The intelligibility of consonants in noisy vowel-consonant-vowel sequences when the vowels are selectively enhanced

Speech Communication

Volumn 41, Issue 2-3, 2003, Pages 429-440

  Meyer, Georg ^a,b   Morse, Robert ^a  

^a KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Automatic speech recognition; Consonant recognition; Relative amplitude; Speech enhancement

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PROCESSING;

CONSONANTS;

SPEECH COMMUNICATION;

EID: 0038373388     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(03)00013-X     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ainsworth W.A., Meyer G.F. Recognition of plosive syllables in noise: comparison of an auditory model with human performance. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96(2):1994;687-694.
2. Bailey P.J., Summerfield Q. Information in speech: observations on the perception of [s]-stop clusters. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Learn. 6:1980;536-563.
3. Boll S.F. Suppression of noise in speech using spectral subtraction. IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process. 27:1979;113-120.
4. Cohen I., Berdugo B. Speech enhancement for non-stationary noise environments. Signal Process. 81(11):2001;2408-2418.
5. Cooper F.S., Delattre P.C., Liberman A.M., Borst J.M., Gerstman L.J. Some experiments on the perception of synthetic speech sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 24:1952;597-606.
6. Delattre P.C., Liberman A.M., Cooper F.S. Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27:1955;769-773.
7. Dorman M.F., Hannley M.T. Identification of speech and speechlike signals by hearing impaired listeners. Daniloff R. Speech Science. 1985;111-153 College-Hill press, San Diego, CA.
8. Dorman M.F., Dori S., Dankowski K., Smith L.M., McCandless G., Parkin J. Acoustic cues for consonant identification by patients who use the Ineraid cochlear implant. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88:1990;2074-2079.
9. Dorman M.F., Studdert-Kennedy M., Raphael L.J. Stop-consonant recognition: release bursts and formant transitions as functionally equivalent, context-dependent cues. Percep. Psychophys. 22:1977;109-122.
10. French N.R., Steinberg J.C. Factors governing the intellibility of speech sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 19:1947;90-119.
11. Gong Y. Speech recognition in noisy environments: a survey. Speech Commun. 16:1995;261-291.
12. Gordon-Salant S. Recognition of natural and time/intensity altered CVs by young and elderly subjects with normal hearing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80:1986;1599-1607.
13. Hazan V., Simpson A. The effect of cue-enhancement on the intelligibility of nonsense word and sentence materials presented in noise. Speech Commun. 24:1998;211-226.
14. Hedrick M. Effect of acoustic cues on labeling fricatives and affricates. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 40:1997;925-938.
15. Hedrick M.S., Carney A.E. Effect of relative amplitude and formant transitions on perception of place of articulation by adult listeners with cochlear implants. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 40:1997;1445-1457.
16. Hedrick M.S., Jesteadt W. Effect of relative amplitude, presentation level, and vowel duration on perception of voiceless stop consonants by normal and hearing impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100:1996;3398-3407.
17. Hedrick M.S., Ohde R.N. Effect of relative amplitude of frication on the perception of place of articulation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94:1993;2005-2026.
18. Joos M. Acoustic Phonetics. Language. 24:1948;1-136.
19. Kleinschmidt M., Tchorz J., Kollmeier B. Combining speech enhancement and auditory feature extraction for robust speech recognition. Speech Commun. 34:2001;75-91.
20. Liberman A.M., Delattre P.C., Cooper F.S., Gerstman L.J. The role of consonant-vowel transitions in the perception of the stop and nasal consonants. Psychol. Monogr. 68:1954;1-13.
21. Lisker L. Voicing in English: a catalogue of acoustic features signalling /b/ versus /p/ in trochees. Lang. Speech. 29:1986;3-11.
22. Luce P.A., Feustel T.C., Pisoni D.B. Capacity demands in short-term memory for synthetic and natural speech. Hum. Factors. 25:1983;17-32.
23. MacAuley R.J., Malpass M.L. Speech enhancement using a soft-decision noise suppression filter. IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process. 28:1980;137-145.
24. Malecot A. Acoustic cues for nasal consonants: an experimental study using a tape-splicing technique. Language. 32:1956;274-284.
25. Mann V.A., Repp B.H. Influence of vocalic context on perception of the /s/-/S/ distinction. Percept. Psychophys. 28:1980;213-228.
26. Meyer G., Yang D., Ainsworth W.A. Applying a model of concurrent vowel segregation to real speech. Greenberg S., Slaney M. Computational Models of Auditory Function. 2001;297-310 IOS Press.
27. Miller G.A., Nicely P.E. The analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27:1955;338-362.
28. Nakata K. Synthesis and perception of nasal consonants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31:1959;661-666.
29. Nordholm S., Claesson B., Bengtsson B. Adaptive array noise suppression of handsfree speaker input in cars. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 42:1993;514-518.
30. Ohde R.N. The development of the perception of cue to the /m/-/n/ distinction in CV syllables. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96:1994;675-686.
31. Ohde R.N., Stevens K.N. The effect of burst amplitude on the perception of consonant place of articulation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74:1983;706-714.
32. Parsons T.W. Enhancing noisy speech. Voice and Speech Processing. 1987;345-364 McGraw-Hill, New York.
33. Pick G., Evans E.F., Wilson J.P. Frequency resolution in patients with hearing loss of cochlear origin. Evans E.F., Wilson J.P. Psychophysics and Physiology of Hearing. 1977;273-281 Academic Press, London.
34. Potter R.K., Kopp G.A., Green H.C. Visible Speech. 1947;Van Nostrand, New York.
35. Rabbitt P. Channel-capacity, intelligibility and immediate memory. Q. J. Exp. Physiol. 20:1968;1-28.
36. Recasens D. Place cues for nasal consonants with special reference to Catalan. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73:1983;1346-1353.
37. Rosen S.M., Fourcin A.J. Frequency selectivity and the perception of speech. Moore B.C.J. Frequency Selectivity in Hearing. 1986;373-487 Academic Press, London.
38. Shannon R.V., Jensvold A., Padilla M., Robert M.E., Wang X. Consonant recordings for speech testing. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 106:1999;L71-L74.
39. Soli S. Second formants in fricatives: acoustic consequences of fricative-vowel articulation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 70:1981;976-984.
40. Soon I.Y., Koh S.N., Yeo C.K. Noisy speech enhancement using discrete cosine transform. Speech Commun. 24:1998;249-257.
41. Stevens K.N. Evidence for the role of acoustic boundaries in the perception of speech sounds. Fromkin V. Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged. 1985;243-255 Academic Press, New York.
42. Strange W., Jenkins J.J., Johnson T.L. Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 74:1983;695-705.
43. Sussman H.M., Fruchter D., Hilbert J., Sirosh J. Linear correlates in the speech signal: the orderly output constraint. Behav. Brain Sci. 21(2):1998;241-259.
44. Whalen D.H. Perception of the English /s/-/integral/distinction relies on fricative noises and transitions, not on brief spectral slices. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90:1991;1776-1785.
45. Widrow B., Luo F.L. Microphone arrays for hearing aids: an overview. Speech Commun. 39:2002;139-146.
46. Wright H.N. The effect of sensorineural hearing loss in threshold-duration function. J. Speech Hear. Res. 11:1968;842-852.