Vowel production and perception: Hyperarticulation without a hyperspace effect

Language and Speech

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 155-174

  Whalen, D H ^a   Magen, Harriet S ^a,b   Pouplier, Marianne ^c   Min Kang, A ^a,d   Iskarous, Khalil ^a  

^a HASKINS LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b RHODE ISLAND COLLEGE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^d YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Formants; Hyperspace; Speech; Vowel perception; Vowel production

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044272978     PISSN: 00238309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00238309040470020301     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. AUER, P. (1998). Dialect leveling and the standard varieties in Europe. Folia Linguistica, 32, 1-9.
2. AUER, P., BARDEN, B., & GROSSKOPF, B. (1998). Subjective and objective parameters determining "salience" in long-term dialect accommodation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 2, 163-187.
3. BRADLOW, A. R. (2002). Confluent talker-and listener-oriented forces in clear speech production. In C. Gussenhoeven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 7 (pp. 237-273). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
4. BROWMAN, C. P., & GOLDSTEIN, L. M. (1990). Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech. In J. Kingston & M. E. Beckman (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology I: Between the grammar and physics of speech (pp. 341-376). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
5. CHAMBERS, J. K. (1999). Converging features in the Englishes of North America. Cuadernos de Filologia Inglesa, 8, 117-127.
6. CHAMBERS, J. K. (2000). World enough and time: Global enclaves of the near future. American Speech, 75, 285-287.
7. CLERMONT, F., & MOKHTARI, P. (1998). Acoustic-articulatory evaluation of the upper vowel-formant region and its presumed speaker-specific potency. In Proceedings of ICSLP 98. Sydney.
8. DALBY, J. M. (1984). Phonetic structure of fast speech in American English. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Indiana University.
9. DeJONG, K. J., BECKMAN, M. E., & EDWARDS, J. (1993). The interplay between prosodic structure and coarticulation. Language and Speech, 36, 197-212.
10. FANT, G. (1998). Half a century with speech science. Quarterly Progress and Status Report (QPR-KTH),3, 1-3.
11. FOWLER, C. A. (1980). Coarticulation and theories of extrinsic timing. Journal of Phonetics, 8, 113-133.
12. FOWLER, C. A. (1984). Segmentation of coarticulated speech in perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 36, 359-368.
13. FRIEDA, E. M., WALLEY, A. C., FLEGE, J. E., & SLOANE, M. E. (2000). Adults' perception and production of the English vowel /i/. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 129-143.
14. HAGIWARA, R.-E. (1995). Acoustic realizations of American /r/ as produced by women and men. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Los Angeles: University of California.
15. HILLENBRAND, J., GETTY, L. A., CLARK, M. J., & WHEELER, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3099-3111.
16. JAKOBSON, R., FANT, G., & HALLÉ, M. (1951). Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. JOHNSON, K. (1989). Higher formant normalization results from auditory integration of F2 and F3. Perception and Psychophysics, 46, 174-180.
18. JOHNSON, K. (2000). Adaptive dispersion in vowel perception. Phonetica, 57, 181-188.
19. JOHNSON, K., FLEMMING, E., & WRIGHT, R. (1993). The hyperspace effect: Phonetic targets are hyperarticulated. Language, 69, 505-528.
20. KEATING, P. (1987). A survey of phonological features. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 66, 124-142.
21. KEWLEY-PORT, D., & WATSON, C. S. (1994). Formant-frequency discrimination for isolated English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 485-496.
22. KLATT, D. H., & KLATT, L. C. (1990). Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 820-857.
23. LADEFOGED, P. (2001). Vowels and consonants: An introduction to the sounds of languages. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
24. LEWIS, D. (1936). Vocal resonance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 8, 91-99.
25. LIBERMAN, A. M. (1996). Speech: A special code. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26. LIBERMAN, A. M., COOPER, F. S., SHANKWEILER, D. P., & STUDDERT-KENNEDY, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74, 431-461.
27. LIBERMAN, A. M., & WHALEN, D. H. (2000). On the relation of speech to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 187-196.
28. MAGEN, H. S. (1997). The extent of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in English. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 187-205.
29. MOON, S.-J., & LINDBLOM, B. (1994). Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 40-55.
30. NEARBY, T. M. (1989). Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 2088-2113.
31. PETERSON, G. E., & BARNEY, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24, 175-184.
32. PICHENY, M. A., DURLACH, N. I., & BRAIDA, L. D. (1986). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing II: Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 434-446.
33. REPP, B. H., & CROWDER, R. G. (1990). Stimulus order effects in vowel discrimination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88, 2080-2090.
34. REPP, B. H., HEALY, A. F., & CROWDER, R. G. (1979). Categories and context in the perception of isolated steady-state vowels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 129-145.
35. RISCHEL, J. (1997). Roman Jakobson and the phonetics-phonology dichotomy. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 29, 121-147.
36. RUBIN, P. E., SALTZMAN, E., GOLDSTEIN, L., McGOWAN, R., TIEDE, M., & BROWMAN, C. (1996). CASY and extensions to the task-dynamic model. Proceedings of the 1st ESCA ETRW on speech production modeling and 4th speech production seminar, Autrans (pp. 125-128).
37. STEVENS, K. N., & HOUSE, A. S. (1963). Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: An acoustical study. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 6, 111-128.
38. STUDDERT-KENNEDY, M. (2000). Evolutionary implications of the particulate principle: Imitation and the dissociation of phonetic form from semantic function. In C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy & J. R. Hurford (Eds.), The evolutionary emergence of language: Social function and the origins of linguistic form (pp. 161-176). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
39. SYRDAL, A. K. (1985). Aspects of a model of the auditory representation of American English vowels. Speech Communication, 4, 121-135.
40. VOLAITIS, L. E., & MILLER, J. L. (1992). Phonetic prototypes: Influence of place of articulation and speaking rate on the internal structure of voicing categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92, 723-735.
41. WHALEN, D. H. (1981). Effects of vocalic formant transitions and vowel quality on the English [s]-[š] boundary. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 275-282.
42. WIER, C. C., JESTEADT, W., & GREEN, D. M. (1976). Comparison of method of adjustment and forced-choice procedures in frequency discrimination. Perception and Psychophysics, 19, 75-79.