Context and Second Language Speech and Phonology

This thriving Matters series is a testament to the vibrancy and the continuous development of the studies of second language acquisition (SLA). However, despite the progress made, recent reflections on and scrutiny of current practices and knowledge base in the wider fields of humanities, social sciences and applied linguistics have raised questions about the foundation of some of our disciplinary knowledge. For example, the sampling bias caused by the focus on W.E.I.R.D (western, educated, industralised, rich, democratic) contexts (see Andringa and Godfroid 2020; Bylund et al. 2023; Henrich et al. 2010) potentially undermines the generalisability of our findings. In addition, existing SLA literature, with the exception of studies associated with the sociolinguistic and variationist paradigm, seems to have made the implicit assumption that the target of acquisition represents a monolithic variety. Linguistic development/ progress is often measured against the monolingual and monolithic “standard”, irrespective of learners’ actual language environment or linguistic exposure.

In relation to L2 speech and phonology, Flege (2009) has called for closer attention to be paid to the nature of input both in terms of quality and quantity in Input Matters. Nevertheless, studies which explicitly address acquisition contexts where a diversity of input exists remain few and far between (see Hansen-Edwards 2022). The lack of acknowledgement of the complexity of the learner’s linguistic environment is problematic not only for reasons noted above, but the neglect of input multiplicity also limits the type of research questions we generate, thereby further restricting the deepening of our understanding of both the process and the outcome of SLA. If we continue to brush aside details about the messiness of the input learners receive, we remain ill-equipped to understand, for instance, how different varieties of a target language contribute to learners’ acquisition or how the various input compete against each other through learners’ acquisition trajectory.

In this chapter, I argue that context matters in second language speech and phonology. Through reviewing studies that investigate input multiplicity, I discuss the nuances that may otherwise be missed had details about the context not been carefully considered, including how the local acquisition context can interact with social factors (e.g. attitude, ethnic identification) as well as the larger socio-political context to mediate L2 perception and L2 production (cf. Douglas Fir Group 2016). I further argue that a better appreciation of the complexity of the context necessities an urgent rethink about L2 speech and phonology assessment anchored on the monolingual, native standard which inevitably perpetuates a deficit model. I end by encouraging the exploration of alternatives such as using bilinguals as a comparison reference on grounds of authenticity, fairness, and justice (i.e. viewing SLA in its own right).