Mimicry of Non - distinctive Phonetic Differences Between Language Varieties

1\ delayed mimicry paradigm w.as used to assess speakers' ,awareness of non-dlSlLnCf!Vc phonetic differences which in part dislinguisn I, :mguagcs. The notion of " rho no logIcal filluLng" IffiroheS ttur second Lmsuagc learners may not be lIblc to perceIve: phonetic differences between thCIT native language and :01 fOrf:.gn langua~ unless the phonetic differences arc linguistically relevant in the nallve bngu2gc. If cross-bogulIgc phoncuc differences arc In fact perceIved poorly, It is unlikely [hal phon.::!;\; mod,ficallon , .. ,II OCcur .n Ihc course of nalUu.hsllc second language acqu15iuon. In th.s study natlvC' English speakers familiar Wllh Spamsh·accentcd English ulempted to lead sentences With a Spamsh accent. Acoustic mC::l5Uremc:nts showed thai twO phonellc characlens!!cs of Engllsh-Ihe long VOT values aSSOCiated '''llh 'p, t, kI and hnal-syll:Jble lengtheningwere altered In the direction of Spanuh anu Spanish.accented Enghsh. These results prOVide tentative eYldence that nOn-dlStlnCIIVe rhonetle differences between languages arc detecuble by I:lnguage learners and thus do nO! present an msupeuble bamer to phonetIC learning in second 1:lOgU .. gc "cqulsHlun