N identify Mandarin T2 and T4. Their difficulties k Nnte partly BI6727 Volasertib because their existing models of pitch accent. Although her H He outlines Are similar to those of T2 and T4, there is m Possible that the Japanese Zuh Rer was not yet the consistency of the models in the H Height between the two languages in the task of training lab short established. In addition, the Japanese H Rer also tended to use the T2-label answers. This can be by the fact that two W words in the Japanese mora with a floor can be spoken to explained utert. A word of two Mora can be achieved either pitchaccent with a rising or falling pattern. However, if the same word is unstressed, Japanese speakers also occur with a scratch. So it is not surprising that Japanese Zuh Rer often than Mandarin T2 to respond.
If Mandarin T2 and T4, the perception of Japanese pitch accent LH and HL were assimilated, w Succeed while the T1 and T3 Mandarin Bergenin inhibitor would be a UU-pair, not on each tone or accent pattern assimilate H He described in Japanese prosodic system. UU occurs when both phones are classified, non-native. Discrimination or influenced by L1 phones categorized assimilations, but less than for those classified. In addition, the effects between L1 L1 phonemes, which are distributed more Us as Similar to the phone is not native. Discrimination between being fair to good, depending on the degree of Similarity of non-native phones are pro Us than to the other and the n Compared HIGHEST L1 phoneme. According to WFP, the H Rer perception of the device Uncategorized twits are less influenced by their L1 system, but it h Depends on the fa One of these examiners pro Oivent similarities Between the categorized non-native contrasts.
Maybe have some T3 T1 audio properties that are relatively easy to collect. T1 is not an acute movement eingeschr Nkt is, T3 a fine thread in the central part, and with a vowel longer manufactured. Therefore, k Can pairs, T1 T4 T3 T2 T1 and T2, the Japanese of the Zuh Been assimilated rer than three pairs of UC. According to WFP beautiful protected in case UC, then the auditors should be able to non-native plaintiff length of a pair of UC to distinguish quite well. For English, a language, stress, the question of tonal assimilation is more complicated. Rooms é et al. suggested that there are two m Possible interpretations: lexical T tonne per k be nnte AEs or categories of language or any language Uncategorized.
On the one hand, dam Ftigt English sound / Tonh Henverl Ufen at the sentence level, show the properties of language U hearing it. For example, a grid a fall release, and one reason for the rise indicates a yes no question. Sun can k The Zuh Rer T perceive Ne English into Mandarin as a category of speech not categorized, because English does not have the contours of your phrasal and clausal levels. On the other hand can kill British Zuh Rer perceive lexical T Ne, the non-language melodic variations. Lexical T Ne are not part of the phonological system of English language, and not allow Us as phoneme categories. In this perspective, the T Ne, melodies that are not comparable to any language Zuh Rer, the phonological system as part of PAM. However, if t lexical