Word-level intelligibility of time-compressed speech: Prosodic and segmental factors

Speech Communication

Volumn 41, Issue 2-3, 2003, Pages 287-301

  Janse, Esther ^a   Nooteboom, Sieb ^a   Quené, Hugo ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Fast speech; Intelligibility; Perception; Prosody; Time compression; Timing

Indexed keywords

ELECTRONIC MAIL; EXTRAPOLATION; RECORDING;

TIME-COMPRESSED SPEECH;

SPEECH COMMUNICATION;

EID: 0038711706     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00130-9     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Altmann G., Carter D. Lexical stress and lexical discriminability: Stressed syllables are more informative, but why? Computer Speech and Language. 3:1989;265-275.
2. Charpentier F., Stella M.G. Diphone synthesis using an overlap-add technique for speech waveforms concatenation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 86. 1986;2015-2018.
3. Covell M., Withgott M., Slaney M. Mach1: Nonuniform time-scale modification of speech. Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Seattle WA. 1998.
4. Cutler A., Clifton C.E. The use of prosodic information in word recognition. Bouma H., Bouwhuis D.G. Attention and Performance X: Control of Language Processes. 1984;183-196 Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
5. Cutler A., Koster M. Stress and lexical activation in Dutch. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. Vol. 1:2000;593-596.
6. Cutler A., van Donselaar W. Voornaam is not a homophone: lexical prosody and lexical access in Dutch. Language and Speech. 44(2):2001;171-195.
7. den Os, E.A., 1988. Vowel reduction in Dutch and Italian, with special reference to fast speech rate. Doctoral dissertation Utrecht University.
8. Gay T. Effect of speaking rate on vowel formant movements. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 63(1):1978;223-230.
9. Horton W., Keysar B. When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition. 59:1996;91-117.
10. Kager R. A metrical theory of stress and destressing in English and Dutch. 1989;Foris, Dordrecht.
11. Kozhevnikov V.A., Chistovich L.A. Speech articulation and perception. 1965;Joint Publications Research Service, Washington.
12. Lehiste I. Suprasegmentals. 1970;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
13. Lindblom B. Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 35(11):1963;1773-1781.
14. Lindblom B. Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H&H theory. Hardcastle W.J., Marchal A. Speech Production and Speech Modelling. 1990;403-439 Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
15. Max L., Caruso A.J. Acoustic measures of temporal intervals across speaking rates: variability of syllable- and phrase-level relative timing. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 40:1997;1097-1100.
16. Moon S., Lindblom B. Interaction between duration, context and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 96(1):1994;40-55.
17. Peterson G.E., Lehiste I. Duration of syllable nuclei in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of the America. 32(6):1960;693-703.
18. Port R.F. Linguistic timing factors in combination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 69(1):1981;262-274.
19. Slowiaczek L.M. Effects of lexical stress in auditory word recognition. Language and Speech. 33(1):1990;47-68.
20. Sluijter, A.M.C., 1995. Phonetic Correlates of Stress and Accent. Doctoral dissertation Leiden University.
21. van Bergem D.R. Acoustic vowel reduction as a function of sentence accent, word stress and word class. Speech Communication. 12:1993;1-23.
22. van Donselaar W., Lentz J. The function of sentence accents and given/new information in speech processing: different strategies for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners? Language and Speech. 37(4):1994;375-391.
23. van Heuven V.J. Perception of stress pattern and word recognition: recognition of Dutch words with incorrect stress position. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 78:1985;s21.
24. van Heuven V., Hagman P. Lexical statistics and spoken word recognition in Dutch. Coopmans P., Hulk A. Linguistics in the Netherlands. 1988;59-68 Foris, Dordrecht.
25. van Leyden K., van Heuven V.J. Lexical stress and spoken word recognition: Dutch vs. English. Cremers C., den Dikken M. Linguistics in the Netherlands. 1996;John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
26. Wingfield A. The intonation-syntax interaction: prosodic features in perceptual processing of sentences. Cohen A., Nooteboom S.G. Structure and Process in Speech Perception. 1975;146-156 Springer Verlag, Berlin.
27. Wingfield A., Lombardi L., Sokol S. Prosodic features and the intelligibility of accelerated speech: syntactic vs. periodic segmentation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 27:1984;128-134.