/u/-fronting in RP: a link between sound change and diminished perceptual compensation for coarticulation? Jonathan Harrington, Felicitas Kleber, Ulrich.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ACCENT, DISCRIMINATION, AND THE INTEGRATION OF IMMIGRANTS INTO THE CANADIAN LABOUR MARKET Alanna MacDougall October 2009 Hearing Audible Minorities.
Advertisements

Dialect Subordinate variety of a language English language has many dialects These dialects may be of different kinds Regional dialecSocial dialect Where.
Tone perception and production by Cantonese-speaking and English- speaking L2 learners of Mandarin Chinese Yen-Chen Hao Indiana University.
The Role of F0 in the Perceived Accentedness of L2 Speech Mary Grantham O’Brien Stephen Winters GLAC-15, Banff, Alberta May 1, 2009.
Plasticity, exemplars, and the perceptual equivalence of ‘defective’ and non-defective /r/ realisations Rachael-Anne Knight & Mark J. Jones.
Human Speech Recognition Julia Hirschberg CS4706 (thanks to John-Paul Hosum for some slides)
Hearing relative phases for two harmonic components D. Timothy Ives 1, H. Martin Reimann 2, Ralph van Dinther 1 and Roy D. Patterson 1 1. Introduction.
Unravelling variation and change in the short vowel system of RP Anne Fabricius SCALPS Research Group Roskilde University Sociolinguistics Symposium 16.
Function words are often reduced or even deleted in casual conversation (Fig. 1). Pairs may neutralize: he’s/he was, we’re/we were What sources of information.
Compensatory coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in Standard Southern British: an acoustic and perceptual study.* Jonathan Harrington, Felicitas.
The perception of dialect Julia Fischer-Weppler HS Speaker Characteristics Venice International University
18 and 24-month-olds use syntactic knowledge of functional categories for determining meaning and reference Yarden Kedar Marianella Casasola Barbara Lust.
SPEECH PERCEPTION 2 DAY 17 – OCT 4, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context Snedeker and Trueswell (2003) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
Spoken Language Analysis Dept. of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 At the Segment-Prosody.
Evidence of a Production Basis for Front/Back Vowel Harmony Jennifer Cole, Gary Dell, Alina Khasanova University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Is there.
Perception of syllable prominence by listeners with and without competence in the tested language Anders Eriksson 1, Esther Grabe 2 & Hartmut Traunmüller.
1/18 LELA Varieties of English Harold Somers Professor of Language Engineering Office: Lamb 1.15.
PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY
Chapter 1: Information and Computation. Cognitive Science  José Luis Bermúdez / Cambridge University Press 2010 Overview Review key ideas from last few.
Speech Perception Overview of Questions Can computers perceive speech as well as humans? Does each word that we hear have a unique pattern associated.
How General is Lexically-Driven Perceptual Learning of Phonetic Identity? Tanya Kraljic and Arthur G. Samuel Our Questions (e.g., learning a particular.
Interviews September 22, Questionnaires a. What it is/when to use them Types of Questionnaires group/individual open/closed a. Face-to-face (Utah.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Perceptual compensation for /u/-fronting in American English KATAOKA, Reiko Department.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Listener’s variation in phoneme category boundary as a source of sound change: a case of /u/-fronting.
Ability to attract and retain followers by virtue of personal characteristics - not traditional or political office (Weber ‘47) What makes an individual.
SPEECH PERCEPTION The Speech Stimulus Perceiving Phonemes Top-Down Processing Is Speech Special?
How do speech patterns spread through a community? Or, “Oh no, not another linguistics model”
Group 4. SURVIVAL!!!  For humans and other animals motion perception is essential for maneuvering in everyday life.  Approaching motion represents a.
Present Experiment Introduction Coarticulatory Timing and Lexical Effects on Vowel Nasalization in English: an Aerodynamic Study Jason Bishop University.
Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Bosch, L. (2009) Developmental shift in the discrimination of vowel contrasts in bilingual infants: is the distributional account.
Segmental factors in language proficiency: Velarization degree as a signature of pronunciation talent Henrike Baumotte and Grzegorz Dogil {henrike.baumotte,
Experiments concerning boundary tone perception in German 3 rd Workshop of the SPP-1234 Potsdam, 7 th January 2009 Presentation of the Stuttgart Project.
The Albertan æ/ɛ shift and community grammars
Jonathan Harrington Contextual ambiguities in speech signals and their consequences for sound change.
Whither Linguistic Interpretation of Acoustic Pronunciation Variation Annika Hämäläinen, Yan Han, Lou Boves & Louis ten Bosch.
Nasal endings of Taiwan Mandarin: Production, perception, and linguistic change Student : Shu-Ping Huang ID No. : NA3C0004 Professor : Dr. Chung Chienjer.
The new social work degree in England: fresh policies and new students? Shereen Hussein* Social Care Workforce Research Unit King’s College London * On.
Understanding Action Verbs- Embodied Verbal Semantics Approach Pavan Kumar Srungaram M.Phil Cognitive Science (09CCHL02) Supervisor: Prof. Bapi.
Sh s Children with CIs produce ‘s’ with a lower spectral peak than their peers with NH, but both groups of children produce ‘sh’ similarly [1]. This effect.
Sounds in a reverberant room can interfere with the direct sound source. The normal hearing (NH) auditory system has a mechanism by which the echoes, or.
Pragmatically-guided perceptual learning Tanya Kraljic, Arty Samuel, Susan Brennan Adaptation Project mini-Conference, May 7, 2007.
SEPARATION OF CO-OCCURRING SYLLABLES: SEQUENTIAL AND SIMULTANEOUS GROUPING or CAN SCHEMATA OVERRULE PRIMITIVE GROUPING CUES IN SPEECH PERCEPTION? William.
4.2.6The effects of an additional eight years of English learning experience * An additional eight years of English learning experience are not effective.
Phonetic Context Effects Major Theories of Speech Perception Motor Theory: Specialized module (later version) represents speech sounds in terms of intended.
The New Normal: Goodness Judgments of Non-Invariant Speech Julia Drouin, Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences & Psychology, Dr.
1 Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception Sandra Anacleto uOttawa.
Lexical and morphosyntactic minimal pairs. Evidence for different processing Luca Cilibrasi, Vesna Stojanovik, Patricia Riddell, School of Psychology,
Parsing acoustic variability as a mechanism for feature abstraction Jennifer Cole Bob McMurray Gary Linebaugh Cheyenne Munson University of Illinois University.
Katherine Morrow, Sarah Williams, and Chang Liu Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
Based on Lai Yi-shiu (2009). Cognitive linguistics.
Bosch & Sebastián-Gallés Simultaneous Bilingualism and the Perception of a Language-Specific Vowel Contrast in the First Year of Life.
Perceptual distance & sound change GSAS workshop on historical linguistics Oct
Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Syllable Pitch Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 16 April 2003.
Investigating language and ethnicity in London: Production and perception data Eivind Torgersen 1, Paul Kerswill 1, Sue Fox 2 and Arfaan Khan 2 Lancaster.
LANGUAGE, DIALECT, AND VARIETIES
Tone sandhi and tonal coarticulation in Fuzhou Min Yang Li 李杨 Phonetics Laboratory, DTAL University of Cambridge 1.
Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory Paola Escudero & Paul Boersma (March 2002) Presented by Paola Escudero.
A STUDY ON PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION FOR / /- FRONTING IN A MERICAN E NGLISH Reiko Kataoka February 14, 2009 BLS 35.
Reinforcement Look at matched picture after sound ends & it moves 10 trials (5 of each pairing) 2 or 4 blocks (2 pairs of words, 2 pairs of swoops) Participants.
What you see is what you get? Heather Johnston March 24, 2005.
Welcome to All S. Course Code: EL 120 Course Name English Phonetics and Linguistics Lecture 1 Introducing the Course (p.2-8) Unit 1: Introducing Phonetics.
Match the phrase to the presenter Controlled Assessment 3: Spoken Language Analysing how speakers adapt for different purposes Using Spoken Language Features.
Lecture 7 Gender & Age.
17th International Conference on Infant Studies Baltimore, Maryland, March 2010 Language Discrimination by Infants: Discriminating Within the Native.
6th International Conference on Language Variation in Europe
Studying Intonation Julia Hirschberg CS /21/2018.
Linguistic Predictors of Cultural Identification in Bilinguals
Detection of Human Simultaneity Thresholds Using Cross-Modal Stimuli
Presentation transcript:

/u/-fronting in RP: a link between sound change and diminished perceptual compensation for coarticulation? Jonathan Harrington, Felicitas Kleber, Ulrich Reubold

General aim of this paper To establish whether a sound-change in progress, /u/- fronting in Standard Southern British (SSB) – can be linked to diminished perceptual compensation for coarticulation (Ohala, 1993). Standard Southern British English = 'BBC English' = mainstream Received Pronunciation (Wells, 1982), spoken by the majority of speakers with a standard accent in England. /u/ (lexical set GOOSE) has become fronted in the last 50 years (various e.g., Wells 1982, Henton 1983, Deterding 1997, Harrington et al. 2002, Harrington 2006, Hawkins & Midgley 2005, Roach, 1997)‏.

/u/-fronting and speech production 1. Taking into account word-frequency, in /ju:/- dialects like SSB ('duty' = /dju:ti, d  u:ti/), /u/ is preceded by C with a high F2-locus (e.g. /j/ in 'cute', /s/ in 'soon') roughly 70% of the time (Harrington, Labphon 9, in press). 2. In acoustic analyses of the Queen's Christmas broadcasts, the extent and rate of F2 transition in /Cu:/ progressively diminished over 50 years – suggesting a link between increased C-on-/u:/ coarticulation and a sound change in progress. (N.B. there is no evidence for a waning of the formality of speaking style in the Christmas broadcasts, as e.g. Harrington et al, 2005 show). So from the point of view of speech production: perhaps there is coarticulatory pressure on /u/ to front?

/u/-fronting and speech perception …not only the speaker, but also ''the listener as a source of sound change'' (Ohala, 1981) Ohala (1993): hypoarticulation-sound changes are those in which a listener fails to undo the effects of coarticulation.

Our extension of Ohala's model to these data and age-differences in SSB speakers is as follows: /u/-fronting and speech perception Acoustic input: [s  n] compensate for coarticulation Perceived as: /sun/ /s  n/ OLD listenersYOUNG listeners

Method: synthetic continua We used HLSYN to create two 13 step synthetic /i-u/ continua at equal Bark intervals by varying F2 in two sets of minimal pairs : (a)/jist/ --- /just/YEAST---USED (p. tense) (b)/swip/ --- /swup/SWEEP---SWOOP A separate group of listeners verified that the endpoints of the continua could be correctly identified. Stimuli randomised and both continua presented in one session 5 times (5 x 13 x 2 = 130 randomised stimuli). Forced-choice identification task: Subjects responded with one of ''used'', ''yeast'', ''swoop'', ''sweep'' to each stimulus.

30 Standard Southern British speakers recruited through University of Cambridge and University College London. YOUNG: 14 subjects aged (11 F, 3 M)‏ OLD: 16 subjects aged (7 F, 9 M) Method: Subjects Subjects were carefully checked to ensure that they were SSB speakers.

Some acoustic data to illustrate /u/-fronting in the young group female male

Three predictions concerning the responses to the synthetic stimuli Prediction 1. Age differences (young vs. old) Prediction 2: Word-type (yeast-used vs. sweep-swoop). relates to Mann & Repp (1980) Prediction 3: Age x Word-type interaction relates to Ohala (1993)

Prediction 1. AGE Since young listeners have a fronted /u/ in speech production, they will have a greater proportion of /u/- responses to the continua that older listeners (because ambiguous tokens between synthetic [i] and [u] will tend to be perceived as /u/‏ by the young). So the hypothesis is that YOUNG and OLD differ not just in production but also in perception

Prediction 2: Word-type Independently of age, /i-u/ boundary should be LEFT- SHIFTED (= more /u/ responses) in YEAST-USED because listeners compensate for coarticulation, e.g. Mann & Repp, 1980)… = the probability of hearing /u/ for the SAME stimulus is greater in YEAST-USED because listeners attribute a certain degree of F2-raising to the effects of the anterior /j_s/ context and factor this out i.e. bias their responses towards /u/

Prediction 3: Age x Word-type IF following our extension of Ohala's model, /u/-fronting comes about because young listeners compensate less for the effects of /C/-on-/u:/ fronting, then the difference in the responses to YEAST-USED vs. SWEEP-SWOOP should be less for the YOUNG because, if there is no/limited compensation for coarticulation, the young will tend not to bias their responses in YEAST-USED towards /u/.

Results (1)‏: AGE The /i-u/ boundary is significantly left-shifted (greater proportion of /u/ responses) in YOUNG compared with OLD speakers.

Results 2: Word-type Significantly greater proportion of /u/ responses (across both age groups) in YEAST-USED relative to SWEEP- SWOOP (compatibly with Mann & Repp, 1980).

Results 3: Age x Word-type The difference in the responses between YEAST-USED vs. SWEEP-SWOOP was less for YOUNG (left) than OLD (right). Our interpretation: less perceptual compensation for coarticulation in the YOUNG.

Summary: replication/support for three findings/theories confirmation that /u/-fronting is a sound change in progress in SSB both from acoustic and perception data further confirmation that listeners compensate for coarticulation (Mann & Repp, 1980) evidence that sound change is also in the ear of the listener (Ohala, 1993)

Conclusions: new findings. 2. We have linked Ohala's model to sound-change in progress by showing that young listeners do not undo the effects of coarticulation to the same extent as older listeners. 1. In the case of age-graded sound-change in progress, young and older members of the same speech community differ not just in production but also in perception

Research support by the German Research Council. Our thanks to Sarah Hawkins and the Dept. of Linguistics, Cambridge University and to Moira Yip, UCL for helping us find subjects and for letting us run the experiments in their laboratories.