Author:
Jasmin Kyle,Tierney Adam,Obasih Chisom,Holt Lori
Abstract
AbstractSegmental speech units such as phonemes are described as multidimensional categories whose perception involves contributions from multiple acoustic input dimensions, and the relative perceptual weights of these dimensions respond dynamically to context. For example, when speech is altered to create an “accent” in which two acoustic dimensions are correlated in a manner opposite that of long-term experience, the dimension that carries less perceptual weight is down-weighted to contribute less in category decisions. It remains unclear, however, whether this short-term reweighting extends to perception of suprasegmental features that span multiple phonemes, syllables, or words, in part because it has remained debatable whether suprasegmental features are perceived categorically. Here, we investigated the relative contribution of two acoustic dimensions to word emphasis. Participants categorized instances of a two-word phrase pronounced with typical covariation of fundamental frequency (F0) and duration, and in the context of an artificial “accent” in which F0 and duration (established in prior research on English speech as “primary” and “secondary” dimensions, respectively) covaried atypically. When categorizing “accented” speech, listeners rapidly down-weighted the secondary dimension (duration). This result indicates that listeners continually track short-term regularities across speech input and dynamically adjust the weight of acoustic evidence for suprasegmental decisions. Thus, dimension-based statistical learning appears to be a widespread phenomenon in speech perception extending to both segmental and suprasegmental categorization.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference53 articles.
1. Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (2004). The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47(1), 31–56.
2. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.
3. Baumann, S., Grice, M., & Steindamm, S. (2006, May). Prosodic marking of focus domains-categorical or gradient. In: Proceedings of Speech Prosody (pp. 301–304). TUDpress Verlag der Wissenschaften GmbH.
4. Beach, C. (1991). The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 644–663.
5. Braun, B., Kochanski, G., Grabe, E., & Rosner, B. S. (2006). Evidence for attractors in English intonation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(6), 4006–4015.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献