Adaptive dispersion in vowel perception

Phonetica

Volumn 57, Issue 2-4, 2000, Pages 181-188

  Johnson, Keith ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOICE;

HUMANS; PHONETICS; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOICE;

EID: 0034167855     PISSN: 00318388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000028471     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bradlow, A.R.: A comparative acoustic study of English and Spanish vowels. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 97: 1916-1924 (1995).
2. Bradlow, A.R.: A perceptual comparison of the /i/-/e/ and /u/-/o/ contrasts in English and Spanish: universal and language-specific aspects. Phonetica 53: 55-85 (1996).
3. Creelman, C.D.: Case of the unknown talker. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 29: 655 (1957).
4. Green, K.P.; Tomiak, G.R.; Kuhl, P.K.: The encoding of rate and talker information during phonetic perception. Perception Psychophysics 59: 675-692 (1997).
5. Halle, M.: The sound pattern of Russian (Mouton, The Hague 1959).
6. Johnson, K.: Speech perception without speaker normalization: an exemplar model; in Johnson, Mullennix, Talker variability in speech processing, pp. 145-166 (Academic Press, New York 1997).
7. Johnson, K.; Flemming, E.; Wright, R.: The hyperspace effect: phonetic targets are hyperarticulated. Language 69: 505-528 (1993).
8. Johnson, K.; Strand, E.A.; D'Imperio, M.: Auditory-visual integration of talker gender in vowel perception. J. Phonet. 27: 359-384 (1999).
9. Liljencrants, J.; Lindblom, B.:Numerical simulation of vowel quality systems: the role of perceptual contrast. Language 48: 839-862 (1972).
10. Lindblom, B.: Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 35: 1773-1781 (1963).
11. Lindblom, B.: Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H&H theory; in Hardcastle, Marchal, Speech production and speech modeling, pp. 403-439 (Kluwer, Dordrecht 1990).
12. Lindblom, B.; Engstrand, O.: In what sense is speech quantal? J. Phonet. 17: 107-121 (1989).
13. Lindblom, B.; Studdert-Kennedy, M.: On the role of formant transitions in vowel recognition. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 30: 693-703 (1967).
14. Mullennix, J.W.; Pisoni, D.B.: Stimulus variability and processing dependencies in speech perception. Perception Psychophysics 47: 379-390 (1990).
15. Mullennix, J. W.; Pisoni, D.B.; Martin, C.S.: Some effects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 85: 365-378 (1989).
16. Nygaard, L.C.; Sommers, M.S.; Pisoni, D.B.: Speech perception as a talker-contingent process. Psychol. Sci. 5: 42-45 (1994).
17. Padgett, J.: Contrast dispersion and Russian palatalization; in Hume, Johnson, The role of speech perception phenomena in phonology (Academic Press, New York, in press).
18. Stevens, K.N.; House, A.S.: Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: an acoustical study. J. Speech Hear. Res. 6: 111-128 (1963).
19. Walker, S.; Bruce, V.; O'Malley, C.: Facial identity and facial speech processing: familiar faces and voices in the McGurk effect. Perception Psychophysics 59: 1124-1133 (1995).