The increased use of voice-response systems has resulted in a greater need for systematic evaluation of the role of segmental and suprasegmental factors in determining the intelligibility of synthesized speech. Two experiments were conducted to examine the effects of pitch contour and speech rate on the perception of synthetic speech. In Experiment 1, subjects transcribed sentences that were either syntactically correct and meaningful or syntactically correct but semantically anomalous. In Experiment 2, subjects transcribed sentences that varied in length and syntactic structure. In both experiments a text-to-speech system generated synthetic speech at either 150 or 250 words/min. Half of the test sentences were generated with a flat pitch (monotone) and half were generated with normally inflected clausal intonation. The results indicate that the identification of words in fluent synthetic speech is influenced by speaking rate, meaning, length, and, to a lesser degree, pitch contour. The results suggest that in many applied situations the perception of the segmental information in the speech signal may be more critical to the intelligibility of synthesized speech than are suprasegmental factors.
Atal, B. S., and Hanauer, S. L. (1971). Speech analysis and synthesis by linear prediction of the speech waveform. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 50, 637–655.
3.
Bernstein, J. (1977). Intelligibility and simulated deaf-like segmental and timing errors. In ICASSP 1977 Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (pp. 244–247). New York: IEEE.
4.
Church, K. W., (1982). On memory limitations in natural language processing. Bloomington, IN: IV Linguistics Club.
5.
Cooper, W. E., and Paccia-Cooper, J. (1980). Syntax and speech. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
Cooper, W. E., and Sorensen, J. (1977). Fundamental frequency contours at syntactic boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 62, 683–692.
7.
Cutler, A. (1976). Phoneme monitoring reaction time as a function of preceding intonation contour. Perception and Psychophysics, 20, 55–60.
8.
Cutler, A., and Darwin, C. J. (1981). Phoneme-monitoring reaction time and preceding prosody: Effects of stop closure duration and of fundamental frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 217–224.
9.
Dallett, K. M. (1964). Intelligibility and short-term memory in the repetition of digit strings. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 7, 362–368.
10.
deHaan, H.J. (1977). A speech-rate intelligibility threshold for speeded and time-compressed connected speech. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, 366–372.
11.
deHaan, H. J., and Schjelderup, J. R. (1978). Threshold of intelligibility/comprehensibility of rapid connected speech: Method and instrumentation. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 10, 841–844.
12.
Dooling, D. J. (1974). Rhythm and syntax in sentence perception. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 255–264.
13.
Egan, J. P. (1948). Articulation testing methods. Laryngoscope, 58, 955–991.
14.
Foulke, E., Amster, C, H., Nolan, C. Y., and Bixler, R. H. (1962). The comprehension of rapid speech by the blind. Exceptional Children, 29, 134–141.
15.
Foulke, E., and Sticht, T. G. (1969). Review of research on the intelligibility and comprehension of accelerated speech. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 50–62.
16.
Frazier, L., and Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291–325.
17.
Garvey, W. D. (1953). The intelligibility of speeded speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 102–108.
18.
Huggins, A. W. F. (1978). Speech timing and intelligibility. In J. Requin (Ed.), Attention and performance VII (pp. 278–298. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
Klatt, D. (1976). Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 59, 1208–1221.
20.
Kucera, H., and Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press,
21.
Larkey, L. S., and Danly, M. (1983). Fundamental frequency and the comprehension of simple and complex sentences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 74, S67.
22.
Lehiste, I. (1970), Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
23.
Lehiste, I., Olive, J., and Streeter, L. (1976), Role of duration in disambiguating syntactically ambiguous sentences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 60, 1199–1202.
24.
Markel, J. D., and Gray, A. H., Jr. (1976). Linear prediction of speech. New York: Springer-Verlag.
25.
Martin, J. (1979). Rhythmic and segmental perceptions are not independent. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 65, 1286–1297.
26.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
27.
Nickerson, R. S. (1975). Characteristics of the speech of deaf persons. The Volta Review, 77, 342–367.
28.
Nusbaum, H. C., Dedina, M, J., and Pisoni, D. B. (1984). Perceptual confusions of consonants in natural and synthetic CV syllables. Research on Speech Perception, (Progress Report No. 10). Bloomington, IN: Speech Research Laboratory, Indiana University.
29.
Nusbaum, H. C., and Pisoni, D. B. (1985). Constraints on the perception of synthetic speech generated by rule. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 17, 235–242.
30.
Nye, P. N., and Gaitenby, J. H. (1974). The intelligibility of synthetic monosyllable words in short syntactically normal sentences. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research,SR-37/38, 169–190.
31.
Pierrehumbert, J. (1979), The perception of fundamental frequency declination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66, 363–369.
32.
Pisoni, D. B. (1981). Speeded classification of natural and synthetic speech in a lexical decision task, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 70, S98.
33.
Pisoni, D. B. (1982). Perception of speech: The human listener as a cognitive interface. Speech Technology, 1, 10–23.
34.
Simpson, C. A., and Marchionda-Frost, K. (1984). Synthesized speech rate and pitch effects on intelligibility of warning messages for pilots. Human Factors, 26, 509–517.
35.
Slowiaczek, L. M., and Pisoni, D. B. (1982). Effects of practice on speeded classification of natural and synthetic speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 71, S95.
36.
Summerfield, A, Q. (1975). How a full account of segmental perception depends on prosody, and vice versa. In A. Cohen and S, G, Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and process in speech perception (pp. 51–66). Heidelberg, W. Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Wingfield, A. (1975). The intonation-syntax interaction: Prosodic features in perceptual processing of sentences. In A. Cohen and S. G. Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and process in speech perception (pp. 146–156), Heidelberg, W. Germany: Springer-Verlag.
39.
Wingfield, A., and Klein, J. F. (1971). Syntactic structure and acoustic pattern in speech perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 9, 23–25.
