Cascading influences on the production of speech: Evidence from articulation

Cognition

Volumn 117, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 243-260

  McMillan, Corey T ^a   Corley, Martin ^b  

^a HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Articulation; Phonemic similarity; Speech production

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPETITION; CONSONANT; ELECTROPALATOGRAPHY; HUMAN; PALATE; PHONEME; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH ARTICULATION; TONGUE; ULTRASOUND; VOICE ONSET TIME;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; PHONETICS; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; SPEECH; SPEECH ARTICULATION TESTS;

EID: 78049411931     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.019     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Articulate Instruments Ltd. (2007a). Articulate assistant advanced user guide: Version 2.07, Edinburgh, UK.
2. Articulate Instruments Ltd. (2007b). Articulate assistant user guide: Version 1.16, Edinburgh, UK.
3. Baars B.J. A dozen competing-plans techniques for inducing predictable slips in speech and action. Experimental slips and human error: Exploring the architecture of volition 1992, 129-150. Plenum Press, New York. B.J. Baars (Ed.).
4. Baayen R.H. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
5. Baddeley A.D. Short-term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic, and formal similarity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1966, 18:362-365.
6. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2008). Lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-25.
7. Bock K. Meaning, sound, and syntax: Lexical priming in sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1986, 12:575-586.
8. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2006). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 4.5.01). Computer program.
9. Browman C.P., Goldstein L. Articulatory gestures as phonological units. Phonology 1989, 6:201-251.
10. Butterworth B., Whittaker S. Peggy Babcock's relatives. Tutorials in motor behavior 1980, 647-656. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam. G.E. Stelmach, J. Requin (Eds.).
11. Chomsky N., Halle M. The sound pattern of english 1968, Harper and Row, New York.
12. Corley, M., Brocklehurst, P. H., & Moat, H. S. (in press). Error biases in inner and overt speech: Evidence from tonguetwisters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition.
13. Cox T.F., Cox M.A.A. Multidimensional scaling 1994, Chapman and Hall, London.
14. Dell G.S. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 1986, 93:283-321.
15. Dell G.S., Reich P.A. Stages in sentence production: An analysis of speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1981, 20:611-629.
16. Dell G.S., Repka R.J. Errors in inner speech. Experimental slips and human error: Exploring the architecture of volition 1992, 237-262. Plenum, New York. B.J. Baars (Ed.).
17. Dunlap W.P., Kemery E.R. Failure to detect moderating effects: Is multicollinearity the problem?. Psychological Bulletin 1987, 102:418-420.
18. Frisch, S. A. (1996). Similarity and frequency in phonology. PhD thesis, Northwestern University.
19. Frisch S.A. Walking the tightrope between cognition and articulation: The state of the art in the phonetics of speech errors. MIT working papers in linguistics 2007, Vol. 53:155-172. MIT. C.T. Schütze, V.S. Ferreira (Eds.).
20. Frisch S.A., Wright R. The phonetics of phonological speech errors: An acoustic analysis of slips of the tongue. Journal of Phonetics 2002, 30:139-162.
21. Garrett M.F. Levels of processing in sentence production. Speech and talk 1980, Vol. 1:177-220. Academic Press, New York, NY. B. Butterworth (Ed.).
22. Goldrick M. Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error, and neuropsychological evidence. Language and Cognitive Processes 2006, 21:817-855.
23. Goldrick M., Blumstein S.E. Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters. Language and Cognitive Processes 2006, 21:649-683.
24. Goldstein L., Pouplier M., Chen L., Saltzman E., Byrd D. Dynamic action units slip in speech production errors. Cognition 2007, 103:386-412.
25. Kupin J.J. Tongue-twisters as a source of information about speech production 1982, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, USA.
26. Laver J. Slips of the tongue as neuromuscular evidence for a model of speech production. Temporal variables in speech: Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler 1980, Mouton, The Hague. H.W. Dechert, M. Raupach (Eds.).
27. Levelt W.J.M. Speaking: From intention to articulation 1989, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
28. Levelt W.J.M., Roelofs A., Meyer A.S. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral & Brain Sciences 1999, 22:1-75.
29. Levitt A.G., Healy A.F. The roles of phoneme frequency, similarity, and availability in the experimental elicitation of speech errors. Journal of Memory and Language 1985, 24:717-733.
30. Liberman A.M., Cooper F.S., Shankweiler D.P., Studdert-Kennedy M. Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review 1967, 74:431-460.
31. Lisker L., Abramson A.S. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word 1964, 20:384-422.
32. MacKay D.G. Spoonerisms: The structure of errors in the serial order of speech. Neuropsychologia 1970, 8:323-350.
33. MacKay D.G. Speech errors: Retrospect and prospect. Errors in linguistic performance 1980, Academic Press, New York. V.A. Fromkin (Ed.).
34. McMillan, C. T. (2008). Articulatory evidence for interactivity in speech production. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.
35. McMillan C.T., Corley M., Lickley R. Articulatory evidence for feedback and competition in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes 2009, 24:44-66.
36. Meringer R., Mayer C. Versprechen und Verlesen: eine Psychologisch-Linguistiche Studie 1978, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
37. Mowrey R.A., MacKay I.R. Phonological primitives: Electromyographic speech error evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1990, 88:1299-1312.
38. Nooteboom S.G. The tongue slips into patterns. Leyden studies in linguistics and phonetics 1969, 114-132. Mouton, The Hague. A.J. van Essen, A.A. van Raad (Eds.).
39. Nooteboom S.G. Lexical bias revisited: Detecting, rejecting and repairing speech errors in inner speech. Speech Communication 2005, 47:43-58.
40. Nooteboom S.G. Listening to one-self: Monitoring in speech production. Phonological encoding and monitoring in normal and pathological speech 2005, Psychology Press, Hove, UK. R. Hartsuiker, R. Bastiaanse, A. Postma, F. Wijnen (Eds.).
41. Nooteboom S.G., Quené H. The SLIP technique as a window on the mental preparation of speech: Some methodological considerations. Experimental approaches to phonology 2007, 339-350. Oxford University Press, Oxford. M.J. Solé, P.S. Beddor, M. Ohala (Eds.).
42. Oppenheim G.M., Dell G.S. Inner speech slips exhibit lexical bias, but not the phonemic similarity effect. Cognition 2008, 106:528-537.
43. Pikovsky A., Rosenblum M., Kurths J. Synchronization: A universal concept in the nonlinear sciences 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
44. Postma A., Noordanus C. Production and detection of speech errors in silent, mouthed, noise-masked, and normal auditory feedback speech. Language and Speech 1996, 39:375-392.
45. Pouplier, M. (2003). Units of phonological coding: Empirical evidence. PhD thesis, Yale University.
46. Pouplier M. An ultrasound investigation of speech errors. Working Papers and Reports of the Vocal Tract Visualization Laboratory 2004, 6:1-17.
47. Pouplier M. Tongue kinematics during utterances elicited with the SLIP technique. Language and Speech 2007, 50:311-341.
48. Pouplier M. The role of a coda consonant as error trigger in repetition tasks. Journal of Phonetics 2008, 36:114-140.
49. R Development Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2008, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
50. Rapp B., Goldrick M. Feedback by any other name is still interactivity: A reply to Roelofs (2004). Psychological Review 2004, 111:573-578.
51. Shattuck-Hufnagel S. Speech errors as evidence for a serial-ordering mechanism in sentence production. Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett 1979, 295-342. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. W.E. Cooper, E.C.T. Walker (Eds.).
52. Shattuck-Hufnagel S. Sublexical units and suprasegmental structure in speech production planning. The production of speech 1983, 109-136. Springer-Verlag, New York. P.F. MacNeilage (Ed.).
53. Shattuck-Hufnagel S. The representation of phonological information during speech production planning: Evidence from vowel errors in spontaneous speech. Phonology Yearbook 1986, 3:117-149.
54. Shattuck-Hufnagel S., Klatt D.H. The limited use of distinctive features and markedness in speech production: Evidence from speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1979, 18:41-55.
55. Stearns, A. M. (2006). Production and perception of place of articulation errors. Master's thesis, University of South Florida.
56. Stemberger J.P. The nature of segments in the lexicon: Evidence from speech errors. Lingua 1982, 56:235-259.
57. Stemberger J.P. An interactive activation model of language production. Progress in the psychology of language 1985, 143-186. Erlbaum, London. A.W. Ellis (Ed.).
58. Stemberger J.P. Apparent anti-frequency effects in language production: The addition bias and phonological underspecification. Journal of Memory and Language 1991, 30:161-185.
59. Stone M. A guide to analysing tongue motion from ultrasound images. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2005, 19:455-502.
60. Tauroza S., Allison D. Speech rates in British English. Applied Linguistics 1990, 11:90-105.
61. del Viso S., Igoa J.M., Garcia-Albea J.E. On the autonomy of phonological encoding: Evidence from slips of the tongue in Spanish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1991, 20:161-185.
62. Vousden J.I., Brown G.D.A., Harley T.A. Serial control of phonology in speech production: A hierarchical model. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 41:101-175.
63. Wilshire C.E. The " tongue twister" paradigm as a technique for studying phonological encoding. Language and Speech 1999, 42:57-82.