English listeners categorize more of a [k-t] continuum as “t” after [ʃ] than [s] (Mann & Repp, 1981). This bias could be due to compensation for coarticulation (Mann & Repp, 1981) or auditory contrast between the fricatives and the stops (Lotto & Kluender, 1998). In Japanese, surface [ʃk, ʃt, sk, st] clusters arise via palatalization and vowel devoicing from /sik, sit, suk, sut/, and acoustic vestiges of the devoiced vowels remain in the fricative. On the one hand, compensation for coarticulation with the devoiced vowel would cancel out compensation for coarticulation with the fricative, and listeners would not show any response bias. On the other hand, if the stop contrasts spectrally with the fricative, listeners should respond “t” more often after [ʃi̥] than [su̥]. Experiment 1 establishes that [k] and [t] coarticulate with preceding voiced [i, u], voiceless [i̥, u̥], and [ʃ, s]. Experiment 2 shows that both Japanese and English listeners respond “t” more often after [ʃi̥] than [su̥], as predicted by auditory contrast. English listeners’ “t” responses also varied after voiced vowels, but those of Japanese listeners did not. Experiment 3 shows that this difference reflects differences in their phonetic experience.
AmanoS.KondoT. (2000). NTT database series: Lexical properties of Japanese (2nd release). Tokyo: Sanseido.
2.
BeckmanM. E. (1982). Segmental duration and the “mora” in Japanese. Phonetica, 39, 113–135.
3.
BeckmanM. E.ShojiA. (1984). Spectral and perceptual evidence for CV coarticulation in devoiced /si/ and /syu/ in Japanese. Phonetica, 41, 61–71.
4.
BlumsteinS. E.StevensK. N. (1979). Acoustic invariance in speech production: Evidence from measurements of the spectral characteristics of stop consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66, 1001–1017.
5.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.5.16) [Computer program]. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.praat.org/
6.
DiehlR. L.LottoA. J.HoltL. L. (2004). Speech perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(6), 149–179.
7.
DupouxE.KakehiK.HiroseY.PallierC.MehlerJ. (1999). Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: A perceptual illusion?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(6), 1568–1578.
8.
DupouxE.PallierC.KakehiK.MehlerJ. (2001). New evidence for prelexical phonological processing in word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16(5–6), 491–505.
9.
FowlerC. A. (2006). Compensation for coarticulation reflects gesture perception, not spectral contrast. Perception and Psychophysics, 68, 161–177.
10.
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 Performance, 26, 877–888.
11.
HanM. (1962). Unvoicing of vowels in Japanese. Onsei on Kenkyuu [Studies in Phonetics], 10, 81–100.
12.
HanM. (1994). Acoustic manifestations of mora timing in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96, 73–82.
13.
HaraguchiS. (1977). The tone pattern of Japanese: An autosegmental theory of tonology. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
14.
HattoriS.YamamotoK.KohashiY.FujimuraO. (1957). Nihongo no boin [Japanese vowels]. Bulletin of the Kobayasi Institute of Physical Research, 7, 69–79.
15.
JakobsonR.FantC. G. M.HalleM. (1951). Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
JongmanA.WaylandR.WongS. (2000). Acoustic characteristics of English fricatives. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 1252–1263.
17.
KeatingP. A.HuffmanM. K. (1984). Vowel variation in Japanese. Phonetica, 41(4), 191–207.
18.
KlattD. H.KlattL. C. (1990). Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 820–857.
19.
LottoA. J.HoltL. L. (2006). Putting phonetic context effects into context: A commentary on Fowler (2006). Perception and Psychophysics, 68, 178–183.
20.
LottoA. J.KluenderK. R. (1998). Gestural contrast effects in speech perception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonant identification. Perception and Psychophysics, 60, 602–619.
21.
MannV. A.ReppB. H. (1980). Influence of vocalic context on the perception of the [ʃ]-[s] distinction. Perception and Psychophysics, 28, 213–228.
22.
MannV. A.ReppB. H. (1981). Influence of preceding fricative on stop consonant perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 548–558.
23.
MashD.KawaharaS. (2006). Sequential contrast versus compensation for coarticulation in English and Japanese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 3423 (Abstract).
24.
McCawleyJ. D. (1977). Accent in Japanese. In HymanL. M. (Ed.), Studies in stress and accent (pp. 251–302). Los Angeles: University of Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics.
25.
NakamuraM. (2003). The articulation of vowel devoicing: A preliminary analysis. On-in Kenkyuu [Phonological Studies], 6, 49–58.
26.
NishiK.StrangeW.Akahane-YamadaR.KuboR.Trent-BrownS. A. (2008). Acoustic and perceptual similarity of Japanese and American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124, 576–588.
27.
NittrouerS.Studdert-KennedyK.McGowanR. S. (1989). The emergence of phonetic segments: Evidence from the spectral structure of fricative-vowel syllables spoken by children and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 32, 120–132.
StevensK. N.BlumsteinS. E. (1978). Invariant cues for place of articulation in stop consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 64, 1358–1368.
30.
TsuchidaA. (1994). Fricative-vowel coarticulation in Japanese devoiced syllables: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 10, 145–165.
31.
TsuchidaA. (1997). Phonetics and phonology of Japanese vowel devoicing, PhD dissertation, Cornell University.
32.
VanceT. (2005). The sounds of Japanese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
ViswanathanN.FowlerC. A.MagnusonJ. S. (2009). A critical examination of the spectral contrast account of compensation for coarticulation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 74–79.
34.
ViswanathanN.MagnusonJ. S.FowlerC. A. (2008). Compensation for coarticulation may reflect gestural perception: Evidence from a critical examination of the effects of non-speech contexts on speech categorization. Eleventh Conference on Laboratory Phonology (pp. 147–148). Wellington, New Zealand (Abstract).
35.
ViswanathanN.MagnusonJ. S.FowlerC. A. (2010). Compensation for coarticulation: Disentangling auditory and gestural theories of perception of coarticulatory effects in speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(4), 1005–1015.
36.
WhalenD. H. (1981). Effects of vocalic formant transitions and vowel quality on the /s-ʃ/ boundary. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 275–282.
37.
WoodS. (1982). X-ray and model studies of vowel articulation, PhD dissertation, Lund University.
