The pitch range of L2 English read by native speakers of Jordanian Arabic compared with that of L1 speakers of English and Arabic

The pitch range of L2 English, produced by native speakers of Jordanian Arabic learning English, compared to that of L1 English and L1 Arabic has not yet been explored. This study investigates whether there is a difference in pitch range between L1 English and L1 Arabic and between L1 Arabic and L2 English. Twelve Jordanian participants were recorded reading the same text in L2 English and L1 Arabic (a translated version of the English text). Their recordings were compared with the recordings of 12 British speakers from the IViE Corpus (L1 English), reading the same text. Each text was split into five sections, and pitch range measurements were taken from those smaller parts of the whole passage. Our findings were that (a) there is a significantly reduced pitch range (narrower pitch span) for L2 English than for L1 English and (b) the pitch ranges of L1 Arabic and L2 English are strikingly similar. While (a) is consistent with the claim that the pitch span for L2 English is universally narrower than that for L1 English, (b) suggests that the narrower pitch span for L2 here is rather a negative cross-linguistic transfer (interference), not interlanguage, between the two languages. The findings contribute to our understanding of the cross-linguistic prosodic effect of L1 and to Mennen's L2 Intonation Learning Theory.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0036364
Primary Topic
Phonetics and Phonology Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The pitch range of L2 English read by native speakers of Jordanian Arabic compared with that of L1 speakers of English and Arabic

Obied Alaqlobi, Muhammad Swaileh A. Alzaidi, Mohammad Bani Younes, Daniel Hirst
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
Phonetics and Phonology Research
article

The pitch range of L2 English read by native speakers of Jordanian Arabic compared with that of L1 speakers of English and Arabic

Obied Alaqlobi, Muhammad Swaileh A. Alzaidi, Mohammad Bani Younes, Daniel Hirst
article en

Abstract

The pitch range of L2 English, produced by native speakers of Jordanian Arabic learning English, compared to that of L1 English and L1 Arabic has not yet been explored. This study investigates whether there is a difference in pitch range between L1 English and L1 Arabic and between L1 Arabic and L2 English. Twelve Jordanian participants were recorded reading the same text in L2 English and L1 Arabic (a translated version of the English text). Their recordings were compared with the recordings of 12 British speakers from the IViE Corpus (L1 English), reading the same text. Each text was split into five sections, and pitch range measurements were taken from those smaller parts of the whole passage. Our findings were that (a) there is a significantly reduced pitch range (narrower pitch span) for L2 English than for L1 English and (b) the pitch ranges of L1 Arabic and L2 English are strikingly similar. While (a) is consistent with the claim that the pitch span for L2 English is universally narrower than that for L1 English, (b) suggests that the narrower pitch span for L2 here is rather a negative cross-linguistic transfer (interference), not interlanguage, between the two languages. The findings contribute to our understanding of the cross-linguistic prosodic effect of L1 and to Mennen's L2 Intonation Learning Theory.

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaVol. 157(4)
Aix-Marseille Université (FR), King Saud University (SA), Al al-Bayt University (JO), Language Science (South Korea) (KR), University of Bisha (SA), Laboratoire Parole et Langage (FR)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Phonetics and Phonology Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.