在過去的幾十年中，儘管對感知同化進行了理論發展，有關中文母語者對英語母音的感知的研究仍然很少。了解非母語者如何將非本土音位同化為本土音位對於理解非母語者對外語音的感知至關重要，而這正是感知同化模型（PAM）的理論核心，即非母語者的語音辨識隨著非母語音位同化到本土音位範疇的程度而變化（Best，1995）。本研究的目標是在PAM的理論下，了解台灣英語作為外語（EFL）學習者的母音感知同化情況。具體而言，我們探討了以下兩個問題：（1）中文母語者對多少個英語單元音進行了分類，（2）中文母語者如何分類（categorized）/不分類（uncategorized）英語單元音。本研究共32名受試者，依據受試者的多益成績分為兩組。並通過母音分類來檢驗英文母音是否被分類。此外，我們亦評估了受試者對已分類的單母音和其注音對應音的知覺相似性。對未分類的單元音的感知進行進一步分析，以了解參與者對待這些未分類元音的集中或分散反應。結果表明，6個英文單母音，包含[i]，[ɪ]，[u]，[ɔ]，[ʌ]和[ɑ]被兩組參與者都認定為已分類，而[ʊ]和[o]僅被高分組認定為已分類（categorized）。對已分類AE母音的評分顯示兩組之間沒有顯著差異，因為兩組都認為已分類的母音與其注音對應音非常相似。卡方檢驗和t檢驗顯示，高分組將所有未分類的AE母音[e]，[ɛ]和[æ]視為分散（dispersed）至不同注音，而低分組將[e]，[ɛ]和[ʊ]視為未分類的集中（focalized）至不同注音，[æ]和[o]則被分散（dispersed）至不同注音。研究結果顯示，母音的音高在知覺決策中起著重要作用、唇圓化影響識別，尤其在高分組的結果中更為明顯。此外，我們發現高分組在探測AE母位特徵方面更為敏感和一致，他們將更多AE母音視為已分類（categorized），並將所有未分類（uncategorized）的AE母音均分（dispersed）至不同注音。

Despite the theoretical development of perceptual attunement over the last decades, few studies have focused on Mandarin speakers’ perception of English vowels. As how non-native phones are assimilated into native phones is essential to understanding non-native speakers’ perception of foreign language’s sounds, the current study aims to investigate Taiwanese EFL learners’ perceptual attunement of vowels in light of the Perceptual Assimilation Model (PAM), which predicts that non-native’s discrimination performance varies with how much the contrasting non-native phones assimilate native phonological categories (Best, 1995). In particular, we ask (1) how many English monophthongs are categorized by Mandarin-speaking EFL learners, and (2) how English monophthongs are categorized/uncategorized by Mandarin-speaking EFL learners. There are 32 participants divided into 2 groups based on their TOEIC scores. A vowel identification task is employed to examine whether the vowels are categorized or uncategorized. Furthermore, participants' ratings are examined to assess the perceived similarity between categorized monophthongs and their Zhuyin counterparts. Perceptions of the uncategorized monophthongs are further analyzed for the participants’ treatment of them as focalized or dispersed responses. The results indicate that 6 American English (AE) monophthongs, including [i], [ɪ], [u], [ɔ], [ʌ] and [ɑ], are perceived as categorized by both groups, and [ʊ] and [o] are perceived as categorized only by high proficiency group. Ratings of categorized AE vowels show no significant differences between groups since both groups rate categorized vowels as highly similar to their Zhuyin counterparts. Chi-square and t-tests reveal that the high proficiency group perceive all uncategorized AE vowel [e], [ɛ] and, [æ] as dispersed responses, while the low proficiency group perceived [e], [ɛ], and [ʊ] as uncategorized focalized responses, and [æ] and [o] as uncategorized dispersed responses. Findings suggest that vowel height plays a significant role in perceptual decision-making, and that lip rounding influences identification, particularly among high proficiency learners. Additionally, we found high proficiency learners more sensitive and more consistent in detecting AE phonological features by assigning more AE vowels as categorized and assigning uncategorized AE vowels all as dispersed responses.

Baigorri, M., Campanelli, L., & Levy, E. S. (2019). Perception of American–English vowels by early and late Spanish–English bilinguals. Language and speech, 62(4), 681-700.
Balas, A. (2018). English vowel perception by Polish advanced learners of English. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique, 63(3), 309-338.
Bauer, R. S., & Benedict, P. K. (1997). Modern Cantonese Phonology (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin). Chap, 2, 162-164.
Best, C. T. (1994). The emergence of native-language phonological influences in infants: A perceptual assimilation model. The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words, 167(224), 233-277.
Best, C. T. (1995). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. Speech perception and linguistic experience, 171-206.
Best, C. T., Goldstein, L., Tyler, M. D., & Nam, H. (2009). Articulating the Perceptual Assimilation Model (PAM): Perceptual assimilation in relation to articulatory organs and their constriction gestures. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(4), 2758-2758.
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech. Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege, 17, 13.
Best, C. T., McRoberts, G. W., & Goodell, E. (2001). Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener’s native phonological system. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109(2), 775-794.
Boersma, P. (2010). Modelling phonological category learning. Preprint. https://www.fon.hum.uva. nl/paul/papers/CategoryEmergence11. pdf (01.06. 2020).
Bohn, O. S., & Best, C. T. (2012). Native-language phonetic and phonological influences on perception of American English approximants by Danish and German listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 40(1), 109-128.
Bohn, O. S., & Bundgaard-Nielsen, R. L. (2008). 11. Second Language Speech Learning with Diverse Inputs. In Input matters in SLA (pp. 207-218). Multilingual Matters.
Bohn, O. S., & Polka, L. (2001). Target spectral, dynamic spectral, and duration cues in infant perception of German vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110(1), 504-515.
Buchwald, A., & Rapp, B. (2006). Consonants and vowels in orthographic representations. Cognitive neuropsychology, 23(2), 308–337.
Bundgaard-Nielsen, R. L., Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2011a). Vocabulary size matters: The assimilation of second-language Australian English vowels to first-language Japanese vowel categories. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(1), 51-67.
Bundgaard-Nielsen, R. L., Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2011b). Vocabulary size is associated with second-language vowel perception performance in adult learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(3), 433-461.
Carter, A. J., Osborne, E., & Houle, D. (2009). Heritability of directional asymmetry in Drosophila melanogaster. International Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 2009.
Chen, Y., Robb, M., Gilbert, H., & Lerman, J. (2001). Vowel production by Mandarin speakers of English. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 15(6), 427-440.
Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English.
Chrabaszcz, A., Winn, M., Lin, C. Y., & Idsardi, W. J. (2014). Acoustic cues to perception of word stress by English, Mandarin, and Russian speakers. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research, 57(4), 1468-1479.
Clopper, C. G., Pisoni, D. B., & De Jong, K. (2005). Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. The Journal of the Acoustical society of America, 118(3), 1661-1676.
Duffy, S. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1992). Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: A review and theoretical interpretation. Language and Speech, 35(4), 351-389.
Escudero, P., & Boersma, P. (2004). Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory. Studies in second language acquisition, 26(4), 551-585.
Faris, M. M., Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2016). An examination of the different ways that non-native phones may be perceptually assimilated as uncategorized. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139(1), EL1-EL5.
Faris, M. M., Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2018). Discrimination of uncategorised non-native vowel contrasts is modulated by perceived overlap with native phonological categories. Journal of Phonetics, 70, 1-19.
Flege, J. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research, 92, 233-277.
Fon, J. (2020). The Phonetic Realizations of the Mandarin Phoneme Inventory: The Canonical and the Variants. Speech Perception, Production and Acquisition: Multidisciplinary approaches in Chinese languages, 11-36.
Goswami, U. (2012). Phonological Representation. In: Seel, N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA.
Harnsberger, J. D. (2001). On the relationship between identification and discrimination of non-native nasal consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110(1), 489-503.
Ho, Yen-kuang, Ph.D. (2009). The perception and production of American English front vowels by EFL learners in Taiwan: The influence of first language and proficiency levels. Available from Digital Dissertation Consortium. (3372354). Retrieved from http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/doc/3372354
Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L. A., Clark, M. J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical society of America, 97(5), 3099-3111.
Ingram, J. C., & Park, S. G. (1997). Cross-language vowel perception and production by Japanese and Korean learners of English. Journal of phonetics, 25(3), 343-370.
IPA reader (n.d.)., Retrieved September, 2018, from http://ipa-reader.xyz/
Kent, R. D., & Vorperian, H. K. (2018). Static measurements of vowel formant frequencies and bandwidths: A review. Journal of communication disorders, 74, 74-97.
Kuo, C. C. (2006). PHONETIC AND PHONOLOGICAL BACKGROUND OF CHINESE. Advances in Chinese spoken language processing, 33.
Ladefoged, Peter. 2001. A course in Phonetics, 4th edn. Orlando: Harcourt Brace College.
Lai, Y. H. (2010). English vowel discrimination and assimilation by Chinese-speaking learners of English. Concentric: Studies in linguistics, 36(2), 157-182.
Lin, C. Y. (2014). Perception and Production of Five English Front Vowels by College Students. English language teaching, 7(9), 14-20.
Li, L., Wang, H. C., Castles, A., Hsieh, M. L., & Marinus, E. (2018). Phonetic radicals, not phonological coding systems, support orthographic learning via self-teaching in Chinese. Cognition, 176, 184-194.
Llompart, M., & Reinisch, E. (2018). Acoustic cues, not phonological features, drive vowel perception: Evidence from height, position and tenseness contrasts in German vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 67, 34-48.
Maurer, D., & Werker, J. F. (2014). Perceptual narrowing during infancy: A comparison of language and faces. Developmental psychobiology, 56(2), 154-178.
Nation, K., & Castles, A. (2017). Putting the learning into orthographic learning. Theories of reading development, 15, 147-168.
Perfetti, C. A. (2017). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In Reading acquisition (pp. 145-174). Routledge.
Polka, L., & Bohn, O. S. (1996). A cross‐language comparison of vowel perception in English‐learning and German‐learning infants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100(1), 577-592.
Polka, L., & Bohn, O. S. (2003). Asymmetries in vowel perception. Speech communication, 41(1), 221-231.
Polka, L., & Bohn, O. S. (2011). Natural Referent Vowel (NRV) framework: An emerging view of early phonetic development. Journal of Phonetics, 39(4), 467-478.
Rauber, A. S., P. Escudero, R. A. H. Bion, and B. O. Baptista. 2005. The Interrelation between the Perception and Production of English Vowels by Native Speakers of Brazilian Portuguese Graduate Program in Applied Linguistics. Interspeech 2: 2913–16
Reetz, H., & Jongman, A. (2020). Phonetics: Transcription, production, acoustics, and perception. John Wiley & Sons.
Rosenberg, A., Zhang, Y., Ramabhadran, B., Jia, Y., Moreno, P., Wu, Y., & Wu, Z. (2019, December). Speech recognition with augmented synthesized speech. In 2019 IEEE automatic speech recognition and understanding workshop (ASRU) (pp. 996-1002). IEEE.
Ryu, N. Y., Kang, Y., & Han, S. (2020). The Effects of Phonetic Duration on Loanword Adaptation: Mandarin Falling Diphthong in Chinese Korean. 어학연구, 56(2), 225-261.
Samuel, A. G., & Kraljic, T. (2009). Perceptual learning for speech. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(6), 1207-1218.
Share, D. L. (2014). Alphabetism in reading science. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 752.
Strange, W., Weber, A., Levy, E. S., Shafiro, V., Hisagi, M., & Nishi, K. (2007). Acoustic variability within and across German, French, and American English vowels: Phonetic context effects. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 122(2), 1111–1129. doi:10.1121/1.2749716
Tyler, M. D., Best, C. T., Faber, A., & Levitt, A. G. (2014). Perceptual assimilation and discrimination of non-native vowel contrasts. Phonetica, 71(1), 4-21.
Tyler, M. D. (2019). PAM-L2 and phonological category acquisition in the foreign language classroom. sl: sn, 607-630.
Wan, I., & Jaeger, J. J. (2003). The phonological representation of Taiwan Mandarin vowels: A psycholinguistic study. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 12(3), 205-257.
Wang, H. C., Zheng, T. F., & Tao, J. (2007). CSLP CORPORA AND LANGUAGE RESOURCES. Advances In Chinese Spoken Language Processing (pp. 523-537).