4.3 Article

Speech disfluencies in bilingual Greek-English young adults

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUENCY DISORDERS
卷 78, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2023.106001

关键词

Adults; Typical disfluencies; Greek; English; Bilingualism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the frequency and types of disfluencies in Greek-English bilingual adults across naturalistic speech samples and compared them between the participants' L1 and L2. The results showed that participants produced more typical disfluencies in English compared to Greek. Filled pauses and vowel prolongations were the most frequent types of disfluencies observed in both languages and across speaking samples. These findings contribute to the existing literature on the manifestation of speech disfluencies in bilingual speakers.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency and types of disfluencies in Greek-English bilingual adults across naturalistic speech samples and compare frequency and types of disfluencies between the participants' L1 and L2.Methods: Participants in the study included 26 Greek-English bilingual young adults. All participants were sequential bilinguals, whose first language was Greek and second language was English. Two speech samples were collected in each language, a conversational and a narrative sample, which were subsequently analyzed for the frequency and types of disfluencies.Results: Results indicated that participants produced more typical disfluencies in English compared to Greek across speaking samples. The most frequent types of disfluencies were filled pauses and vowel prolongations (without tension or struggle) across speaking samples and languages.Conclusion: Our results revealed differences in the types and frequencies of disfluencies produced in participants' native compared to their second language. Results add to the growing body of literature addressing the manifestation of speech disfluencies in bilingual speakers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据