Production and perception of the Korean obstruents by Cantonese speakers

Abstract

This study investigates the production and perception of the Korean obstruents, including plosives, affricates and fricatives, by Cantonese speakers. It is well-known that in Korean the plosives and affricates are classified into three laryngeal categories, namely ‘tense’ /p’ t’ k’ ts’/ (ㅃ ㄸ ㄲ ㅉ), ‘lenis’ /p t k ts/ (ㅂ ㄷ ㄱ ㅈ), and ‘aspirated’ /pʰ tʰ kʰ tsʰ/ (ㅍ ㅌ ㅋ ㅊ), and the alveolar fricatives include the ‘tense’ /s’/ (ㅆ) and ‘lenis’ /s/ (ㅅ). By contrast, in Cantonese the plosives and affricates are only in two laryngeal categories, i.e., ‘unaspirated’ /p t k ts/ and ‘aspirated’ /pʰ tʰ kʰ tsʰ/, and there is one alveolar fricative /s/. According to the Attention to Dimension model (Francis and Nusbaum, 2002), learners of a second language (L2) are unable to direct perceptual attention to a new or unfamiliar phonetic contrast in L2 without training. Hence, Cantonese speakers are expected to have difficulty in producing and perceiving the Korean obstruents of different laryngeal categories, in particular those in the unfamiliar category absent in their first language (L1). In the present study, eight Cantonese speakers, four male and four female, who have completed and passed a beginner course in Korean, participated in an audio recording and a listening test. Results of acoustic analysis of the Korean obstruents produced in the test CV syllables by the Cantonese speakers show that all the speakers clearly produce a VOT contrast between the ‘tense’ and ‘aspirated’ Korean plosives/affricates. However, they fail to produce a distinctive VOT pattern for the ‘lenis’ counterparts. The Cantonese speakers also fail to produce a difference in F0 at the onset of the vowels that follow the Korean obstruents in the three different laryngeal categories. The data suggest the L1 (Cantonese) interference on the production of L2 (Korean) sounds. In the listening test, the performance of the Cantonese speakers is better. Some Cantonese speakers can differentiate the Korean plosives/affricates in all the three laryngeal categories, ‘tense, lenis, aspirated’, and almost all the Cantonese speakers (except one) can distinguish between the Korean ‘lenis’ and ‘tense’ fricatives. In general, the misperception by the Cantonese speakers is due to the confusion between the Korean ‘lenis’ and ‘aspirated’ obstruents. To conclude, the data of the present study indicate that Cantonese speakers are able to distinguish the three Korean laryngeal categories perceptually, while they are less successful in producing the three categories differently. This is especially for producing the unfamiliar L2 laryngeal categories which are not occurring in L1. The findings shed light on the discrepancy between production and perception of the L2 sounds.