We investigated how spoken words are recognized when they have been altered by phonological assimilation. Previous research has shown that there is a process of perceptual compensation for phonological assimilations. Three recently formulated proposals regarding the mechanisms for compensation for assimilation make different predictions with regard to the level at which compensation is supposed to occur as well as regarding the role of specific language experience. In the present study, Hungarian words and nonwords, in which a viable and an unviable liquid assimilation was applied, were presented to Hungarian and Dutch listeners in an identification task and a discrimination task. Results indicate that viably changed forms are difficult to distinguish from canonical forms independent of experience with the assimilation rule applied in the utterances. This reveals that auditory processing contributes to perceptual compensation for assimilation, while language experience has only a minor role to play when identification is required.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeddorP. S.KrakowR. A. (1999). Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: Evidence for partial compensation.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America106, 2868–2887.
2.
BehringerJ. (1996). Experimental Run Time System (Version 3.18) [Computer software].Darmstadt, Germany: Technische Hochschule Darmstadt.
3.
BoersmaP. (1997). Functional phonologyUtrecht, The Netherlands: LOT [Dissertation].
4.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2002). PRAAT 4.0: A system for doing phonetics with the computer [Computer software].Amsterdam, The Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.
5.
BooijG. (1995). The phonology of DutchOxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
6.
BregmanA. S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis: The perceptual organization of soundCambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BrowmanC. P.GoldsteinL. (1992). Articulatory phonology: An overview. Phonetica.49, 155–180.
8.
ClarkA. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together againCambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
CoenenE.ZwitserloodP.BölteJ. (2001). Consequences of assimilation for word recognition and lexical representation.Language and Cognitive Processes15, 535–564.
10.
ColinC.RadeauM.SoquetA.DemolinD.ColinF.DeltenreP. (2002). Mismatch negativity evoked by the McGurk–MacDonald effect: A phonetic representation within short-term memory.Clinical Neurophysiology113, 495–506.
11.
DarcyI. (2002). Online processing of phonological variation in speech comprehension: The case of assimilation.Temporal integration is the perception of speech.HawkinsS.NguygenN.Grenoble, France: ISCA32.
12.
de BoerB. (2000). Self-organisation in vowel systems.Journal of Phonetics28, 441–465.
13.
DelgutteB. (1997). Auditory neural processing of speech.The handbook of phonetic sciences.HardcastleW. J.LaverJ.Oxford, UK: Blackwell507–538.
14.
ElmanJ. L.BatesE. A.JohnsonM. H.Karmiloff-SmithA.ParisiD.PlunkettK. (1996). Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on developmentCambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
ErnestusM. (2000). Voice assimilation and segment reduction in DutchUtrecht, The Netherlands: LOT [Dissertation].
16.
ErnestusM.BaayenR. H.SchreuderR. (2002). The recognition of reduced word forms.Brain and Language81, 162–173.
17.
FitchH. L.HalwesT. E.EricksonD. M.LibermanA. M. (1980). Perceptual equivalent of two acoustic cues for stop-consonant manner.Perception & Psychophysics27, 343–350.
18.
FowlerC. A. (1990). Sound-producing sources as objects of perception: Rate normalization and nonspeech perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America88, 1236–1249.
19.
FowlerC. A. (1996). Listeners do hear sounds, not tongues.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America99, 1730–1741.
20.
FowlerC. A.Compensation for coarticulation reflects gesture perception, not spectral contrast.Perception & Psychophysics(in press).
21.
FowlerC. A.BestC. T.McRobertsG. W. (1990). Young infants’ perception of liquid coarticulatory influences on following stop consonants.Perception & Psychophysics48, 559–570.
22.
FowlerC. A.BrownJ. M. (2000). Perceptual parsing of acoustic consequences of velum lowering from information for vowels.Perception & Psychophysics62, 21–32.
23.
FowlerC. A.BrownJ. M.MannV. A. (2000). Contrast effects do not underlie effects of preceding liquids on stop-consonant identification by humans.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance26, 877–888.
24.
FowlerC. A.SmithM. (1986). Speech perception as “vector analysis”: An approach to the problems of segmentation and invariance.Invariance and variability of speech processes.PerkellJ.KlattD.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc123–136.
25.
GanongW. F. (1980). Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance6, 110–125.
26.
GaskellM. G. (2003). Modelling regressive and progressive effects of assimilation in speech perception.Journal of Phonetics31, 447–463.
27.
GaskellM. G.HareM.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1995). A connectionist model of phonological representation in speech perception.Cognitive Science19, 407–439.
28.
GaskellM. G.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1996). Phonological variation and inference in lexical access.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance22, 144–158.
29.
GaskellM. G.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1998). Mechanisms of phonological inference in speech perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance24, 380–396.
30.
GaskellM. G.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (2001). Ambiguity resolution and spoken word recognition: Bridging the gap.Journal of Memory and Language44, 325–349.
31.
GerritsE. (2001). The categorization of speech sounds by adults and childrenUtrecht, The Netherlands: LOT [Dissertation].
32.
GerritsE.SchoutenM. E. H. (2004). Categorical perception depends on the discrimination task.Perception & Psychophysics66, 363–376.
33.
GowD. W. (2001). Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition.Journal of Memory and Language45, 133–159.
34.
GowD. W. (2002). Does English coronal place assimilation create lexical ambiguity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance28, 163–179.
35.
GowD. W. (2003). Feature parsing: Feature cue mapping in spoken word recognition.Perception & Psychophysics65, 575–590.
36.
GowD. W.HussamiP.Acoustic modification in English place assimilation.Paper presented at the meeting of the Acoustical Society of America.Columbus, OH, USA November.
37.
GowD. W.ImA. M. (2004). A cross-linguistic examination of assimilation context effects.Journal of Memory and Language51, 279–296.
38.
HoltL. L.LottoA. J. (2002). Behavioral examinations of the level of auditory processing of speech context effects.Hearing Research167, 156–169.
39.
HumeE.JohnsonK. (2001). The interplay of perception and phonology.The role of speech perception in phonology.HumeE.JohnsonK.New York, NJ: Academic Press3–26.
40.
HuraS. L.LindblomB.DiehlR. (1992). On the role of perception in shaping phonological assimilation rules.Language & Speech35, 59–72.
41.
KeppelG. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
42.
KingstonJ.Ears to categories: New arguments for autonomy.Proceedings of the First Conference on Phonetics and Phonology in Iberia..FrotaS.VigarioM.FreitasM.Mouton de Gruyter.Berlin, Germany (in press).
43.
KingstonJ.MacmillanN. A. (1995). Integrality of nasalization and f1 in vowels in isolation and before oral and nasal consonants—a detection-theoretic application of the Garner paradigm.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America97, 1261–1285.
44.
KlotzW.NeumannO. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance25, 976–992.
45.
KohlerK. J. (1990). Segmental reduction in connected speech in German: Phonological facts and phonetic explanations.Speech production and speech modelling.HardcastleW. J.MarchalA.Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer69–92.
46.
LadefogedP.MaddiesonI. (1996). Sounds of the world's languagesOxford, UK: Blackwell.
47.
LahiriA.Marslen-WilsonW. (1991). The mental representation of lexical form: A phonological approach to the lexicon.Cognition38, 245–294.
48.
LahiriA.ReetzH. (2002). Underspecified recognition.Laboratory phonology 7.GussenhovenC.WarnerN.Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter637–676.
49.
LibermanA. M. (1996). Speech: A special codeCambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50.
LottoA. J.KluenderK. R. (1998). General contrast effects in speech perception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonant identification.Perception & Psychophysics60, 602–619.
51.
LottoA. J.KluenderK. R.HoltL. L. (1997). Perceptual compensation for coarticulation by Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).Journal of the Acoustic Society of America102, 1134–1140.
52.
MacmillanN. A.KingstonJ.ThorburnR.DickeyL. W.BartelsC. (1999). Integrality of nasalization and F-1. II. Basic sensitivity and phonetic labeling measure distinct sensory and decision-rule interactions.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America106, 2913–2932.
53.
MannV. A. (1980). Influence of preceding liquid on stop-consonant perception.Perception and Psychophysics28, 407–412.
54.
MannV. A. (1986). Distinguishing universal and language-dependent levels of speech perception: Evidence from Japanese listeners perception of English “l” and “r”.Cognition24, 169–196.
55.
MannV. A.ReppB. H. (1981). Influence of preceding fricative on stop-consonant perception.Journal of the Acoustic Society of America69, 548–558.
56.
McQueenJ. M. (1996). Phonetic categorization.Language and Cognitive Processes11, 655–664.
57.
MittererH.BlomertL. (2003). Coping with phonological assimilation in speech perception: Evidence for early compensation.Perception & Psychophysics65, 956–969.
58.
MittererH.CsépeV.BlomertL.Compensation for phonological assimilation in perception: Evidence from Hungarian liquid assimilation.Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences.20032321–2324.
59.
MittererH.ErnestusM.Listeners recover/t/s that speakers reduce: Evidence from /t/-lenition in Dutch.Journal of Phonetics.(in press).
60.
NäätänenR.WinklerI. (1999). The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience.Psychological Bulletin125, 826–859.
61.
NeareyT. M. (1990). The segment as a unit of speech perception.Journal of Phonetics18, 347–373.
62.
NeumannO. (1990). Direct parameter specification and the concept of perception.Psychological Research52, 207–215.
63.
NolanF. (1992). The descriptive role of segments: Evidence from assimilations.Papers in laboratory phonology: II. Gestures segment, prosody.DochertyG. J.LaddR. D.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press261–280.
64.
OhalaJ. J. (1990). The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation.Papers in laboratory phonology I: Between the grammar and the physics of speech.KingstonJ.BeckmanM.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press258–275.
65.
OlssonM. (1992). Hungarian phonology and morphologyLund, Sweden: Lund University Press.
66.
OtakeT.YoneyamaK.CutlerA.Van der LugtA. H. (1996). The representation of Japanese moraic nasals.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America100, 63831–3842.
67.
PittM. A.McQueenJ. M. (1998). Is compensation for coarticulation mediated by the lexicon?.Journal of Memory and Language39, 347–370.
68.
RauscheckerJ. P. (1998). Cortical processing of complex sounds.Current Opinion in Neurobiology8, 516–521.
69.
ReppB. (1983). Bidirectional contrast effects in the perception of VC–CV sequences.Perception & Psychophysics33, 147–155.
70.
SchoutenB.GerritsE.van HessenA. (2003). The end of categorical perception as we know it.Speech Communication41, 71–80.
71.
ScottS. K.WiseR. J. S. (2003). PET and fMRI studies of the neural basis of speech perception.Speech Communication41, 23–24.
72.
SeoM. (2001). A perception-based study of sonorant assimilation in Korean.OSU Working Papers in Linguistics55, 43–69.
73.
SiptárP.TörkenczyM. (2000). The phonology of HungarianOxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
74.
SmitsR. (2001a). Evidence for hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance27, 1145–1162.
75.
SmitsR. (2001b). Hierarchical categorization of coarticulated phonemes: A theoretical analysis.Perception & Psychophysics63, 1109–1139.
76.
SteriadeD. (2001). Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: A perceptual account.The role of speech perception in phonology.HumeE.JohnsonK.New York, NJ: Academic Press219–250.
77.
StevensE. B.KuhlP. K.PaddenD. M.Macaques show context effects in speech perception.Paper presented at 116th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America.Honolulu, HI, USA November.
78.
SummerfieldQ.AssmannP. F. (1989). Auditory enhancement and the perception of concurrent vowels.Perception & Psychophysics45, 529–536.
79.
VerstraetenB.Van de VeldeH. (2001). Socio-geographical variation of/r/in standard Dutch.'r-atics: Sociolinguistic, phonetic and phonological characteristics of /r/.Van de VeldeH.van HoutR.Brussels, Belgium: Etude & Travaux45–62.
80.
VorbergD.MattlerU.HeineckeA.SchmidtT.SchwarzbachJ.Different time courses for visual perception and action priming.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.20031006275–6280.
81.
WangX.LuT.LiangL. (2003). Cortical processing of temporal modulations.Speech Communication41, 107–121.
82.
WeberA. (2001). Help or hindrance: How violation of different assimilation rules affects spoken-language processing.Language and Speech44, 95–118.
