The effects of inventory on vowel perception in French and Spanish: An MEG study

Brain and Language

Volumn 100, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 295-300

  Hacquard, Valentine ^a   Walter, Mary Ann ^a   Marantz, Alec ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Magnetoencephalography (MEG); Mismatch field (MMF); Perception; Similarity; Vowel inventory

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; SOUND; SPEECH; VOWEL;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; PHONETICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 33947150488     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: 10902155     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.04.009     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bradlow A. A comparative acoustic study of English and Spanish vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97 3 (1995) 1916-1924
2. Cohen J.D., MacWhinney B., Flatt M., and Provost J. Psyscope: a new graphics interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 25 2 (1993) 257-271
3. Flemming E. Auditory representations in phonology (2002), Routledge, NY
4. Frisch, S. (1996). Similarity and frequency in phonology. Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University.
5. Jongman A., Fourakis M., and Sereno J. The acoustic vowel space of Modern Greek and German. Language Speech 32 (1989) 221-248
6. Hume, E., & Bromberg, I. (2005). Predicting epenthesis: an information-theoretic account. In Seventh Annual Meeting of the French Network Phonology.
7. Johnson K., Flemming E., and Wright R. The hyperspace effect: phonetic targets are hyperarticulated. Language 69-3 (1993) 505-528
8. Johnson K. Adaptive dispersion in vowel perception. Phonetica 57 (2000) 181-188
9. Kuhl P.K. Language, mind, and brain: experience alters perception. In: Gazzaniga M.S. (Ed). The new cognitive neurosciences. 2nd ed. (2000), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 99-115
10. Lindblom B. Phonetic universals in vowel systems. In: Ohala J., and Jaeger J.J. (Eds). Experimental phonology (1986), Academic Press, Orlando 13-44
11. Lindblom, B. (1990). Models of phonetic variation and selection. Phonetic Experimental Research: Vol. 11 (pp. 101-118). Institute of Linguistics, University of Stockholm.
12. Näätänen R., Lehtoskoskl A., Lennes M., Cheour M., Huotilainen M., Ilvonen A., et al. Language-specific phoneme representations revealed by electric and magnetic brain responses. Nature 385 (1997) 432-434
13. Peterson G., and Barney H. Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 24 2 (1952) 175-184
14. Phillips C., Pellathy T., Marantz A., Yellin E., Wexler K., Poeppel D., et al. Auditory cortex accesses phonological categories: an MEG mismatch study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000)
15. Savela J., Kujala T., Tuomainen J., Ek M., Aaltonen O., and Näätänen R. The mismatch negativity and reaction time as indices of the percpetual distance between the corresponding vowels of two related languages. Cognitive Brain Research 16 (2003) 250-256
16. Sebastián, N., Martí, M. A., Carreiras, M., & Cuetos, F. (2000). LEXESP: Una base de datos informatizada del español. Barcelona: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universitat de Barcelona.
17. Sharma A., and Dorman M.F. Cortical auditory evoked potential correlates of categorical perception of voice-onset time. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106 (1999) 1078-1083
18. Stevens K.N. The quantal nature of speech: evidence from articulatory-acoustic data. In: David E., and Denes P. (Eds). Human communication: A unified view (1972), McGraw Hill, New York 51-66
19. Stevens K.N., and Bickley C. Constraints among parameters simplify control of Klatt formant synthesizer. Journal of Phonetics 19 (1991) 161-174
20. Winkler I., Lehtokoski A., Alku P., Vaino M., Czigler I., Csepe V., et al. Pre-attentive detection of vowel contrasts utilizes both phonetic and auditory memory representations. Cognitive Brain Research 7 (1999) 357-369