PHONEMES AND SYLLABLES IN SPEECH PERCEPTION: SIZE OF ATTENTIONAL FOCUS IN FRENCH

5th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, EUROSPEECH 1997

Volumn , Issue , 1997, Pages 2159-2162

  Pallier, Christophe ^a,b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^b ÉCOLE DES HAUTES ÉTUDES EN SCIENCES SOCIALES   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SPEECH RECOGNITION;

DETECTION EXPERIMENTS; PERCEPTUAL SYSTEM; PHONEME DETECTION; PHONOLOGICAL REPRESENTATIONS; PRIMARY UNITS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH SIGNALS; SPOKEN WORDS;

SPEECH COMMUNICATION;

EID: 0347533345     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. M. A. Pitt and A. G. Samuel, “Attentional Allocation during Speech Perception: How fine is the focus?,” Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 29, pp. 611-632, 1990.
2. J. Mehler, J. Y. Dommergues, U. Frauenfelder, and J. Segui, “The syllable's role in speech segmentation,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, vol. 20, pp. 298-305, 1981.
3. H. Savin and T. Bever, “The nonperceptual reality of the phoneme,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, vol. 9, pp. 295-302, 1970.
4. D. W. Massaro, “Perceptual units in Speech Recognition,” JEP, vol. 102, pp. 199-208, 1974.
5. J. Mehler, “The role of syllables in speech processing: Infant and adult data,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, vol. 295, pp. 333-352, 1981.
6. E. Dupoux, “Prelexical processing: the syllabic hypothesis revisited,” in Cognitive models of speech processing: The second sperlonga meeting, G. T. M. Altmann and R. Shillcock, Eds. Hove East Sussex UK: LEA, 1993, pp. 81-114.
7. S. Decoene, “Testing the speech unit hypothesis with the primed matching task: phoneme categories are perceptually basic,” Perception & Psychophysics, vol. 53, pp. 601-616, 1993.
8. J. Segui, “The syllable: A basic perceptual unit in speech perception ?,” in Attention and Performance X, H. Bouma and D. G. Bouwhuis, Eds. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum, 1984, pp. 165-181.
9. J. L. McClelland and J. L. Elman, “The TRACE model of speech perception,” Cognitive Psychology, vol. 18, pp. 1-86, 1986.
10. A. Cutler, J. Mehler, D. Norris, and J. Segui, “The syllable's differing role in the segmentation of French and English,” Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 25, pp. 385-400, 1986.
11. D. G. Norris and A. Cutler, “The relative accessibility of phonemes and syllables,” Perception & Psychophysics, vol. 43, pp. 541-550, 1988.
12. J. Segui, E. Dupoux, and J. Mehler, “The role of the syllable in speech segmentation, phoneme identification and lexical access,” in Cognitive models of speech processing: psycholinguistic and computational perspectives, G. T. M. Altmann, Ed. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 1990, pp. 263-280.
13. A. Cutler, J. Mehler, D. Norris, and J. Segui, “A language specific comprehension strategy,” Nature, vol. 304, pp. 159-160, 1983.
14. U. Neisser, Cognitive Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967.
15. C. Pallier, N. Sebastian-Gallés, T. Felguera, A. Christophe, and J. Mehler, “Attentional allocation within syllabic structure of spoken words,” Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 32, pp. 373-389, 1993.
16. C. Pallier, “Rôle de la syllabe dans la perception de la parole: études attentionnelles,” Paris: Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, 1994 [available from the author].
17. U. H. Frauenfelder, J. Segui, and T. Dijkstra, “Lexical Effects in Phonemic Processing: Facilitatory or Inhibitory ?,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, vol. 16, pp. 77-91, 1990.
18. U. H. Frauenfelder and J. Segui, “Phoneme monitoring and lexical processing: Evidence for associative context effects,” Memory and Cognition, vol. 17, pp. 134-140, 1989.
19. R. D. Luce, Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
20. S. A. Finney, A. Protopapas, and P. D. Eimas, “Attentional Allocation to Syllables in American English,” Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 35, pp. 893-909, 1996.