The research question that can be improved regarding the study can be formulated in the following way. Does lexical competition increase in trilingual speakers because of the additional (third) language compared to bilinguals? It is important to ensure that research questions are as clear and precise as possible (Cai et al., 2019; Kross & Giust, 2019). Therefore, it is critical in the study that compares two groups of people to mention these groups in the research question. Since the study aims at comparing lexical competition in bilinguals and trilingual speakers, these two groups of people should be included in the research question. Comparing the two types of speakers is also necessary to note, as many studies have been devoted to lexical competition in bilinguals (Hardison, 2013). The proposed study’s significance is associated with its focus on the difference between language processing in bilinguals and trilingual speaking people.
As for the hypothesis in study 1, the given hypothesis can be improved in the following way: Due to a higher level of lexical competition in trilingual speakers, this group will look more at the distractor from the L3. The null hypothesis can be as follows: There is no statistically meaningful difference between the time spent on the processing of linguistic units in different languages by bilinguals and trilingual speakers. Hypotheses have to be precise and reflect the central concepts and variables of the study. It is found in other studies that L3 influences the language processing in trilingual speakers (Lloyd-Smith et al., 2016). In the reviewed study, the focus is on lexical competition, so it is essential to mention it in the hypothesis related to the expectations of trilingual speakers’ language processing.
The research question for Study 2 can be formulated as follows: How do the Dutch dialects spoken in the North and South of the country influence how native speakers of Dutch produce final stop consonants in English? In order to enhance the precision of the reviewed research question, it is necessary to add details regarding the dialects. It is essential to state which dialects are cited as the focus is on particular dialects (those spoken in the North and South of the country). Multiple studies on the influence of different languages and dialects have been implemented, and the effects of dialects on pronunciation and perception have been explored (Munro & Derwing, 1995; Bradlow & Bent, 2008; Hanulíková & Weber, 2011). The significance of the study under consideration is related to its exploration of the influence of exact dialects on people’s pronunciation.
As for the hypothesis that can be utilized in this study, the suggested hypothesis can be improved: Participants from the North of the Netherlands will have shorter VOTs when producing final stop consonants compared to the participants from the South of the country. It is important to describe the compared groups explicitly. It is also critical to mention that the differences in the pronunciation of final stop consonants are under analysis. The null hypothesis can be formulated in the following way: All participants will have similar VOTs when producing final stop consonants.
The study implemented by Bradlow et al. (1997) dwells upon the link between language perception and production. The researchers examined the ways the intervention aimed at /r-l/ identification in Japanese learners of English affected their pronunciation of these consonants. Further steps in this direction can involve the analysis of the impact of similar training on bilinguals’ pronunciation. It is possible to identify whether bilinguals can produce and perceive certain sounds better after an intervention aimed at improving their identification.
The aim of the proposed study is to detect the peculiarities in language perception and production in bilinguals. The difference between the study by Bradlow et al. (1997) and the proposed study is related to the assumption that bilinguals will have fewer difficulties than people speaking one language as they may be acquainted with some form of sound. It is possible to explore Asian Americans’ production and perception of Spanish /r/ after brief training. The sound r is different in English and Spanish, which makes it an appropriate language unit for the research. Asian speakers (Japanese and Korean) tend to have difficulties pronouncing /r-l/ sounds. As for the procedure, the participants will receive similar training provided during the study implemented by Bradlow et al. (1997). Pre- and post-test experiments will be held, in which English speakers will identify the sounds produced by the participants before and after the intervention.
The research question can be formulated in the following way: Can Asian American bilinguals (speaking English and another language) produce Spanish /r/ better after the identification training compared to Asian participants speaking one language (Japanese or Korean)? The hypothesis guiding this study can be formulated as follows: After sound identification training, bilinguals speaking English and Korean or Japanese will produce Spanish /r/ better than monolinguals speaking Korean or Japanese. The dependent variable will be the correctness of the pronunciation of the Spanish sound /r/ as perceived by English speakers. The independent variables will be the number of languages the participants speak and the training intervention aimed at improving the participants’ identification of the sound.
References
Bradlow, A. R., & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech.Cognition, 106(2), 707-729. Web.
Bradlow, A. R., Pisoni, D B., Akahane-Yamada, R., & Tohkura, Y. (1997). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(4), 2299-2310. Web.
Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., & Hiebert, J. (2019). Posing significant research questions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50(2), 114-120. Web.
Hanulíková, A., & Weber, A. (2011). Sink positive: Linguistic experience with th substitutions influences nonnative word recognition.Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(3), 613-629. Web.
Hardison, D. M. (2013). Second language speech perception: A cross-disciplinary perspective on challenges and accomplishments. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349-363). Routledge.
Kross, J., & Giust, A. (2019). Elements of research questions in relation to qualitative inquiry. The Qualitative Report, 24(1), 24-30. Web.
Lloyd-Smith, A., Gyllstad, H., & Kupisch, T. (2016). Transfer into L3 English.Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7(2), 131-162. Web.
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Processing time, accent, and comprehensibility in the perception of native and foreign-accented speech.Language and Speech, 38(3), 289-306. Web.