Speech segments are highly context-dependent and acoustically variable. One factor that contributes heavily to the variability of speech is speaking rate. Some speech cues are temporal in nature—that is, the distinctions that they signify are defined over time. How can temporal speech cues keep their distinctiveness in the face of extrinsic transformations, such as those wrought by different speaking rates? This issue is explored with respect to the perception, in Icelandic, of Voice Onset Time as a cue for word-initial stop voicing, wordinitial aspiration as a cue for [h], and Voice Offset Time as a cue for pre-aspiration. All the speech cues show rate-dependent perception though to different degrees, with Voice Offset Time being most sensitive to rate changes and Voice Onset Time least sensitive. The differences in the behaviour of these speech cues are related to their different positions in the syllable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ÁrnasonK. (1986). The segmental and suprasegmental status of pre-aspiration in modern Icelandic.Nordic Journal of Linguistics9, 1–23.
2.
BladonA. (1986). Phonetics for hearers.Language for hearers.McGregorOxford: Pergamon Press1–24.
3.
CatfordJ. (1977). Fundamental problems in phoneticsEdinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
4.
DiehlR. L.WalshM. A. (1989). An auditory basis for the stimulus-length effect in the perception of stops and glides.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America85, 2154–2164.
5.
EpsteinW. (1973). The process of “taking-into-account” in visual perception.Perception2, 267–285.
6.
FinneyD. J. (1971). Probit analysisCambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
GreenK. P.StevensE. B.KuhlP. K. (1994). Talker continuity and the use of rate information during phonetic perception.Perception & Psychophysics55, 249–260.
8.
JusczykP. W. (1986). Speech perception.Handbook of perception and human performance.BoffK. R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ. P.New York: John Wiley.
9.
KlattD. H. (1980). Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America67, 971–995.
10.
KlattD. H.KlattL. C. (1990). Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality among female and male talkers.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America87, 820–857.
11.
LadefogedP. (1993). A course in phonetics. 3rd ed Fort Worth: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
12.
LibermanA. M.CooperF. S.ShankweilerD. P.Studdert-KennedyM. (1967). Perception of the speech code.Psychological Review74, 431–461.
13.
LindblomB. (1990). Explaining phonetic variation. A sketch of the H&H theory.Speech Production and Speech Modeling.HardcastleW.MarchalA.Dordrecht: Klüwer403–439.
14.
LindblomB. (1994). Role of articulation in speech perception: Clues from productionPaper presented at the 127th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America.June1994.
15.
LiskerL.AbramsonA. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Spectrographic measurements.Word20, 384–422.
16.
LiskerL.AbramsonA. S. (1967). Some effects of context on voice onset time in English stops.Language and Speech10, 1–28.
17.
LiskerL.AbramsonA. S. (1970). The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics.Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Phonetic SciencesPrague: Academia563–567.
18.
MaddiesonI. (1984). Patterns of soundCambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
MattinglyI. G.LibermanA. M.SyrdalA. K.HalwesT. (1971). Discrimination in speech and nonspeech modes.Cognitive Psychology2, 131–157.
20.
MillerJ. L. (1987). Rate-dependent processing in speech perception.Progress in the psychology of language.EllisA. W.Hove, U.K: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates LtdVol. III, 119–157.
21.
MillerJ. L.AibelI. L.GreenK. (1984). On the nature of rate-dependent processing during phonetic perception.Perception & Psychophysics35, 5–15.
22.
MillerJ. L.GreenK. P.ReevesA. (1986). Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast.Phonetica43, 106–115.
23.
MillerJ. L.VolaitisL. E. (1989). Effect of speaking rate on the perceptual structure of a phonetic category.Perception & Psychophysics46, 505–512.
24.
NooteboomS. G. (1979). Complex control of simple decisions in the perception of vowel length.Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Phonetic Sciencesvolume II298–304. Copenhagen: Institute of Phonetics.
25.
PéturssonM. (1972). La préaspiration en islandais moderne. Examen de sa réalisation phonétique chez deux sujets. Studia Linguistica, 26, 61–80.
26.
PindJ. (1986). The perception of quantity in Icelandic.Phonetica43, 116–139.
27.
PindJ. (1995a). Speaking rate, VOT and quantity: The search for higher-order invariants or two Icelandic speech cues.Perception & Psychophysics57, 291–304.
28.
PindJ. (1995b). Constancy and normalization in the perception of Voice Offset Time as a cue for pre-aspiration.Acta Psychologica89, 53–81.
29.
PortR. F.DalbyJ. (1982). Consonant/vowel ratio as a cue for voicing in English.Perception & Psychophysics32, 141–152.
30.
StevensK. N. (1960). Toward a model for speech recognition.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America32, 47–55.
31.
StevensK. N. (1993). Models for the production and acoustics of stop consonants.Speech communication13, 367–375.
32.
StevensK. N.BlumsteinS. E. (1981). The search for invariant acoustic correlates of acoustic features.Perspectives on the study of speech.EimasP. D.MillerJ. L.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc1–38.
33.
SummerfieldQ. (1981). On articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance7, 1074–1095.
34.
SummerfieldQ.HaggardM. (1977). On the dissociation of spectral and temporal cues to the voicing distinction in initial stop consonants.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America62, 435–448.
35.
VolaitisL. E.MillerJ. L. (1992). Phonetic prototypes: Influence of place of articulation and speaking rate on the internal structure of voicing categories.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America92, 723–735.
