How representations help define computational problems: Commentary on Grossberg, Gaskell and Greenberg

Journal of Phonetics

Volumn 31, Issue 3-4, 2003, Pages 487-493

  Gow Jr , David W ^a,b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b SALEM STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344685546     PISSN: 00954470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00015-9     Document Type: Note

References (21)

1. Bregman, A. (1990). Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.
2. Browman, C. P., & Goldstein, L. (1990). Articulatory gestures as phonological units. Phonology, 6, 201-231.
3. Coleman, J. (2003). Discovering the acoustic correlates of phonological contrasts. Journal of Phonetics, 31, this issue.
4. Darcy, I. (2002). Online processing of phonological variation in speech comprehension: The case of assimilation. In: S. Hawkins & N. Nguyen (Eds.), Temporal integration in the perception of speech (p. 32); Proceedings of the ISCA TIPS workshop. Available from: http://www.lpl.univ-aix.fr/~tips/.
5. Gaskell, M.G. (2003). Modelling regressive and progressive effects of assimilation in speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, [doi: 10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00012-3], this issue.
6. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1998). Mechanisms of phonological inference in speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 380-396.
7. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2001). Lexical ambiguity resolution and spoken word recognition: Bridging the gap. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 325-349.
8. Gaskell, M. G., Hare, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1995). A connectionist model of phonological representation in speech perception. Cognitive Science, 19, 407-439.
9. Gaskell, M. G., Spinelli, E., & Meunier, F. (2002). Perception of resyllabification in French. Memory and Cognition, 30, 798-810.
10. Gay, T. H. (1981). Temporal and spatial properties of articulatory movements: evidence for minimum spreading across and maximum effects within syllable boundaries. In T. Myers, J. Laver, & J. Anderson (Eds.), The cognitive representation of speech (pp. 133-138). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
11. Goldinger, S.D., & Azuma, T. (2003). Puzzle-solving science: The quixotic quest for units in speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, [doi:10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00030-5], this issue.
12. Gow, D. W. (2001). Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 133-159.
13. Gow, D. W. (2002a). Does phonological assimilation create lexical ambiguity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 45, 133-159.
14. Gow, D. W. (2002b). Integrating feature cues over time to resolve ambiguity. In: S. Hawkins & N. Nguyen (Eds.), Temporal integration in the perception of speech (p. 37); Proceedings of the ISCA TIPS workshop. Available from: http://www.lpl.univ-aix.fr/~tips/.
15. Gow, D. W. (in press). Feature parsing: Feature cue mapping in spoken word recognition. Perception and Psychophysics.
16. Greenberg, S., Carey, H., Hitchcock, L.,& Chang, S. (2003). Temporal properties of spontaneous speech - a syllable-centric perspective. Journal of Phonetics, 31, this issue.
17. Grossberg, S. (2003). Resonant neural dynamics of speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, 31, 000-000.
18. Jansen, W., & Toft, Z. (2002). On sounds that like to be paired (after all): An acoustic investigation of Hungarian voicing assimilation. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 12, 19-51.
19. Jun, J. (1997). An acoustic analysis of reduced articulations. Language, 20, 323-332.
20. Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20, 384-422.
21. Repp, B. H. (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: New experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 81-110.