On the speech-to-song illusion: Evidence from German

Proceedings of the International Conference on Speech Prosody

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages

  Falk, Simone ^a   Rathcke, Tamara ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Illusion; Intonation; Music; Perception; Rhythm; Tone

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC CHARACTERISTIC; ACOUSTIC PARAMETERS; DECODING STRATEGY; ILLUSION; INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES; INTONATION; RHYTHM; TONE; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

MUSIC;

EID: 85050195602     PISSN: 23332042     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Auhagen, W., 2005. Rhythmus- und Tempoempfinden. In: de la Motte-Haber, H. and Rötter, G. (Eds.), Musikpsychologie. Laaber: Laaber, 231-250.
2. Beckman, M., Edwards, J., 1990. Lengthening and shortening and the nature of prosodic constituency. In Kingston and M. Beckman (eds), Papers in laboratory phonology I. Cambridge: University Press, 152-178.
3. Boersma, P., Weenink, D., 2001. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 5, 341-345.
4. Bregman, A.S., Campbell, J., 1971. Primary auditory stream segregation and perception of order in rapid sequences of tones. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 244-249.
5. Cutler, A. 1991. Linguistic rhythm and speech segmentation. In Sundberg, J., Nord, L. and Carlson, R. (eds): Music, Language, Speech and Brain. Macmillan: Houndsmills &London, 157-166.
6. Deutsch, D., 1995. Musical Illusions and Paradoxes. CD: Philomel Records.
7. Deutsch, D., Lapidis, R., Henthorn, T., 2008. The speech-to-song-illusion. J. Acoust. Soc. America, s.124, 2471.
8. Forster, K.I. and Forster, J., 2003. DMDX: A Windows Display Program with Millisecond Accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 35 (1), 116-124.
9. Francom, J.C., 2009. Experimental Syntax: exploring the effect of repeated exposure to anomalous syntactic structure - evidence from rating and reading tasks. Dissertation, University of Arizona.
10. Gregory, R.L., 1971. Visual illusions. In Held, R. (ed.) Image, object and illusion. San Francisco: Freeman, 48-58.
11. Krumhansl, C.L., 2005. Musikalische Bezugssysteme. In Stoffer, T.H. and Oerter, R. (Eds), Allgemeine Musikpsychologie. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter, 267-306.
12. Lehiste, 1973. Rhythmic units and syntactic units in production and perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 54(5). 1228-1234.
13. Patel, A., 2008. Music, language and the brain. Oxford: University Press.
14. Peretz, I., in press. Music, language and modularity in action. In Rebuschat, P., Rohrmeier, M., Hawkins, J. and Cross, I. [Eds], Language and Music as cognitive systems. Oxford: University Press.
15. Peretz, I., Champod, S. and Hyde, K. (2003). Varieties of Musical Disorders: The Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 999, 58-75.
16. Peretz, I. Coltheart, M., 2003. Modularity of music processing. Nature neuroscience, 6, 688-691.
17. Pilotti, M., Antrobus, J.S. and Duff, M. (1997). The effect of presemantic acoustic adaptation on semantic 'satiation'. Memory and Cognition 25 (3), 305-312.
18. Sundberg, J., 1987. The Science of the Singing Voice. Illinois: Northern Illinois Press.
19. Sundberg, J., 1989. Synthesis of Singing by rule. In Mathews, M. V. and Pierce, J. R. [Eds], Current Directions in Computer Music Research. MIT Press, 45-55.
20. Zatorre, R.J., Belin, P. and Penhune,V.B., 2002. Structure and function of auditory cortex: music and speech. Trends in cognitive Science 6, 37-46.