Skip to main content
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
1. S -H. Jin, C. Liu, and S -M. Moon, “ The identification of English vowels in noise for English, Chinese and Korean listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, 2487 (2010).
2. J. E. Flege, I. R. A. MacKay, and D. Meador, “ Native Italian speakers’ perception and production of English vowels,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106, 29732987 (1999).
3. S. Van Wijngaarden, H. Steeneken, and T. Houtgast, “ Quantifying the intelligibility of speech in noise for non-native listeners,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 19061916 (2002).
4. K. J. Van Engen, “ Similarity and familiarity: second language sentence recognition in first- and second-language multi-talker babble,” Speech Commun. 52, 943953 (2010).
5. M. Cooke, M. L. G. Lecumberri, and J. Barker, “ The foreign language cocktail party problem: Energetic and informational masking effects on non-native speech perception,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, 414427 (2008).
6. A. Stuart, J. Zhang, and S. Swink, “ Reception thresholds for sentence in quiet and noise for monolingual English and Bilingual Mandarin-English listeners,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 21, 239248 (2010).
7. J. M. Festen, “ Contributions of comodulation masking release and temporal resolution to the speech-reception threshold masked by an interfering voice,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94, 12951300 (1993).
8. A. Cutler, J. Mehler, D. Norris, and J. Segui, “ The monolingual nature of speech segmentation by bilinguals,” Cognit. Psychol. 24, 381410 (1992).
9. A. Cutler and T. Otake, “ Mora or phoneme? Further evidence for language-specific listening,” J. Mem. Lang. 33, 824844 (1994).
10. Z. A. Liang, “ The auditory perception of Mandarin Tones,” Acta Phys. Sin. 26, 8591 (1963).
11. Q. J. Fu, F. G. Zeng, R. V. Shannon, and S. D. Soli, “ Importance of tonal envelope cues in Chinese speech recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 505510 (1998).
12. S -A. Jun, “ Prosody in sentence processing: Korean vs English,” UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics. 104, 2645 (2005).
13. ANSI, “Specification for Audiometers,” ANSI Report No. S3.6-2010 (ANSI, New York, 2010).
14. M. Nilsson, S. D. Soli, and J. A. Sullivan, “ Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 10851099 (1994).
15. D. N. Kalikow, K. M. Stevens, and L. L. Elliott, “ Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61, 13371351 (1977).
16. G. Studebaker, “ A ‘rationalized’ arcsine transform,” J. Speech Hear. Res. 42, 5664 (1985).
17. S. A. Simpson and M. Cooke, “ Consonant identification in N-talker babble is a nonmonotonic function of N (L),” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118, 27752778 (2005).

Data & Media loading...


Article metrics loading...



This study aimed to investigate English sentence recognition in quiet and two types of maskers, multi-talker babble (MTB) and long-term speech-shaped noise (LTSSN), with varied signal-to-noise ratios, for English-, Chinese-, and Korean-native listeners. Results showed that first, sentence recognition for non-native listeners was affected more by background noise than that for native listeners; second, the masking effects of LTSSN were similar between Chinese and Korean listeners, but the masking effects of MTB were greater for Chinese than for Korean listeners, suggesting possible interaction effects between the non-native listener's native language and speech-like competing noise in sentence recognition.


Full text loading...


Access Key

  • FFree Content
  • OAOpen Access Content
  • SSubscribed Content
  • TFree Trial Content
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd