{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01751674394641937, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.494983277591973, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Production and Perception of Single and Double Consonant Letters in English Words by Korean Learners of English

This study investigates how Korean students produce and perceive single and double consonant letters in English words. To this end, twenty-eight Korean learners of English participated in the production and perception tests of English consonants /p, b, s, d, k, g/ with single and double letters. The participants were first asked to produce English words with the target consonants spelled with a single or a double letter. Then, the same participants were asked to choose the same words they heard among the two productions of each native American English speaker’ production: the original production and artificially lengthened production of the target consonant sound. The percentages of the correct production and perception for the target consonant sounds with single consonant letters and double consonant letters were calculated to compare the accuracy of single and double letters. The study results demonstrate three factors influencing the production and perception of English single and double consonant letters. First, the Korean participants’ performance of the double letters was significantly worse than the performance of the single letters for both perception and production. This clearly shows that orthographic forms affect the learners’ production and perception of English words. Second, modality effect was attested such that the participants’ perception of the English single and double letters was significantly worse than the production of the same targets. Third, the participants showed worse performance for the voiceless targets than for the voiced targets both in perception and production, thus showing voicing effect. Further, the participants’ production of the voiceless targets was significantly worse than the production of the voiced targets. Finally, pedagogical suggestions were provided.