Vowel discrimination by English, French and Turkish speakers: Evidence for an exemplar-based approach to speech perception

Phonetica

Volumn 66, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 222-242

  Ettlinger, Marc ^a   Johnson, Keith ^b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE TEST; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHONETICS; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ADULT; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LANGUAGE TESTS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PHONETICS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77951845009     PISSN: 00318388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000298584     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Archangeli, D.B.: Grounded phonology (MIT Press, Cambridge 1994).
2. Balota, D.A.; Chumbley, J.I.: Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. J. exp. Psychol. hum. Percept. Perform. 10: 340-357 (1984).
3. Best, C.T.: A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception; in Strange, Speech perception and linguistic experience: theoretical and methodological issues in cross-language speech research, pp. 167-200 (Timonium, York 1995).
4. Best, C.T.; McRoberts, G.W.; Goodell, E.: Discrimination of non-native consonant contrasts varying in perceptual assimilation to the listener's native phonological system. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 109: 775 (2001). (Pubitemid 32144011)
5. Boersma, P.; Weenink, D.: Praat: Doing phonetics by computer; version 4.2 (2005). URL: www.praat.org.
6. Bohn, O.S.: Cross-language speech perception in adults: first language transfer doesn't tell it all; in Strange, Speech perception and linguistic experience: issues in cross-language research, pp. 279-304 (York Press, Baltimore 1995).
7. Boomershine, A.; Currie Hall, K.; Hume, B.; Johnson, K.: The influence of allophony vs. contrast on perception: the case of Spanish and English; in Avery, Dresher, Rice, Phonological contrast (Mouton, The Hague 2008).
8. Browman, C.P.; Goldstein, L.: Towards an articulatory phonology; in Ewen, Anderson, Phonol. Yb., vol. 3, pp. 219-252 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1986).
9. Browman, C.P.; Goldstein, L.: Articulatory phonology: an overview. Phonetica 49: 155-180 (1992).
10. Chomsky, N.; Halle, M.: The sound pattern of English (Harper & Row, New York 1968).
11. Clopper, C.G.; Pisoni, D.B.: Effects of talker variability on perceptual learning of dialects. Lang. Speech 47: 207-239 (2004). (Pubitemid 40145118)
12. Condax, J.D.; Krones, R.R.: Duration of four vowels in manually produced synthetic speech. J. Phonet. 4: 151-171 (1976).
13. Cowan, N.; Morse, P.A.: The use of auditory and phonetic memory in vowel discrimination. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 79: 500-507 (1986). (Pubitemid 16186564)
14. De Boer, B.: The origins of vowel systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2001).
15. Eimas, P.D.: The relation between identification and discrimination along speech and non-speech continua. Lang. Speech 6: 206-217 (1963).
16. Ettlinger, M.: An exemplar-based model of chain shifts. Proc. 16th Int. Congr. Phonet. Sci., 2007, pp. 685-688.
17. Fant, G.: Speech sounds and features (MIT Press, Cambridge 1973).
18. Fischer-Jørgensen, E.; Jørgensen, H.P.: Close and loose contact ('Anschluss') with special reference to North German. Annu. Rep. Inst. Phonet. Univ. Copenh. 4: 43-80 (1969).
19. Flege, J.E.: Speech learning in a second language; in Phonological development: models, research, implications, pp. 565-604 (York Press, Timonium 1992).
20. Fox, R.A.: Effect of lexical status on phonetic categorization. J. exp. Psychol. hum. Percept. Perform. 10: 526-540 (1984).
21. Francis, A.L.; Nusbaum, H.C.: Selective attention and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. J. exp. Psychol. hum. Percept. Perform. 28: 349-366 (2002).
22. Goldinger, S.D.: Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. J. exp. Psychol. Learn. Memory Cognit. 22: 1166-1183 (1996).
23. Goldinger, S.D.: Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychol. Rev. 105: 251-279 (1998).
24. Goldinger, S.D.: A complementary-systems approach to abstract and episodic speech perception. 16th Int. Congr. Phonet. Sci., 2007.
25. Goldstein, L.; Fowler, C.A.: Articulatory phonology: a phonology for public language use; in Schiller, Meyer, Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: differences and similarities, pp. 159-207 (Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin 2003).
26. Grieser, D.; Kuhl, P.K.: Categorization of speech by infants: support for speech-sound prototypes. Devl Psychol. 25: 577-588 (1989).
27. Hall, C.: Modern German pronunciation: an introduction for speakers of English (Manchester University Press, Manchester 2003).
28. Hintzman, D.L.; Block, R.; Inskeep, N.: Memory for mode of input. J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav. 11: 741-749 (1972).
29. Huang, T.: Language specificity in auditory perception of Chinese tones; PhD diss. Ohio State University (2004).
30. Iverson, P.; Kuhl, P.K.: Mapping the perceptual magnet effect for speech using signal detection theory and multidimensional scaling. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 97: 553-562 (1995).
31. Iverson, P.; Kuhl, P.K.; Akahane-Yamada, R.; Diesch, E.; Tohkura, Y.; Kettermann, A.; Siebert, C.: A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition 87: B47-B57 (2003). (Pubitemid 36034228)
32. Jakobson, R.; Fant, G.; Halle, M.: Preliminaries to speech analysis (MIT Press, Cambridge 1952).
33. Jessen, M.: Phonetics and phonology of tense and lax obstruents in German (Benjamins, Amsterdam 1998).
34. Johnson, K.: Speech perception without speaker normalization: an exemplar model; in Johnson, Mullennix, Talker variability in speech processing, pp. 145-165 (Academic Press, San Diego 1997).
35. Johnson, K.: Cross-linguistic perceptual differences emerge from the lexicon; in Agwuele, Warren, Park, Proc. 2003 Texas Linguistics Soc. Conf., pp. 26-41 (Cascadilla Press, Somerville 2004).
36. Johnson, K.: Quantitative methods in linguistics (Blackwell, Oxford 2008).
37. Johnson, K.; Babel, M.: On the perceptual basis of distinctive features: Evidence from the perception of fricatives by Dutch and English speakers. J. Phonet. 38: 127-138 (2010).
38. Kiliç, M.A.; Ögüt, F.: A high unrounded vowel in Turkish: is it a central or back vowel? Speech Commun. 43: 143-154 (2004).
39. Kiliç, M.A.; Ögüt, F.; Dursun, G.; Okur, E.; Yildirim, I.; Midilli, R.: The effects of vowels on voice perturbation measures. J. Voice 18: 318-324 (2004). (Pubitemid 39164282)
40. Lang, C.E.; Ohala, J.J.: Temporal cues for vowels and universals of vowel inventories. ICSLP 96, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Spoken Language, vol. 1, 1996.
41. Levy, E.S.: Language experience and consonantal context effects on perceptual assimilation of French vowels by American-English learners of French. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 125: 1138 (2009).
42. Liberman, A.M.; Mattingly, I.G.: A specialization for speech perception. Science 243: 489-494 (1989).
43. Liberman, A.M., Harris, K.S., Hoffman, H.S., Griffith, B.C.: The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. J. exp. Psychol. 54: 358-368 (1957).
44. Lindblom, B.; Liljencrantz, J.: Numerical simulation of vowel quality systems: the role of perceptual contrast. Language 48: 839-862 (1972).
45. Lively, S.E.; Pisoni, D.B.; Yamada, R.A.; Yamada, T.: Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /1/. III. Long-term retention of new phonetic categories. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 96: 2076 (1994). (Pubitemid 24311635)
46. Maddieson, I.; Precoda, K.: Updating UPSID. UCLA Working Papers Phonet. 74: 104-111 (1990).
47. Massaro, D.W.: Experimental psychology and information processing (Rand McNally, Chicago 1975).
48. McNeil, D.; Lindig, K.: The perceptual reality of phonemes, syllables, words, and sentences. J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav. 12: 419-430 (1973).
49. McQueen, J.M.; Cutler, A.; Norris, D.: Phonological abstraction in the mental lexicon. Cognitive Sci. 30; 1113-1126 (2006).
50. Mielke, J.: The emergence of distinctive features (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2008).
51. Norris, D.; McQueen, J.M.; Cutler, A.: Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychol. 47: 204-238 (2003). (Pubitemid 37041619)
52. Nosofsky, R.M.: Attention, similarity, and the identification- categorization relationship. J. exp. Psychol. 115: 39-57 (1986).
53. Oudeyer, P.Y.: The self-organization of speech sounds. J. theor. Biol. 233: 435-449 (2005).
54. Pierrehumbert, J.: Exemplar dynamics: word frequency, lenition, and contrast; in Bybee, Hopper, Frequency effects and the emergence of lexical structure, pp. 137-157 (Benjamins, Amsterdam 2001).
55. Pisoni, D.B.: Some comments on talker normalization in speech perception; in Tohkura, Vatikiotis-Bateson, Sagisaka, Speech perception, production and linguistic structure, pp. 143-151 (Ohmsha, Tokyo 1992).
56. Pisoni, D.B.; Sawusch, J.R.: Some stages of processing in speech perception; in Cohen, Nooteboom, Structure and process in speech perception, pp. 16-35 (Springer, New York 1975).
57. Poeppel, D.; Idsardi, W.; van Wassenhove, V.: Speech perception at the interface of neuroscience and linguistics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 363: 1071-1086 (2008). (Pubitemid 351158935)
58. Polka, L.; Bohn, O.S.: A cross language comparison of vowel perception in English learning and German learning infants. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 100: 577 (1986).
59. Polka, L.; Werker, J.F.: Developmental changes in perception of nonnative vowel contrasts. J. exp. Psychol. 20: 421-435 (1994).
60. Repp, B.H.; Crowder, R.G.: Stimulus order effects in vowel discrimination. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 88: 2080-2090 (1990).
61. Schacter, D.L.; Eich, J.E.; Tulving, E.: Richard Semon's theory of memory. J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav. 17: 721-743 (1978).
62. Singh, S.; Woods, D.R.: Perceptual structure of 12 American English vowels. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 49: 1861 (1971).
63. Stevens, K.N.: Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 111: 1872-1891 (2002).
64. Strange, W.; Weber, A.; Levy, E.S.; Shafiro, V.; Hisagi, M.; Nishi, K.: Acoustic variability within and across German, French, and American English vowels: phonetic context effects. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 122: 1111-1129 (2007). (Pubitemid 47205509)
65. Sussman, J.E.; Lauckner Morano, V.J.: Further tests of the 'perceptual magnet effect' in the perception of [i]: identification and change/no change discrimination. J. acoust. Soc. Am. 97: 539 (1995).
66. Wedel, A.B.: Self-organization and categorical behavior in phonology; PhD thesis University of California at Santa Cruz (2004).
67. Weide, R.L.: CMU pronouncing dictionary (1994). Downloaded from http://www.speech.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/cmudict on February 1, 2010.
68. Whaley, C.P.: Word-nonword classification time. J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav. 17: 143-154 (1978).