Exaggeration of featural contrasts in clarifications of misheard speech in English

Journal of Phonetics

Volumn 41, Issue 3-4, 2013, Pages 249-263

  Schertz, Jessamyn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877338927     PISSN: 00954470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2013.03.007     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Ainsworth W. Duration as a cue in the recognition of synthetic vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1972, 51(2B):648-651.
2. Baese-Berk M., Goldrick M. Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes 2009, 24(4):527-554.
3. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2011). Praat: Doing Phonetics by computer, version 5.3:. http://www.praat.org.
4. Bradlow A. Confluent talker- and listener-oriented forces in clear speech production. Laboratory phonology 2002, Vol. 7:241-273. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.
5. Bradlow A., Kraus N., Hayes E. Speaking clearly for children with learning disabilities. Sentence perception in noise. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2003, 46(1):80-97.
6. Bradlow A., Torretta G.M., Pisoni D.B. Intelligibility of normal speech I. Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics. Speech Communication 1996, 20(3):255-272.
7. Cho T. Prosodic strengthening and featural enhancement. Evidence from acoustic and articulatory realizations of /a, i/ in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2005, 117(6):3867-3878.
8. Cho T., Keating P. Articulatory and acoustic studies of domain-initial strengthening in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 2001, 29(2):155-190.
9. Cho T., Keating P. Effects of initial position versus prominence in English. Journal of Phonetics 2009, 37(4):466-485.
10. Cho T., Lee Y., Kim S. Communicatively driven versus prosodically driven hyper-articulation in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 2011, 39(3):344-361.
11. Cho T., McQueen J. Prosodic influences on consonant production in Dutch. Effects of prosodic boundaries, phrasal accent and lexical stress. Journal of Phonetics 2005, 33(2):121-157.
12. Choi, H. (2003). Prosody-induced acoustic variation in English stop consonants. In Proceedings of the 15th international congress of phonetic sciences (pp. 2661-2664).
13. Cooke M., Lu Y. Spectral and temporal changes to speech produced in the presence of energetic and informational maskers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2010, 128(4):2059-2069.
14. de Jong, K. (1995). On the status of redundant features. In B. Connell, & A. Arvaniti (Eds.). Laboratory phonology 4: Phonology and phonetic evidence (pp. 68-86).
15. de Jong K. Stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus in English. Patterns of variation in vowel duration. Journal of Phonetics 2004, 32(4):493-516.
16. de Jong K., Zawaydeh B.A. Comparing stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus. Patterns of variation in Arabic vowel duration. Journal of Phonetics 2002, 30(1):53-75.
17. Erickson D. Articulation of extreme formant patterns for emphasized vowels. Phonetica 2002, 59(2-3):134-149.
18. Escudero P., Boersma P., Rauber A., Bion R. A cross-dialect acoustic description of vowels. Brazilian and European Portuguese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2009, 126(3):1379-1393.
19. Ferguson S., Kewley-Port D. Talker differences in clear and conversational speech. Acoustic characteristics of vowels. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2007, 50(5):1241-1255.
20. Ferguson S., Poore M., Shrivastav R., Kendrick A., McGinnis M., Perigoe C. Acoustic correlates of reported clear speech strategies. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology 2010, 43:45-64.
21. Garnier M., Henrich N., Dubois D. Influence of sound immersion and communicative interaction on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2010, 53(3):588-608.
22. Granlund S., Hazan V., Baker R. An acoustic-phonetic comparison of the clear speaking styles of Finnish-English late bilinguals. Journal of Phonetics 2012, 40(3):509-520.
23. Hazan V., Baker R. Acoustic-phonetic characteristics of speech produced with communicative intent to counter adverse listening conditions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2011, 130(4):2139-2152.
24. Hillenbrand J.M., Clark M.J., Houde R.A. Some effects of duration on vowel recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2000, 108(6):3013-3022.
25. Kang, K.-H. (2009). Clear speech production and perception of Korean stops and the sound change in Korean stops. Ph.D. thesis, University of Oregon.
26. Kang K.-H., Guion S. Clear speech production of Korean stops. Changing phonetic targets and enhancement strategies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008, 124(6):3909-3917.
27. Kessinger R., Blumstein S. Effects of speaking rate on voice-onset time in Thai, French, and English. Journal of Phonetics 1997, 25(2):143-168.
28. Kirov, C., & Wilson, C. (2012). Specificity of online variation in speech production. Poster presentation at the annual meeting of the linguistic society of America, Portland, OR.
29. Koopmans-van Beinum, F. J. (1980). Vowel contrast reduction, an acoustic and perceptual study of Dutch vowels in various speech conditions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.
30. Krause J.C., Braida L.D. Acoustic properties of naturally produced clear speech at normal speaking rates. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2004, 115(1):362-378.
31. Kuzla C., Ernestus M. Prosodic conditioning of phonetic detail in German plosives. Journal of Phonetics 2011, 39(2):143-155.
32. Ladefoged P., Kameny I., Brackenridge W. Acoustic effects of style of speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1976, 59(1):228-231.
33. Levow, G. (1999). Understanding recognition failures in spoken corrections in human-computer dialogue. In Proceedings of the ESCA workshop on dialogue and prosody (pp. 736-742), Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
34. Lindblom B. The status of phonetic gestures. Modularity and the motor theory of speech perception 1990, 7-31. Psychology Press. I.G. Mattingly, M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.).
35. Lisker L., Abramson A. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops. Acoustical measurements. Word 1964, 20:384-422.
36. Liu S., Zeng F. Temporal properties in clear speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 120(1):424-432.
37. Maniwa K., Jongman A., Wade T. Acoustic characteristics of clearly spoken English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2009, 125(6):3962-3973.
38. Moon S.-J., Lindblom B. Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1994, 96(1):40-55.
39. Nielsen K. Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation. Journal of Phonetics 2011, 39(2):132-142.
40. Ohala J. Acoustic study of clear speech. A test of the contrastive hypothesis. International symposium on prosody 1994.
41. Oviatt S., Bernard J., Levow G.-A. Linguistic adaptations during spoken and multimodal error resolution. Language and Speech 1998, 41:419-442.
42. Oviatt S., Levow G., Moreton E., MacEachern M. Modeling global and focal hyperarticulation during human-computer error resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1998, 104(5):3080-3098.
43. Perkell J.S., Zandipour M., Matthies M.L., Lane H. Economy of effort in different speaking conditions 1. A preliminary study of intersubject differences and modeling issues. Psychology Faculty Publications 2002.
44. Picheny M.A., Durlach N.I., Braida L. Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing II. Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 1986, 29:434-446.
45. Schertz J. Featural enhancement in clarification of misheard stops in Spanish. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2012, 132(3):1937.
46. Schum D.J. Intelligibility of clear and conversational speech of young and elderly talkers. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 1996, 7(3):212-218.
47. Shattuck-Hufnagel S., Turk A. A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1996, 25:193-247.
48. Smiljanić R., Bradlow A. Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2005, 118(3):1677-1688.
49. Smiljanić R., Bradlow A. Stability of temporal contrasts across speaking styles in English and Croatian. Journal of Phonetics 2008, 36(1):91-113.
50. Smiljanić R., Bradlow A. Temporal organization of English clear and conversational speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008, 124(5):3171-3182.
51. Smiljanić R., Bradlow A. Speaking and hearing clearly. Talker and listener factors in speaking style changes. Language and Linguistics Compass 2009, 3(1):236-264.
52. Stent A., Huffman M., Brennan S. Adapting speaking after evidence of misrecognition. Local and global hyperarticulation. Speech Communication 2008, 50(3):163-178.
53. Uther M., Knoll M.A., Burnham D. Do you speak E-NG-L-I-SH? A comparison of foreigner-directed and infant-directed speech. Speech Communication 2007, 49(1):2-7.
54. Van Heuven V.J. What is the smallest prosodic domain?. Phonological structure and phonetic form. Papers in laboratory phonology III 1994, 76-97. Cambridge University Press. P. Keating (Ed.).
55. Warner N. Reduction. The blackwell companion to phonology 2011, 1866-1891. Blackwell. M. van Oostendorp, C.J. Ewen, E. Hume, K. Rice (Eds.).
56. Wassink A., Wright R., Franklin A. Intraspeaker variability in vowel production. An investigation of motherese, hyperspeech, and Lombard speech in Jamaican speakers. Journal of Phonetics 2007, 35:363-379.
57. Whalen D.H., Magen H.S., Pouplier M., Kang A.M., Iskarous K. Vowel production and perception. Hyperarticulation without a hyperspace effect. Language and Speech 2004, 47(2):155-174.