Mechanisms of interaction in speech production

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 527-554

  Baese Berk, Melissa ^a   Goldrick, Matthew ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Interactive processes; Lexical phonetic variation; Speech production

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONSONANT; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; LONG TERM MEMORY; MALE; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SEMANTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH ARTICULATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOWEL; WORD LIST RECALL;

EID: 70450237697     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: 14640732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690960802299378     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Andruski, J. E., Blumstein, S. E., & Burton, M. (1994). The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access. Cognition, 52, 163-187.
2. Arnold, J. (2008). Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 495-527.
3. Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (2004). The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47, 31-56.
4. Baayen, R., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.
5. Bailey, T. M., & Hahn, U. (2001). Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or lexical neighborhoods? Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 568-591.
6. Bell, A., Jurafsky, D., Fosler-Lussier, E., Girand, C, Gregory, M., & Gildea, D. (2003). Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversational speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113, 1001-1024.
7. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2002). Praat v. 4.0.8. A system for doing phonetics by computer. Amsterdam: Institute of Phonetic Sciences of the University of Amsterdam.
8. Bradlow, A. R. (2002). Confluent talker- and listener-related forces in clear speech production. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology (Vol. 7, pp. 241-273). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
9. Clopper, C. G., Pisoni, D. B., & Tierney, A. T. (2006). Effects of open-set and closed-set task demands on spoken word recognition. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 17, 331-349.
10. Dell, G.S. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in language production. Psychological Review, 93, 283-321.
11. Ferreira, V. S., Slevc, L. R., & Rogers, E. S. (2005). How do speakers avoid ambiguous linguistic expressions? Cognition, 96, 263-284.
12. 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.
13. Ganong, W. F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 110-125.
14. Garrett, M. F. (1980). Levels of processing in sentence production. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 1, pp. 177-220). New York: Academic Press.
15. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 613-656.
16. Goldrick, M. (2006). Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error and neuropsychological evidence. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 817-855.
17. Goldrick, M., & Blumstein, S. E. (2006). Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 649-683.
18. Goldrick, M., & Rapp, B. (2001). Mrs. Malaprop's neighborhood: Using word errors to reveal neighborhood structure. Poster presented at the Psychonomic Society Annual Meeting.
19. Goldrick, M., & Rapp, B. (2007). Lexical and post-lexical phonological representations in spoken production. Cognition, 102, 219-260.
20. Hartsuiker, R. J., Corley, M., & Martensen, H. (2005). The lexical bias effect is modulated by context, but the standard monitoring account doesn't fly: Related beply to Baars et al. 1975. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 58-70.
21. Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.
22. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words; the neighbourhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36.
23. MacDonald, M. C. (1999). Distributional information in language comprehension, production and acquisition: Three puzzles and a moral. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Emergence of language (pp. 177-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
24. Magnuson, J. S., Dixon, A., Tanenhaus, M., & Aslin, R. (2007). The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive, 31, 133-156.
25. McClelland, J. L., Mirman, D., & Holt, L. L. (2006). Are there interactive processes in speech perception? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 363-369.
26. McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M., & Aslin, R. (2002). Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access. Cognition, 86, B33-B42.
27. Meyer, D. E., & Gordon, P. C. (1985). Speech production: Motor programming of phonetic features. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 3-26.
28. Munson, B. (2007). Lexical access, lexical representation, and vowel production. In J. S. Cole & J. I. Hualde (Eds.), Laboratory phonology (pp. 201-228). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
29. Munson, B., & Solomon, P. N. (2004). The effect of phonological density on vowel articulation. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 47, 1048-1058.
30. Peterson, R. R., & Savoy, P. (1998). Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 539-557.
31. Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2002). Word-specific phonetics. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology (pp. 101-139). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
32. Pluymaekers, M., Ernestus, M., & Baayen, R. (2005). Lexical frequency and acoustic reduction in spoken Dutch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 2561-2569.
33. Rapp, B., & Goldrick, M. (2000). Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. Psychological Review, 107, 460-499.
34. Roelofs, A. (2004). Error biases in spoken word planning and monitoring by aphasic and nonaphasic speakers: Comment on Rapp and Goldrick (2000). Psychological Review, 111, 561-572.
35. Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90, 51-89.
36. Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., Tanenhaus, M. K., Crosswhite, K., Masharov, M., & McDonough, J. (2007). Effects of prosodically-modulated sub-phonetic variations on lexical competition. Cognition, 105, 466-476.
37. Scarborough, R. A. (2003). Lexical confusability and degree of coarticulation. Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society.
38. Scarborough, R. A. (2004). Coarticulation and the structure of the lexicon. Doctoral dissertation. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Los Angeles.
39. Smiljanic, R., & Bradlow, A. R. (2005). Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 1677-1688.
40. Sommers, M. S., Kirk, K. I., & Pisoni, D. B. (1997). Some considerations in evaluating spoken word recognition by normal-hearing, noise-masked normal-hearing, and cochlear implant listeners. I: The effects of response format. Ear and Hearing, 18, 89-99.
41. Vitevitch, M. S. (2002). The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28, 735-747.
42. Vitevitch, M. S., Ambrüster, J., & Chu, S. (2004). Subleixcal and lexical representations in speech production: Effects of phonotactic probability and onset density. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 30, 514-529.
43. Vitevitch, M., S., & Luce, P. A. (2004). A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 36, 481-487.
44. 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.
45. Wright, R. A. (1997). Lexical competition and reduction in speech: A preliminary report. Research on spoken language processing: Progress report. Bloomington, IN: Speech Research Lab, Psychology Department, Indiana University.
46. Wright, R. A. (2004). Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation. In J. J. Local, R. Ogden, & R. Temple (Eds.), Laboratory phonology (Vol. 6, pp. 26-50). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Yaniv, I., Meyer, D. E., Gordon, P. C., Huff, C. A., & Sevald, C. A. (1990). Vowel similarity, connectionist models, and syllable structure in motor programming of speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 1-26.