Segmentation by lexical subtraction in Hungarian speakers of second-language English

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 544-554

  White, Laurence ^a   Melhorn, James F ^b   Mattys, Sven L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cross modal priming; Lexical information; Prosody; Second language; Speech segmentation

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUNGARY; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE TEST; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STUDENT; UNITED KINGDOM; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CUES; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; HUNGARY; LANGUAGE TESTS; MALE; MULTILINGUALISM; PHONETICS; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES; VOCABULARY;

EID: 77949562137     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210903006971     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modelling with crossed random effects for subject and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390-412.
2. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database (Release 2). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.
3. Bortfeld, H., Morgan, J. L., Golinkoff, R. M., & Rathbun, K. (2005). Mommy and me. Psychological Science, 16, 298-304.
4. Cutler, A., & Butterfield, S. (1992). Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 218-236.
5. Cutler, A., & Carter, D. M. (1987). The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary. Computer Speech and Language, 2, 133-142.
6. Cutler, A., Mehler, J., Norris, D. G., & Seguí, J. (1992). The monolingual nature of speech segmentation by bilinguals. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 384-410.
7. 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.
8. Fónagy, I. (1958). A hangsúlyról [On stress]. In P. Fábián (Ed.), Nyelvtudományi Értekezések (Vol. 18). Budapest, Hungary: Akadémiai Kiadó.
9. Hamers, J. F., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Bilingual interdependencies in auditory perception. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 303-310.
10. Honbolygó, F., Csépe, V., & Ragó, A. (2004). Suprasegmental speech cues are automatically processed by the human brain: A mismatch negativity study. Neuroscience Letters, 363, 84-88.
11. Jusczyk, P. W., Houston, D. M., & Newsome, M. (1999). The beginnings of word segmentation in English-learning infants. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 159-207.
12. Liss, J. M., Spitzer, S., Caviness, J. N., Adler, C., & Edwards, B. (1998). Syllabic strength and lexical boundary decisions in the perception of hypokinetic dysarthric speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 2457-2466.
13. Mády, K., Bombien, L., & Reichel, U. D. (2008). Is Hungarian losing the vowel quantity distinction? In R. Sock, S. Fuchs, & Y. Laprie (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Seminar on Speech Production, Strasbourg (pp. 445-448). Strasbourg, France: INRIA.
14. Mattys, S. L. (2004). Stress versus coarticulation: Toward an integrated approach to explicit speech segmentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 397-408.
15. 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.
16. Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory & Cognition, 9, 225-236.
17. Sanders, L. D., Neville, H. J., & Woldorff, M. G. (2002). Speech segmentation of native and non- native speakers: The use of lexical, syntactic and stress pattern cues. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 45, 519-530.
18. Siptár, P., & Törkenczy, M. (2000). The phonology of Hungarian. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
19. Smith, M. R., Cutler, A., Butterfield, S., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (1989). The perception of rhythm and word boundaries in noise-masked speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 912-920.
20. Taalas, P. (1999). DIALANG: An Internet-based system for diagnostic language assessment. Proceedings of WebNet World Conference on the WWW and Internet 1999 (p. 1766). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
21. Vroomen, J., Tuomainen, J., & de Gelder, B. (1998). The roles of word stress and vowel harmony in speech segmentation. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 133-149.
22. Weber, A. (2000). The role of phonotactics in the segmentation of native and non-native continuous speech. In A. Cutler, J. McQueen, & R. Zondervan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Spoken Access Processes (pp. 143-146). Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.