Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Race-relevant cues influence the processing of linguistic variation: Evidence from African American English and Mainstream American English Cover

Race-relevant cues influence the processing of linguistic variation: Evidence from African American English and Mainstream American English

Open Access
|Aug 2024

References

  1. Acheme, D. E., & Cionea, I. A. (2022). “Oh, I like your accent”: perceptions and evaluations of standard and non-standard accented English speakers. Communication Reports, 35(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2022.2037679.
  2. Baese-Berk, M. M., McLaughlin, D., & McGowan, K. B. (2020). Perception of non-native speech. Language and Linguistics Compass, 14(e12375). https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12375
  3. Babel, M., & Munson, B. (2014). Producing socially meaningful linguistic variation. In M. Goldrick, V. Ferreira, & M. Miozzo (Eds.), Oxford handbook of language production (pp. 308–325). Oxford University Press.
  4. Baugh, J. (2003). Linguistic profiling. In S. Makoni, G. Smitherman, A. F. Ball, & A.K. Spears (Eds.), Black linguistics: language, society and politics in African and the Americas (pp. 155–168). Routledge.
  5. Beyer, T., Edwards, K. A., & Fuller, C. C. (2015). Misinterpretation of African American English BIN by adult speakers of standard American English. Language and Communication, 45, 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2015.09.001
  6. Beyer, T., & Hudson Kam, C. L. (2012). First and second graders’ interpretation of Standard American English morphology across varieties of English. First Language, 32(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723711427618
  7. Campbell-Kibler, K. (2009). The nature of sociolinguistic perception. Language Variation and Change, 21(01), 135–156. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509000052
  8. Dube, S., Kung, C., Peter, V., Brock, J., & Demuth, K. (2016). Effects of type of agreement violation and utterance position on the auditory processing of subject-verb agreement: an ERP study. Frontiers in Psychology 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01276
  9. Dovidio, J. F., & Gluszek, A. (2012). Accents, nonverbal behavior, and intergroup bias. In H. Giles (Ed.) The handbook of intergroup communication (pp. 87–99). New York, NY: Routledge.
  10. Drager, K. (2010). Sociophonetic variation in speech perception. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(7), 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00210.x
  11. Dragojevic, M. (2018). Language attitudes. In H. Giles & J. Harwood (Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of intergroup communication (Vol. 2, pp. 35–57). Oxford University Press.
  12. Dragojevic, M., & Giles, H. (2016). I don’t like you because you’re hard to understand: The role of processing fluency in the language attitudes process. Human Communication Research, 41, 396–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12079
  13. Eckert, P., & Rickford, J. R. (2001). Style and sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge University Press.
  14. Fasold, R. W. (1981). The relation between black and white speech in the South. American Speech, 56(3), 163-–189. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/454432
  15. Fasoli, F., Maass, A., Karniol, R., Antonio, R., & Sulpizio, S. (2020). Voice changes meaning: The role of gay-versus straight-sounding voices in sentence interpretation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 39(5–6), 653–677. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X19886625
  16. Giles, H., & Watson, B. M. (2013). The social meanings of language, dialect and accent: International perspectives on speech styles (Vol. 16). Peter Lang Publishing.
  17. Green, L. J. (2002). African American English: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Green, L. J. (2011). Language and the African American child. Cambridge University Press.
  19. Grogger, J. (2011). Speech patterns and racial wage inequality. Journal of Human Resources, 46, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.46.1.1
  20. Hay, J., & Drager, K. (2010). Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics, 48(4), 865–892. https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2010.027
  21. Inquisit 2.0.60616 [Computer software]. (2006). Seattle, WA: Millisecond Software.
  22. Johnson, V. E. (2005). Comprehension of third person singular /s/in AAE-speaking children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36, 116–124.
  23. King, S., & Sumner, M. (2014). Voices and variants: effects of voice on the form-based processing of words with different phonological variants. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 36 (pp. 2913–2918).
  24. Kushins, E. R. (2014). Sounding like your race in the employment process: An experiment on speaker voice, race identification, and stereotyping. Race and Social Problems, 6, 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-014-9123-4
  25. Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: studies in the Black English Vernacular. University of Pennsylvania Press.
  26. Lev-Ari, S., Dodsworth, R., Mielke, J., & Peperkamp, S. (2019). The different roles of expectations in phonetic and lexical processing. Interspeech, 2305–2309.
  27. Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3), 1126–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
  28. Lippi-Green, R. (2012). English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United States. Routledge.
  29. Martin, S., & Wolfram, W. (1998). The sentence in African-American Vernacular English. In S. S. Mufwene, J. R. Rickford, G. Bailey, & J. Baugh (Eds.), African-American English (pp. 11–36). Routledge.
  30. Massey, D. S., & Lundy, G. (2001). Use of black English and racial discrimination in urban housing markets: New Methods and findings. Urban Affairs Review, 36, 452–469.
  31. McGowan, K. B. (2015). Social expectation improves speech perception in noise. Language and Speech, 58(4), 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830914565191
  32. McGowan, K. B. & Babel, A. M. (2020) Perceiving isn’t believing: listeners’ expectation and awareness of phonetically-cued social information. Language in Society, 49(2), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404519000782
  33. Mengesha, Z., & Zellou, G. (2018). The interaction between phonological and lexical variation in word recall in African American English. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 40 (pp. 2109–2114).
  34. Minear, M., & Park, D. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(4), 630–633. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206543
  35. Pearson, B. Z., Conner, T., & Jackson, J. E. (2013). Removing obstacles for African American English-speaking children through greater understanding of language difference. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028248
  36. Perry, L. K., Mech, E. N., MacDonald, M. C., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2017). Influences of speech familiarity on immediate perception and final comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3758/213423-017-1297-5
  37. Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003). Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology. Language and Speech, 46(2–3), 115–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309030460020501
  38. Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solo (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Erlbaum
  39. Purnell, T., Idsardi, W., & Baugh, J. (1999). Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 10–30.
  40. Pullum, G. (1999). African American Vernacular English is not standard English with mistakes. In R. S. Wheeler (Ed.), The workings of language: from prescriptions to perspectives (pp. 59–66). Praeger Publishers.
  41. Rickford, J. R. (1999). Using the vernacular to teach the standard. In African American vernacular English: Features, evolution, educational implications (pp. 329–347). Blackwell.
  42. Rickford, J. R., & King, S. (2016). Language and linguistics on trial: Hearing Rachel Jeantel (and other vernacular speakers) in the courtroom and beyond. Language, 948–988.
  43. Squires, L. (2014). Social differences in the processing of grammatical variation. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 20(2), 177–188.
  44. Squires, L. (2016). Processing grammatical differences: perceiving versus noticing. In A. Babel (Ed.), Awareness and control in sociolinguistic research (pp. 80–103). Cambridge University Press.
  45. Staum Casasanto, L. (2008). Does social information influence sentence processing? [Conference presentation]. 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Washington, D.C.
  46. Staum Casasanto, L. (2010). What do listeners know about sociolinguistic variation? University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 15(2), 38–49.
  47. Sumner, M. (2015). The social weight of spoken words. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 238–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.03.007
  48. Sumner, M., Kim, S. K., King, E., & McGowan, K. B. (2014). The socially weighted encoding of spoken words: A dual-route approach to speech perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.01015
  49. Thomas, E. R., & Reaser, J. (2004). Delimiting perceptual cues used for the ethnic labeling of African American and European American voices. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8(1), 54–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00251.x
  50. Weissler, R. E., & Brennan, J. R. (2020). How do listeners form grammatical expectations to African American Language? University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 25(2), 135–141.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58734/plc-2024-0015 | Journal eISSN: 2083-8506 | Journal ISSN: 1234-2238
Language: English
Page range: 415 - 445
Published on: Aug 29, 2024
Published by: Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2024 Tim Beyer, Tess Renirie, David Andresen, published by Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.