Hostname: page-component-7d8f8d645b-dvxft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-05-28T14:35:27.625Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Andrew H. Lee*
McGill University
Roy Lyster
McGill University
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Andrew H. Lee, Department of Integrated Studies in Education, McGill University, 3700 McTavish Street, Montreal, QC H3A 1Y2, Canada. E-mail:


To what extent do second language (L2) learners benefit from instruction that includes corrective feedback (CF) on L2 speech perception? This article addresses this question by reporting the results of a classroom-based experimental study conducted with 32 young adult Korean learners of English. An instruction-only group and an instruction + CF group were exposed to five 1-hr form-focused lessons that drew learners’ attention to the nonnative phonemic contrast /i/-/ɪ/, but only the instruction + CF group was given relevant feedback. Forced-choice identification tasks were completed by participants in a pretest, an immediate posttest, and a delayed posttest. The two groups showed similar accuracy on the pretest; however, the instruction + CF group outperformed the instruction-only group on the immediate and delayed posttests as well as on unfamiliar words. The significant predictors for these differences turned out to be perceptual accuracy vis-à-vis /ɪ/-natural and /ɪ/-synthesized sounds. These findings are discussed in terms of the pivotal role played by CF in developing accuracy in L2 speech perception.

Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Baker, W., Trofimovich, P., Mack, M., & Flege, J. E. (2002). The effect of perceived phonetic similarity on non-native sound learning by children and adults. In Fisch, S., Scarabela, B., & Do, A.-H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 26, pp. 3647). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171204). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In Munro, M. J. & Bohn, O.-S. (Eds.), Second language speech learning: The role of language experience in speech perception and production (pp. 1334). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.3.41) [Computer program]. Retrieved from
Bohn, O.-S. (1995). Cross-language speech perception in adults: First language transfer doesn’t tell it all. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 279304). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Bohn, O.-S., & Flege, J. E. (1990). Interlingual identification and the role of foreign language experience in L2 vowel perception. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11, 303328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borden, G., Gerber, A., & Milsark, G. (1983). Production and perception of the /r/-/l/ contrast in Korean adults learning English. Language Learning, 33, 499526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 22992310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25, 257271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focussed instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 1841.Google Scholar
Escudero, P. (2006). Second language phonology: The role of perception. In Pennington, M. (Ed.), Phonology in context (pp. 109134). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2004). Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception and phonological theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 551585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second-language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233277). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Bohn, O.-S., & Jang, S. (1997). Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 437470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardison, D. M. (2003). Acquisition of second-language speech: Effects of visual cues, context, and talker variability. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 495522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 30993111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huberty, C. J., & Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 302308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamieson, D. G., & Rvachew, S. (1992). Remediating speech production errors with sound identification training. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 16, 201210.Google Scholar
Klatt, D. H. (1980). Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 971995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P. K. (2000). A new view of language acquisition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 97, 1185011857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambacher, S. G., Martens, W. L., Kakehi, K., Marasinghe, C. A., & Molholt, G. (2005). The effects of identification training on the identification and production of American English vowels by native speakers of Japanese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 227247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leather, J. (1990). Perceptual and productive learning of Chinese lexical tone by Dutch and English speakers. In Leather, J. & James, A. (Eds.), New Sounds 90: Proceedings of the Amsterdam Symposium on the Acquisition of Second Language Speech (pp. 7297). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Leather, J. (1999). Second-language speech research: An introduction. In Leather, J. (Ed.), Phonological issues in language learning (pp. 158). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lee, H. (1993). Korean. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 23, 2831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, K. (2008). The effect of perceptual training on the perception and production of English vowel contrasts by Korean speakers (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea.Google Scholar
Lively, S. E., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. II: The role of phonetic environment and talker variability in learning new perceptual categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 94, 12421255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lively, S. E., Pisoni, D. B., Yamada, R. A., Tohkura, Y., & Yamada, T. (1994). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/. III. Long-term retention of new phonetic categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 20762087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llisterri, J. (1995). Relationships between speech production and speech perception in a second language. In Elenius, K. & Branderud, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 9299). Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology/Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Loewen, S. (2014). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361377). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Logan, J. S., Lively, S. E., & Pisoni, D. B. (1991). Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: A first report. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 89, 874886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (5th ed.). (2009). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Lyster, R. (2004a). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R. (2004b). Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: Implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies, 14, 321341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maye, J., Werker, J. F., & Gerken, L. (2002). Infant sensitivity to distributional information can affect phonetic discrimination. Cognition, 82, B101B111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polka, L., & Bohn, O.-S. (2011). Natural Referent Vowel (NRV) framework: An emerging view of early phonetic development. Journal of Phonetics, 39, 467478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochet, B. L. (1995). Perception and production of second-language speech sounds by adults. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 379410). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Rvachew, S., & Jamieson, D. G. (1995). Learning new speech contrasts: Evidence from adults learning a second language and children with speech disorders. In Strange, W. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 411432). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Saito, K. (2012). Effects of instruction on L2 pronunciation development: A synthesis of 15 quasi-experimental intervention studies. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 842854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K. (2013). The acquisitional value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning: Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners. Language Learning, 63, 499529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012a). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62, 595633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012b). Investigating the pedagogical potential of recasts for L2 vowel acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 387398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Wu, X. (2014). Communicative focus on form and L2 suprasegmental learning: Teaching Cantonese learners to perceive Mandarin tones. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36, 134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Day, R. R. (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 4072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, J.-L., Abry, C., Boë, L.-J., Ménard, L., & Vallée, N. (2005). Asymmetries in vowel perception, in the context of the Dispersion-Focalisation Theory. Speech Communication, 45, 425434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 29, 7387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, W., & Dittmann, S. (1984). Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r-l/ by Japanese adults learning English. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 131145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, R. I. (2007). Modeling L1/L2 interactions in the perception and production of English vowels by Mandarin L1 speakers: A training study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Tsukada, K., Birdsong, D., Bialystok, E., Mack, M., Sung, H., & Flege, J. E. (2005). A developmental study of English vowel production and perception by native Korean adults and children. Journal of Phonetics, 33, 263290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X. (2002). Training Mandarin and Cantonese speakers to identify English vowel contrasts: Long-term retention and effects on production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Wang, X., & Munro, M. J. (2004). Computer-based training for learning English vowel contrasts. System, 32, 539552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J. A. (2003). Acoustic and perceptual evaluation of Mandarin tone productions before and after perceptual training. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 10331043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Y., Spence, M. M., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J. A. (1999). Training American listeners to perceive Mandarin tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 36493658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, B. (1996). A comparative study of American English and Korean vowels produced by male and female speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 24, 245261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar