A STUDY ON PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION FOR / /- FRONTING IN A MERICAN E NGLISH Reiko Kataoka February 14, 2009 BLS 35.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Tom Lentz (slides Ivana Brasileiro)

Advertisements

Accessing spoken words: the importance of word onsets

Analysis of Spoken Language Department of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 Vowel.

Turning an L1 three-way contrast into an L2 two-way contrast Paola Escudero University of Utrecht and McGill University Paul Boersma University of Amsterdam.

Tone perception and production by Cantonese-speaking and English- speaking L2 learners of Mandarin Chinese Yen-Chen Hao Indiana University.

Sounds that “move” Diphthongs, glides and liquids.

Philip Harrison J P French Associates & Department of Language & Linguistic Science, York University IAFPA 2006 Annual Conference Göteborg, Sweden Variability.

Human Speech Recognition Julia Hirschberg CS4706 (thanks to John-Paul Hosum for some slides)

Compensatory coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in Standard Southern British: an acoustic and perceptual study.* Jonathan Harrington, Felicitas.

Coarticulation Analysis of Dysarthric Speech Xiaochuan Niu, advised by Jan van Santen.

The perception of dialect Julia Fischer-Weppler HS Speaker Characteristics Venice International University

ENG 528: Language Change Research Seminar Sociophonetics: An Introduction Chapter 5: Vowels (Continued) Lindblom (1963), Undershoot.

Phonetic variability of the Greek rhotic sound Mary Baltazani University of Ioannina, Greece  Rhotics exhibit considerable phonetic variety cross-linguistically.

Infant sensitivity to distributional information can affect phonetic discrimination Jessica Maye, Janet F. Werker, LouAnn Gerken A brief article from Cognition.

The Perception of Speech. Speech is for rapid communication Speech is composed of units of sound called phonemes –examples of phonemes: /ba/ in bat, /pa/

Can a prosodic pattern induce/ reduce the perception of a lower- class suburban accent in French? Philippe Boula de Mareüil 1 & Iryna Lehka-Lemarchand.

Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context Snedeker and Trueswell (2003) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.

Ling 240: Language and Mind Acquisition of Phonology.

Speech perception 2 Perceptual organization of speech.

Splice: From vowel offset to vowel onset FIG 3. Example of stimulus spliced from the repetitive syllables. EXPERIMENT 2 (Voicing ID) METHOD Speech materials:

Spoken Language Analysis Dept. of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 At the Segment-Prosody.

“Speech and the Hearing-Impaired Child: Theory and Practice” Ch. 13 Vowels and Diphthongs –Vowels are formed when sound produced at the glottal source.

Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Prominence Rachael-Anne Knight Prosody and Pragmatics 15 th November 2003.

Evidence of a Production Basis for Front/Back Vowel Harmony Jennifer Cole, Gary Dell, Alina Khasanova University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Is there.

Niebuhr, D‘Imperio, Gili Fivela, Cangemi 1 Are there “Shapers” and “Aligners” ? Individual differences in signalling pitch accent category.

Phonetic Similarity Effects in Masked Priming Marja-Liisa Mailend 1, Edwin Maas 1, & Kenneth I. Forster 2 1 Department of Speech, Language, and Hearing.

Development of coarticulatory patterns in spontaneous speech Melinda Fricke Keith Johnson University of California, Berkeley.

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.

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

SPEECH PERCEPTION The Speech Stimulus Perceiving Phonemes Top-Down Processing Is Speech Special?

Speech Perception Richard Wright Linguistics 453.

TEMPLATE DESIGN © A Production Study on Phonologization of /u/-fronting in Alveolar Context KATAOKA, Reiko

Influence of Word Class Proportion on Cerebral Asymmetries for High and Low Imagery Words Christine Chiarello 1, Connie Shears 2, Stella Liu 3, and Natalie.

Phonetics, day 2 Oct 3, 2008 Phonetics 1.Experimental a. production b. perception 2. Surveys/Interviews.

Stop Place Contrasts before Liquids Edward Flemming MIT.

Vowel formant discrimination in high- fidelity speech by hearing-impaired listeners. Diane Kewley-Port, Chang Liu (also University at Buffalo,) T. Zachary.

Segmental factors in language proficiency: Velarization degree as a signature of pronunciation talent Henrike Baumotte and Grzegorz Dogil {henrike.baumotte,

Speech Perception 4/6/00 Acoustic-Perceptual Invariance in Speech Perceptual Constancy or Perceptual Invariance: –Perpetual constancy is necessary, however,

Perceived prominence and nuclear accent shape Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 5 th September 2003.

1 Speech Perception 3/30/00. 2 Speech Perception How do we perceive speech? –Multifaceted process –Not fully understood –Models & theories attempt to.

Adaptive Design of Speech Sound Systems Randy Diehl In collaboration with Bjőrn Lindblom, Carl Creeger, Lori Holt, and Andrew Lotto.

Results 1.Boundary shift Japanese vs. English perceptions Korean vs. English perceptions 1.Category boundary was shifted toward boundaries in listeners’

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.

Evaluating prosody prediction in synthesis with respect to Modern Greek prenuclear accents Elisabeth Chorianopoulou MSc in Speech and Language Processing.

Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: a perceptual illusion? Emmanual Dupoux, et al (1999) By Carl O’Toole.

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.

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.

Neurophysiologic correlates of cross-language phonetic perception LING 7912 Professor Nina Kazanina.

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

4.1.4 The four groups’ average performances of / ʃ /, /t ʃ / and /d ʒ / 3176Hz English native speakers place their tips of tongues in a further back location.

2.3 Markedness Differential Hypothesis (MDH)

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

The Relation Between Speech Intelligibility and The Complex Modulation Spectrum Steven Greenberg International Computer Science Institute 1947 Center Street,

Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Syllable Pitch Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 16 April 2003.

Transitions + Perception March 25, 2010 Tidbits Mystery spectrogram #3 is now up and ready for review! Final project ideas.

Tone sandhi and tonal coarticulation in Fuzhou Min Yang Li 李杨 Phonetics Laboratory, DTAL University of Cambridge 1.

A PRODUCTION STUDY ON PHONOLOGIZATION OF /U/-FRONTING IN ALVEOLAR CONTEXT Reiko Kataoka 10 January 2009 LSA annual meeting.

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

Danielle Werle Undergraduate Thesis Intelligibility and the Carrier Phrase Effect in Sinewave Speech.

S. Kramer1, K. Tucker1, A.L. Moro1, E. Service1, J.F. Connolly1

6th International Conference on Language Variation in Europe

University of Silesia Acoustic cues for studying dental fricatives in foreign-language speech Arkadiusz Rojczyk Institute of English, University of Silesia.

A Japanese trilogy: Segment duration, articulatory kinematics, and interarticulator programming Anders Löfqvist Haskins Laboratories New Haven, CT.

Presentation transcript:

A STUDY ON PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION FOR / /- FRONTING IN A MERICAN E NGLISH Reiko Kataoka February 14, 2009 BLS 35

PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION FOR COARTICULATION Perceptual compensation for coarticulation: an effect of context-moderated perception that compensate for coarticulatory influence of the speech sounds. Perceptual correction (Ohala 1981: 182) Failure to compensate, erroneous compensation  misperception Why care perceptual compensation? To understand how humans achieve faithful sound transmission To understand how misperception could occur  sound change

EXAMPLES OF PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION F1 of precursor influences [i]/[e] decision (Ladefoged & Broadbent, 1957) Speech rate influences [i]/[u] decision in [w_w] context (Lindblom & Studdert-Kennedy, 1967) Influence by: adjacent segment: Mann & Repp, 1980; Lotto & Kluender, 1998; Beddor & Krakow,1999; Harrington et al., 2008 Lexical status: Ganong, 1980; Elman & McClelland, 1988 Precursor sentence: Ohala & Shriberg, 1990

PREVIOUS STUDY ON ALVEOLAR / /- FRONTING (OHALA & FEDER, 1994) Stimuli: [i] – [u] continua (with following [də] or [bə]) Factors: Alveolar, Bilabial Acoustic or Noise Findings: 1) Listeners compensated for coarticulatory frongting in alveolar context. 2) Listeners did so both in Acoustic and Noise contexts VbəVbə VdəVdə

HYPOTHESIS H1: The /i-u/ boundary would be more leftward for alveolar context than for bilabial context. H2: The similar boundary shift would occur both in ‘Acoustic’ and ‘Noise’ conditions. H3: The boundary discrepancy would become progressively greater as speech rate increase from slow to medium to fast. Exploration: H4: Whether vowel perception is influenced by presence or absence of precursor sentence. (acoustic mode vs. speech mode?) H5: Whether Reaction Time (RT) for /u/-response is influenced by context or not. (perceptual contrast?)

STIMULI 10 equal-step /i/ - /u/ continuum (Praat) Separate a source from natural utterance. Apply a filter (5 peak fequencies and bandwiths) Duration = 100 msc Formant (Hz) bandwidth (Hz) F F F F F

STIMULI 10 equal-step /i/ - /u/ continuum (Praat) cont. Variable F2 and F3 F Hz Hz (0.18 Bark) F Hz Hz (0.5 Bark) Vowel duration: 100 msc (also 80 msc and 120 msc) Amplitude contour first and last 15 ms F0 contour: 130  90 Hz F3: (Hz) F2: (Hz)

STIMULUS CVC Add onset and coda to the vowel Alveolar: [dit] – [dut] Alveolar in Noise: [NiN] – [NuN] Bilabial: [bip] – [bup] Bilabial in Noise: [NiN] – [NuN](Vowel onset to C2 release = 170 msc)

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN w/o Precursor: Stimulus presented in isolation Task: two-alternative forced-choice between /i/ and /u/ w/Precursor: Stimulus presented after “I guess the word is _____” Trials: 10 tokens x 4 repetition = 40 trials per cell Block: Context – blockedAcoustic vs. Noise – mixed; Fast, Medium, Slow – blocked Listeners: Native speakers of Am-Engl. (n=32: 18F, 14M; yrs old) Context ConditionsAlveolar ‘deet’ /‘doot’ Bilabial ‘beep’ /‘boop’ w/o precursor Acoustic (100)[dVt][bVp] Noise (100)[NVN] w/ precursor Fast (800-80)[dVt][bVp] Med. ( )[dVt][bVp] Slow ( )[dVt][bVp] H1 H3 H2 Q1 Q2: RT

THIS IS HOW THE EXPERIMENT GOES (1) Acoustic Noise Press [1] Press [5] for for ‘deet’ ‘doot’

THIS IS HOW THE EXPERIMENT GOES (2) Acoustic Noise Press [1] Press [5] for for ‘beep’ ‘boop’

THIS IS HOW THE EXPERIMENT GOES (3) Fast Medium Slow Press [1] Press [5] for for ‘deet’ ‘doot’

RESULTS: NOISE VS. ACOUSTIC * CONTEXT Percentage of /u/-Response by Context and Condition NoiseAcustic /u/-Response (%) Stimulus Step Number

RESULTS: NOISE VS. ACOUSTIC * CONTEXT (RT) Reaction Time for /u/-response Effect of Contexts (Paired T-Test) N: [t=-0.69 (31), p=0.499] R: [t=-1.60 (31), p=0.123]

RESULTS: PRECURSOR * CONTEXT Percentage of /u/-Response by Condition and Context t=0.91 (31), p=0.371 t=2.68 (31), p=0.012 * /u/-Response (%)

RESULTS: PRECURSOR * CONTEXT (RT) Reaction Time for /u/-response Effect of Contexts (Paired T-Test) Without: [t=-1.6 (31), p=0.120] With: [t=-2.26 (31), p=0.031] *

RESULTS: SPEECH RATE * CONTEXT Percentage of /u/-Response by Context and Condition Effect of Contexts (Paired T-Test) Slow: [t= (31), p=0.938] Medium: [t=2.684 (31), p=0.012] * Fast: [t=4.657 (31), p<0.001] * /u/-Response (%) Fast Slow Medium Stimulus Number

RESULTS: SPEECH RATE * CONTEXT (RT) Reaction Time for /u/-response Effect of Contexts (Paired T-Test) Slow: [t= (31), p=0.876] Medium: [t= (31), p=0.031]* Fast: [t= (31), p=0.498

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSIONS No compensation when consonantal contexts were replaced by white noise and “assumed” contexts were given visually. Degree of boundary shift varies across stimuli and experimental condition: Greater shift with precursor sentences than without it. Progressively greater boundary shift as speech rate increases Reaction Time for /u/-response Significant context effect (A <B) in majority of conditions  Degree of Compensation for coarticulation may be influenced by speechlike-ness of the stimuli. Compensation is triggered when linguistic expectation plays a role in perception.  Compensation could be incomplete.  Perceptual Compensation may be related to contrast enhancement.  On the linguistic theory of sound change: Assimilatory sound change by incomplete correction?

Thank you!!