Talking to Nonnative Speakers: Investigating language-specific audience design and cognate use Jessi Jacobsen 04.29.17 Jessi Jacobsen 05.06.17

“Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design: Louder Slower pace of speech More repetition

“Foreigner Talk” and Audience Design: Louder Slower pace of speech More repetition All language general—What about language-specific adaptations?

Cognates: Psycholinguistic perspective: translation equivalents that share significant phonological/orthographic overlap between languages Insectos-insects Sofá-sofa Prisión-prison Restaurante-restaurant Some of the easiest words to learn and remember in a new language (Lotto & de Groot, 1998)

Cognates as Audience Design? Do native speakers (NS) use more cognates when talking to a nonnative speaker (NNS) than a fellow native speakers?

Experiment 1: Method Participants: 32 native Spanish speakers (English = nonnative language) Playing game of telephone 30 concepts that could be referred to by either a cognate (C; e.g., insectos) or a non-cognate (NC; e.g., bichos ) Incorporated into 4-sentence story (2 Cs/2 NCs per story)

Experiment 1: Method (Cont.) Participant hears story Does multiplication distractor task Records story for future audience NNS Condition NS Condition Hola….um soy Americana... Participant Confederate Participant Confederate

Experiment 1: Results Tally # Cs and NCs each participant uses over course of experiment 2 (Cognate, Non-Cognate) X 2 (NNS, NS) No Main Effect: of Word Type No Interaction Main Effect: More Words Used Overall in NNS Condition, F(1, 15)=5.07, p=.03

Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS

Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS But maybe this task is just weird?

Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS But maybe this task is just weird? Forgetting about partner

Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS But maybe this task is just weird? Forgetting about partner Repetition does not require comprehension

Experiment 1: Discussions/Limitations Suggesting that NS do not use more cognates with NNS than fellow NS But maybe this task is just weird? Forgetting about partner Repetition does not require comprehension Do the participants know which words are cognates?

Experiment 2: Method 42 Native English Speakers (all fulfilled Carleton’s language requirement for Spanish) Referential communication task with 26 items that could be referred to with either a C (e.g., insects) or an NC (e.g., bugs)

 

Experiment 2: Method (Cont.) Procedure: Video Introductions Record Instructions for ”Matching Game” Demographic/ Proficiency Info NS Condition ”Spaniard” NNS Condition

Experiment 2: Results Tally number of cognates each participant uses across experiment Condition (Audience) Mean # Cognates Used NS (Ole) 11.80 (3.02) NNS (Spaniard) 13.32 (2.36) t(40)=1.83, p = .075, d= 0.56

Experiment 2: Results Tally number of cognates each participant uses across experiment Using individualized definition of cognate Condition (Audience) Mean # Cognates Used NS (Ole) 11.80 (3.02) NNS (Spaniard) 13.32 (2.36) t(40)=1.83, p = .075, d= 0.56 Condition (Audience) Mean # Cognates Used NS (Ole) 10.00 (2.51) NNS (Spaniard) 11.82 (2.84) t(40)=2.19, p = .035, d= 0.6

Discussion/Takeaways NS do seem to use more cognates with NNS than NS Effect more reliable when using individualized cognate definition

Discussion/Takeaways NS do seem to use more cognates with NNS than NS Effect more reliable when using individualized cognate definition Many differences between Experiments 1 and 2 Language difference Priming difference Individualized cognate definition etc.

Discussion/Takeaways Future directions Strategic v. automatic? Comprehension studies People can account for language-specific information when engaging in foreigner talk!!

THANK YOU! My amazing mentors at Carleton, especially my advisor Mija Van Der Wege, my 2nd reader Cherlon Ussery, and CogSci Chair Extraordinaire Kathie Galotti. The wonderfully helpful staff and researchers at the BCBL, especially Jon Andoni Duñabeitia All my awesome participants YOU for being a great audience!

Questions?