Exploring the role of exposure frequency in recognizing pronunciation variants

Journal of Phonetics

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 304-311

  Pitt, Mark A ^a   Dilley, Laura ^b   Tat, Michael ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960615560     PISSN: 00954470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.07.004     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bates, D., & Maechler, M. (2009). Ime4: Linear mixed effects models using S4 classes.
2. Bybee J. Phonology and language use 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
3. Connine C.M. It's not what you hear but how often you hear it: On the neglected role of phonological variant frequency in auditory word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2004, 11(6):1084-1089.
4. Connine C.M., Ranbom L.J., Patterson D.J. Processing variant forms in spoken word recognition: The role of variant frequency. Perception & Psychophysics 2008, 70(3):403-411.
5. de Jong K. Stress-related variation in the articulation of coda alveolar stops: Flapping revisited. Journal of Phonetics 1998, 26:283-310.
6. Ernestus, M., & Baayen, H. (2007). The comprehension of acoustically reduced morphologically complex words: The roles of deletion, duration, and frequency of occurrence. In Proceedings of the international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 773-776). Saarbruecken.
7. Ganong W.F. Phonetic categorization in auditory perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1980, 6:110-125.
8. Godfrey, J., Holliman, E., & McDaniel, J. (1992). SWITCHBOARD: Telephone speech corpus for research and development. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, & signal processing (IEEE ICASSP-92) (pp. 517-520). San Francisco: IEEE.
9. Goldwater, S. (2007). Nonparametric Bayesian models of lexical acquisition. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Brown University.
10. Gomez R. Statistical learning in infant language development. The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics 2007, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. G.M. Gaskell (Ed.).
11. Jaeger T.F. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:434-446.
12. Janse E., Nooteboom S.G., Quene H. Coping with gradient forms of /t/-deletion and lexical ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes 2007, 22(2):161-200.
13. Johnson K. Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology. Journal of Phonetics 2006, 34:485-499.
14. McLennan C.T., Luce P.A., Charles-Luce J. Representation of lexical form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2003, 29:539-553.
15. McLennan C.T., Luce P.A., Charles-Luce J. Representation of lexical form: Evidence from studies of sublexical ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31:1308-1314.
16. McMahon A. An introduction to English phonology 2002, Oxford University Press, New York.
17. Mitterer H., Ernestus M. Listeners recover [t]s that speakers reduce: Evidence from /t/-lenition in Dutch. Journal of Phonetics 2006, 34:73-103.
18. Mitterer H., McQueen J.M. Processing reduced word-forms in speech perception using probabilistic knowledge about speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2009, 35:244-263.
19. Patterson D.J., Connine C.M. A corpus analysis of variant frequency in American English flap production. Phonetica 2001, 58(4):254-275.
20. Patterson D.J., LoCasto P., Connine C.M. A corpus analysis of schwa vowel deletion frequency in American English. Phonetica 2003, 60:45-68.
21. Pierrehumbert J. Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology. Language and Speech 2003, 46(2-3):115-154.
22. Pitt, M.A., Dilley, L., Johnson, K., Kiesling, S., Raymond, W., Hume, E., & Fosler-Lussier, E. (2007). Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech (Final release) [www.buckeyecorpus.osu.edu] Columbus, OH: Department of Psychology, Ohio State University (Distributor).
23. Pitt M. The strength and time course of lexical activation of pronunciation variants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2009, 35:896-910.
24. R Core Development Team. (2009). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from on May 24, 2010. http://www.R-project.org.
25. Ranbom L.J., Connine C.M. Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 57:273-298.
26. Raymond W., Dautricourt R., Hume E. Word-internal /t,d/ deletion in spontaneous speech: Modeling the effects of extra-linguistic, lexical, and phonological factors. Language Variation and Change 2006, 18:55-97.
27. Saffran J.R. Statistical language learning: Mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2003, 12:110-114.
28. Shockey L. Sound patterns of spoken English 2003, Blackwell, Cambridge.
29. Tucker, B.V., & Warner, N. (2007). Inhibition of processing due to reduction of the American English flap. In Proceedings of the 16th international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 1949-1952). Saarbruecken.
30. Zue V., Laferriere M. Acoustic study of medial /t,d/ in American English. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1979, 66(4):1039-1050.