Sentence examples for native tone from inspiring English sources

The results showed that F0 patterns of beginning-level L2 English are systematically different from those of native English speakers, which can be transferred from their native tone language.

The result has shown that intonation patterns of beginning-level L2 English produced by Vietnamese speakers are systematically different from those of native English speakers, which can be transferred from their native tone language.

A full account of tone assimilation will likely need to incorporate considerations of phonetic, and even acoustic, similarity and overlap between nonnative and native tone categories.

Mandarin and Cantonese (tone-language) speakers were asked to categorize Thai tones according to their own native tone categories, and Australian English (non-tone-language) speakers to categorize Thai tones into their native intonation categories for instance, question or statement.

The top (most frequent) responses and associated percentages for the Cantonese tone, Mandarin tone, and English intonation groups (and the Thai native tone group for comparison) are included in the Appendix, along with mean goodness ratings.

Overall, Mandarin participants appeared to find the category assimilation task easier than did Cantonese participants (in terms of having a higher number of categorizations; i.e., tones were heard as a single native tone category), particularly for Thai level tones.

Given the possibly privileged status of rising F0 patterns, the slight rising tendency of the Thai high (45) tone may be important (see Fig.  4, which shows that the Thai high tone is predominantly assimilated to rising native tones by both the Cantonese and Mandarin groups).

These significant differences demonstrate the large variations found for UC and UU pairs across the language groups, suggesting that accounts based on phonetic, and even acoustic, similarity and overlap between nonnative and native tones are likely to be required, in addition to those based on phonological categories (see the similar suggestion in So & Best, 2014).

In this regard, like So and Best (2014), we found large differences in discrimination performance across the UC pairings, suggesting that accounts based on phonetic, and even acoustic, similarity and overlap between nonnative and native tones are likely to be required, in addition to those based on phonological categories.

The multinomial logistic regression analyses revealed that both the Mandarin and Cantonese groups generally showed a pattern of mapping Thai falling tones to native  level tones and Thai  rising tones to native  rising tones.

Both the Mandarin and Cantonese groups categorized AO and AV Thai falling tones as their native level tones, and Thai rising tones as their native rising tones, although the Mandarin participants found it easier to categorize Thai level tones than did the Cantonese participants.