Lexical similarity and speech production: Neighborhoods for nonwords

Lingua

Volumn 122, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 164-176

  Scarborough, Rebecca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Hyperarticulation; Nasal coarticulation; Neighborhood density; Nonwords

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856085650     PISSN: 00243841     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Baayen R.H., Piepenbrock R., Gulikers L. The CELEX Lexical Database (Release 2) [CD-ROM] 1995, Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania [distributor], Philadelphia, PA.
2. Baese-Berk M., Goldrick M. Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes 2009, 24:527-554.
3. Bailey T.M., Hahn U. Phoneme similarity and confusability. Journal of Memory and Language 2005, 52:339-362.
4. Beddor P.S., Krakow R.A. Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: evidence for partial compensation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1999, 106:2868-2887.
5. Bradlow A.R., Torretta G.M., Pisoni D.B. Intelligibility of normal speech I: global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics. Speech Communication 1996, 20:255-272.
6. Chen, M.Y., 1996. Acoustic Correlates of Nasality in Speech. Ph.D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
7. Chen M.Y. Acoustic correlates of English and French nasalized vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1997, 102:2360-2370.
8. Dell G.S. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in speech production. Psychological review 1986, 93:283-321.
9. Fowler C.A. Segmentation of coarticulated speech in perception. Perception & Psychophysics 1984, 36:359-368.
10. Fowler C.A. Parsing coarticulated speech in perception: effects of coarticulation resistance. Journal of Phonetics 2005, 33:199-213.
11. Fowler C.A., Smith M.R. Speech perception as vector analysis: an approach to the problem of invariance and segmentation. Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes 1986, 123-139. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. J.S. Perkell, D.H. Klatt (Eds.).
12. Frisch S., Pierrehumbert J., Broe M. Similarity avoidance and the OCP. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2004, 22:179-228.
13. Greenberg J.H., Jenkins J.J. Studies in the psychological correlates of the sound system of American English. Word 1964, 20:157-177.
14. Levelt W.J.M., Roelofs A., Meyer A.S. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Brain and Behavioral Sciences 1999, 22:1-75.
15. Lindblom B. Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H&H theory. Speech Production and Speech Modeling 1990, 403-439. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands. W.J. Hardcastle, A. Marchal (Eds.).
16. Luce, P.A., 1986. Neighborhoods of words in the mental lexicon. Research on Speech Perception Progress Report, No. 6. Indiana University, Psychology Department, Speech Research Laboratory, Bloomington.
17. Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing 1998, 19:1-36.
18. Mann V., Repp B. Influence of vocalic context on perception of the [Š]-[s] distinction. Perception & Psychophysics 1980, 28:213-228.
19. Manuel S.Y. Speakers nasalize after /n/, but listeners still hear. Journal of Phonetics 1995, 23:453-476.
20. Miller G.A., Nicely P. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 1955, 27:338-352.
21. Munson B., Solomon N.P. The effect of phonological neighborhood density on vowel articulation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2004, 47:1048-1058.
22. Pierrehumbert J. Word-specific phonetics. Papers in Laboratory Phonology VII 2002, 101-139. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. C. Gussenhoven, N. Warner (Eds.).
23. Repp B.H. Coarticulation in sequences of two nonhomorganic stop consonants: perceptual and acoustic evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1983, 74:420-427.
24. Scarborough, R., 2004. Coarticulation and the Structure of the Lexicon. UCLA Dissertation.
25. Scarborough R. Lexical and contextual predictability: confluent effects on the production of vowels. Laboratory Phonology 2010, vol. 10:557-586. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
26. Schunn, C.D., 1999. Statistical significance bars (SSB): A way to make graphs more interpretable. Unpublished manuscript. http://www.lrdc.pitt.edu/schunn/SSB/SSBpaper.html.
27. Shattuck-Huffnagel S., Klatt D. 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.
28. Stemberger J.P. Wordshape errors in language production. Cognition 1990, 35:123-157.
29. Vitevitch M.S. The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms. Language and Speech 1997, 40:211-228.
30. Vitevitch M.S. The influence of sublexical and lexical representations on the processing of spoken words in English. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 2003, 17:487-499.
31. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. When words compete: levels of processing in perception of spoken words. Psychological Science 1998, 9:325-329.
32. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A. Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 40:374-408.
33. Vitevitch M.S., Sommers M.S. The facilitative influence of phonological similarity and neighborhood frequency in speech production in younger and older adults. Memory & Cognition 2003, 31:491-504.
34. Vitevitch M.S., Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B., Auer E.T. Phonotactics, neighborhood activation, and lexical access for spoken words. Brain and Language 1999, 68:306-311.
35. Whalen D. Subcategorical phonetic mismatches slow phonetic judgments. Perception & Psychophysics 1984, 35:49-64.
36. Wright, R., 1997. Lexical competition and reduction in speech: a preliminary report. Research on Spoken Language Processing Progress Report, No. 21. Indiana University, Psychology Department, Speech Research Laboratory, Bloomington.
37. Wright R. Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation. Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI 2004, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. J.J. Local, R. Ogden, R. Temple (Eds.).