Press.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Mettewie, L. & L.Van Mensel (2020). Understanding foreign language education and bilingual education in Belgium: a (surreal) piece of cake. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1-19.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Michaux, M.C. (2016). Klemtoonproductie en-perceptie door Franstalige NVT-leerders. PhD dissertation Université Catholique de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Michaux, M.C. & Caspers, J. (2013). The production of Dutch word stress by Francophone learners. Interface Conference (IDP-2013), 89.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Munro, M.J. & T.M.Derwin (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning45, 73-97.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Pinget, A.C.H., H.R.Bosker, H.Quené & N.H.de Jong (2014). Native speakers’ perceptions of fluency and accent in L2 speech. Language Testing31, 349-365.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Quené, H. & H.Van den Bergh (2008). Examples of mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language59(4), 413-425.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Rasier, L. (2006). Prosodie en vreemdetaalverwerving. Accentdistributie in het Frans en Nederlands als vreemde taal. PhD Dissertation Université Catholique de Louvain.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Rasier, L. & P.Hiligsmann (2007). Prosodic transfer from L1 to L2. Theoretical and methodological issues. Nouveaux cahiers de linguistique française28, 41-66.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics25, 46-73.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing5, 1-20.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Schmader, T. & B.Lickel (2006). Stigma and shame: Emotional responses to the stereotypic actions of one’s ethnic ingroup. In: S.Levin & C.van Laar (eds.), Stigma and Group Inequality: Social Psychological Perspectives, Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 261-285.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Spolsky, B. (1995). Prognostication and language aptitude testing, 1925–62. Language Testing12, 321-340.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Tajfel, H. & J.C.Turner (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: W.G.Austin & S.Worchel (eds.), Social psychology of intergroup relations, 33-48. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Theissen, S. (1994). L’enseignement du néerlandais en Belgique francophone. Septentrion23(2), 41-48.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Tsurutani, C. & E.Selvanathan (2013). Influence of generational cohort and experience with non-native speakers on evaluation of speakers with foreign-accented speech. InternationalJournal of the Sociology of Language224, 43-62.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Van de Velde, H., M.Kissine, E.Tops, S.van der Harst & R.van Hout (2010). Will Dutch become Flemish? Autonomous developments in Belgian Dutch. Multilingua29, 383-416.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Wang, H. & V.van Heuven (2015). The Interlanguage Speech Intelligibility Benefit as bias toward native-language phonology. i-Perception6(1), 1-13.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Wen, Z.E., A.Biedroń & P.Skehan (2017). Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Language Teaching50(1), 1-31.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Wilkinson, R. (2013). English-medium instruction at a Dutch university: Challenges and pitfalls. In: A.Doiz, D.Lasagabaster & J.M.Sierra (eds.), English-Medium Instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 3-24.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Willemyns, R. (2002). The dutch-french language border in Belgium. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development23(1-2), 36-49.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Willemyns, R. (2003). Dutch. In: A.Deumert & W.Vandenbussche (eds.), Germanic standardizations: Past to present. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 93-125.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Winke, P., S.Gass & C.Myford (2013). Raters’ L2 background as a potential source of bias in rating oral performance. Language Testing30(2), 231-252.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Witte, E. & H.Van Velthoven (1999) Langue et politique: La situation de la Belgique dans une perspective historique, Bruxelles: VUB University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Witteman, M.J., A.C.Weber, & J.McQueen (2011). On the relationship between perceived accentedness, acoustic similarity, and processing difficulty in foreign- accented speech. In:Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech), 2229-2232.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Xi, X. & P.Mollaun (2011). Using raters from India to score a large-scale speaking test. Language Learning61(4), 1222-1255.
    [Google Scholar]