Statistical information and coarticulation as cues to word boundaries: A matter of signal quality

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 69, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 856-864

  Fernandes, Tânia ^a   Ventura, Paulo ^a,b   Kolinsky, Régine ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

^b FREE UNIVERSITY OF BRUSSELS   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35648966510     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193922     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. ASLIN, R. N., SAFFRAN, J. R., & NEWPORT, E. L. (1998). Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 9, 321-324.
2. BRENT, M. R., & CARTWRIGHT, T. A. (1996). Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation. Cognition, 61, 93-125.
3. BYRD, D. (1996). Influences on articulatory timing in consonant sequences. Journal of Phonetics, 24, 209-244.
4. BYRD, D., & SALTZMAN, E. (1998). Intragestural dynamics of multiple prosodic boundaries. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 173-199.
5. CHO, T., & MCQUEEN, J. M. (2005). Prosodic influences on consonant production in Dutch: Effects of prosodic boundaries, phrasal accent and lexical stress. Journal of Phonetics, 33, 121-157.
6. CHRISTIANSEN, M. H., & CURTTN, S. (2005). Integrating multiple cues in language acquisition: A computational study of early infant speech segmentation. In G. Houghton (Ed.), Connectionist models in cognitive psychology (pp. 347-372). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
7. CONWAY, C. M., & CHRISTIANSEN, M. H. (2005). Modality-constrained statistical learning of tactile, visual, and auditory sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, & Cognition, 31, 24-39.
8. DAHAN, D., & BRENT, M. R. (1999). On the discovery of novel wordlike units from utterances: An artificial-language study with implications for native-language acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 165-185.
9. DUTOIT, T., PAGEL, V., PIERRET, N., BATAILLE, F., & VAN DER VRECKEN, O. (1996). The MBROLA project: Towards a set of high quality speech synthesizers free of use for non commercial purposes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, 3, 1393-1396.
10. FISER, J., & ASLIN, R. N. (2001). Unsupervised statistical learning of higher-order spatial structures from visual scenes. Psychological Science, 12, 499-504.
11. FOUGERON, C., & KEATING, P. A. (1997). Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3728-3740.
12. GÓMEZ, R. L., & GERKEN, L. (2000). Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 178-186.
13. JOHNSON, E. K., & JUSCZYK, P. W. (2001). Word segmentation by 8-month-olds: When speech cues count more than statistics. Journal of Memory & Language, 44, 548-567.
14. KEATING, P. A. (2006). Phonetic encoding of prosodic structure. In J. Harrington & M. Tabain (Eds.), Speech production: Models, phonetic processes, and techniques (pp. 167-185). New York: Psychology Press.
15. KLATT, D. H. (1980). Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Perception and production of fluent speech (pp. 243-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. KUHN, G., & DIENES, Z. (2005). Implicit learning of nonlocal musical rules: Implicitly learning more than chunks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1417-1432.
17. KÜHNERT, B., & NOLAN, E (1999). The origin of coarticulation. In W. J. Hardcastle & N. Hewlett (Eds.), Coarticulation: Theory, data, and techniques (pp. 61-75). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. LIBERMAN, A. M., & STUDDERT-KENNEDY, M. (1978). Phonetic perception. In R. Held, H. Leibowitz, & H.-L. Teuber (Eds.), Handbook of sensory physiology: Vol 8. Perception (pp. 143-178). Berlin: Springer.
19. MANUEL, S. (1999). Cross-language studies: Relating language-particular coarticulation patterns to other language-particular facts. In W. J. Hardcastle & N. Hewlett (Eds.), Coarticulation: Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 179-198). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. MATTYS, S. L. (2004). Stress versus coarticulation: Toward an integrated approach to explicit speech segmentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 397-408.
21. MATTYS, S. L., WHITE, L., & MELHORN, J. F. (2005). Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: A hierarchical framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 477-500.
22. MCNEALY, K., MAZZIOTTA, J. C., & DAPRETTO, M. (2006). Cracking the language code: Neural mechanisms underlying speech parsing. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 7629-7639.
23. MCQUEEN, J. M. (1998). Segmentation of continuous speech using phonotactics. Journal of Memory & Language, 39, 21-46.
24. MCQUEEN, J. M., NORRIS, D., & CUTLER, A (1994). Competition in spoken word recognition: Spotting words in other words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, & Cognition, 20, 621-638.
25. NORRIS, D., MCQUEEN, J. M., & CUTLER, A. (1995). Competition and segmentation in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1209-1228.
26. ONNIS, L., MONAGHAN, P., RICHMOND, K., & CHATER, N. (2005). Phonology impacts segmentation in online speech processing. Journal of Memory & Language, 53, 225-237.
27. PERRUCHET, P., & PACTON, S. (2006). Implicit learning and statistical learning: One phenomenon, two approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 223-238.
28. PERRUCHET, P., & VINTER, A (1998). PARSER: A model for word segmentation. Journal of Memory & Language, 39, 246-263.
29. SAFFRAN, J. R., ASLIN, R. N., & NEWPORT, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926-1928.
30. SAFFRAN, J. R., JOHNSON, E. K., ASLIN, R. N., & NEWPORT, E. L. (1999). Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults. Cognition, 70, 27-52.
31. SAFFRAN, J. R., NEWPORT, E. L., & ASLIN, R. N. (1996). Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 606-621.
32. SANDERS, L. D., NEWPORT, E. L., & NEVILLE, H. J. (2002). Segmenting nonsense: An event-related potential index of perceived onsets in continuous speech. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 700-703.
33. SCHNEIDER, W., ESCHMAN, A., & ZUCCOLOTTO, A. (2002a). E-Prime references guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
34. SCHNEIDER, W., ESCHMAN, A., & ZUCCOLOTTO, A. (2002b). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
35. SHUKLA, M., NESPOR, M., & MEHLER, J. (2007). An interaction between prosody and statistics in the segmentation of fluent speech. Cognitive Psychology, 54, 1-32.
36. THIESSEN, E. D., & SAFFRAN, J. R. (2003). When cues collide: Use of stress and statistical cues to word boundaries by 7- to 9-month-old infants. Developmental Psychology, 39, 706-716.
37. TORO, J. M., SINNETT, S., & SOTO- FARACO, S. (2005). Speech segmentation by statistical learning depends on attention. Cognition, 97, B25-B34.
38. VROOMEN, J., TUOMAINEN, J., & DE GELDER, B. (1998). The roles of word stress and vowel harmony in speech segmentation. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 133-149.