The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech

Language and Speech

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 31-56

  Aylett, Matthew ^a,b   Turk, Alice ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b Rhetorical Systems Ltd   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Articulation; Duration; Prosody; Redundancy; Speech

Indexed keywords

EID: 3543016768     PISSN: 00238309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00238309040470010201     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. ANDERSON, A. H., BADER, M., BARD, E. G., BOYLE, E., DOHERTY-SNEDDON, G. M., GARROD, S., ISARD, S., KOWTKO, J. C., McALLISTER, J. M., MILLER, J. E., SOTILLO, C. F., THOMPSON, H. S., & WEINERT, R. (1991) The HCRC Map Task Corpus. Language and Speech, 34(4) 351-366.
2. AYLETT, M., & BULL, M. (1998). The automatic marking of prominence in spontaneous speech using duration and part of speech information. In Proceedings of ICSLP- 98, 2123-2126.
3. AYLETT, M. P. (2000). Stochastic suprasegmentalst Relationships between redundancy, prosodic structure and care of articulation in spontaneous speech (http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/matthewa/thesis sum.html). Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.
4. BAAYEN, R. H., PIEPENBROCK, R., & GULIKERS, L. (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania. Version 2.5.
5. BALOTA, D., BOLAND, J., & SHIELDS, L. (1989). Priming in pronunciation: Beyond pattern recognition and onset latency. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 14-36.
6. BARD, E., & AYLETT, M. (1999). The dissociation of deaccenting, givenness and syntactic role in spontaneous speech. In ICPhs99, 1753-1756.
7. BECKMAN, M. E. (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Dordrecht-Holland: Foris Publications.
8. BECKMAN, M. E., & AYERS, G. M. (1993). Guideline for ToBI labelling. First edition.
9. BECKMAN, M. E., & EDWARDS, J. (1990). Lengthening and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency. In J. Kingston & M. E. Beckman (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology I (pp. 152-178). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
10. BECKMAN, M. E., & PIERREHUMBERT, J. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255-309.
11. BELL, A., GREGORY, M. L., JURAFSKY, D., GIRARD, C., BRENIER, J., & IKENO, A. (2002). Which predictability measures affect content word durations? In PMLA ICSLP Workshop.
12. BOOIJ, G. (1995). The phonology of Dutch. Clarendon Press.
13. CAMPBELL, W N. (1992). Multilevel timing in speech. Ph.D. thesis, Sussex University.
14. CAMPBELL, W. N., & ISARD, S. D. (1991). Segment durations in a syllable frame. Journal of Phonetics, 19, 37-47.
15. CLARKSON, P., & ROSENFELD, R. (1997). Statistical language modeling using the CMUCambridge toolkit. In Proceedings of Eurospeech 97, 2707-2710.
16. CRUTTENDEN, A. (1986). Intonation. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
17. CUTLER, A., & CARTER, D. (1987). The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary. Computer Speech and Language, 2, 133-142.
18. FIDELHOLTZ, J. (1975). Word frequency and vowel reduction in English. In CLS 75, 200-213.
19. FOUGERON, C., & KEATING, P. (1997). Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 6, 3728-3740.
20. FOWLER, C. A., & HOUSUM, J. (1987). Talkers' signaling of ́ New" and ́ Old" words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 489-504.
21. FOWLER, C. A., LEVY, E. T., & BROWN, J. M. (1997), Reduction of spoken words in certain discourse contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 24-40.
22. FRY, D. (1955). Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 765-768.
23. GOLDINGER, S., & W., SUMMERS (1989). Lexical neighborhoods in speech production: A first report. Research on Speech Perception Progress Report. Psychology Department, Speech Research Laboratory, Indiana University, 15, 331-342.
24. HUNNICUT, S. (1985). Intelligibility versus redundancy - conditions of dependency, Language and Speech, 28, 45-56.
25. JURAFSKY, D., BELL, A., GREGORY, M., & RAYMOND, W. (2001). Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 229-254). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
26. LADD, D. R. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
27. LADD, D., & CAMPBELL, N. (1991). Theories of prosodic structure: Evidence from syllable duration. In Proceedings of the XIIth International Conference on Phonetic Sciences, 2, 290-293.
28. LADEFOGED, P. (1982). AUC course in phonetics. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 2nd edition.
29. LIEBERMAN, P. (1963). Some effects of semantic and grammatical context on the production and perception of speech. Language and Speech, 6, 172-187.
30. LINDBLOM, B. (1967). Vowel duration and a model of lip mandible coordination. Speech Transmission Laboratory - Quarterly Progress and Status Report, Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT, Cambridge, 4, 1-29.
31. MAYO, C., AYLETT, M., & LADD, D. (1997). Prosodic transcription of Glasgow English: An evaluation study of GlaToBI. In A. Botinis, G. Kouroupetroglou, & G. Carayiannis (Eds.), Proceedings of the ESCA Intonation Workshop (pp. 231-234). ESCA.
32. NETER, J., WASSERMAN, W., & KUTNER, M. H. (1990). Applied linear statistical models: Regression, analysis of variance and experimental design (3rd ed.). Boston: Irwin.
33. PAN, S., & HIRSCHBERG, J. (2000). Modeling local context for pitch accent prediction. Proceedings of the ACL 2000, ACL, Hong Kong, 233-240.
34. PIERCE, J. R. (1961). Symbols, signals and noise: The nature and process of communication. New York: Harper.
35. PISONI, D., NUSBAUM, H., LUCE, P., & SLOWIACZEK, L. (1985). Speech perception, word recognition, and the structure of the lexicon. Speech Communication, 4, 75-95.
36. SAMUAL, A. G., & TROICKI, M. (1998). Articulation control is inversely related to redundancy when children or adults have verbal control. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 175-194.
37. SANTEN, J. van (1998). Chapter 5: Timing. In R. Sproat (Ed.), Multilingual text-to-speech synthesis (pp. 115-139). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
38. SELKIRK, E. (1978). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In T. Fretheim (Ed.), Nordic prosody II. Trondheim: TAPIR.
39. SHANNON, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423; 623-656.
40. SHATTUCK-HUFNAGEL, S., & TURK, A. E. (1996). A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 193-247.
41. SLUIJTER, A. (1995). Phonetic correlates of stress and accent. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
42. SOTILLO, C. F. (1997). Phonological reduction and intelligibility in task-oriented dialog. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.
43. TURK., A., & WHITE, L. (1999). Structural influences on accentual lengthening in English. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 171-206.
44. TURK., A. E., & SAWUSCH, J. R. (1997). The domain of accentual lengthening in American English. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 25-41.
45. WIGHTMAN, C., SHATTUCK-HUFNAGEL, S., OSTENDORF, M., & PRICE, P. (1992). Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91, 1707-1717.
46. WRIGHT, R. (1997). Lexical competition and reduction in speech: A preliminary report. Progress Report, Indiana University, 21, 471-485.