The present study examined the center and size of naïve adult listeners’ vowel perceptual space (VPS) in relation to listener language (LL) and talker age (TA). Adult listeners of three different first languages, American English, Greek, and Korean, categorized and rated the goodness of different vowels produced by 2-year-olds and 5-year-olds and adult speakers of those languages, and speakers of Cantonese and Japanese. The center (i.e., mean first and second formant frequencies (F1 and F2)) and size (i.e., area in the F1/F2 space) of VPSs that were categorized either into /a/, /i/, or /u/ were calculated for each LL and TA group. All center and size calculations were weighted by the goodness rating of each stimulus. The F1 and F2 values of the vowel category (VC) centers differed significantly by LL and TA. These effects were qualitatively different for the three vowel categories: English listeners had different /a/ and /u/ centers than Greek and Korean listeners. The size of VPSs did not differ significantly by LL, but did differ by TA and VCs: Greek and Korean listeners had larger vowel spaces when perceiving vowels produced by 2-year-olds than by 5-year-olds or adults, and English listeners had larger vowel spaces for /a/ than /i/ or /u/. Findings indicate that vowel perceptual categories of listeners varied by the nature of their native vowel system, and were sensitive to TA.
BestC. T. (1995). A direct realist perspective on cross-language speech perception. In StrangeW. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 171–204. York Press.
2.
BestC. T.TylerM. D. (2007). Nonnative and second-language speech perception: Commonalities and complementarities. In MunroM. J.BohnO.-S. (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning: In honor of James Emil Flege, 1334 (pp. 1–47). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
3.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2006). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5. 3. 51. http://www.praat.org/
4.
ChungH.KongE-J.EdwardsJ.WeismerG.FourakisM.HwangY. (2012). Cross-linguistic study of children’s and adults’ vowel spaces. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(1), 442–454.
5.
ClopperC. G.PisoniD. B. (2006). The nationwide speech project: A new corpus of American English dialects. Speech Communication, 48(6), 633–644.
6.
CutlerA.WeberA.SmitsR.CooperN. (2004). Patterns of English phoneme confusions by native and non-native listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(6), 3668–3678.
7.
CutlerA.SmitsR.CooperN. (2005). Vowel perception: Effects of non-native language vs. non-native dialect. Speech Communication, 47(1), 32–42.
8.
DavisB. L.MacNeilageP. F. (1990). Acquisition of correct vowel production: A quantitative case study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 33(1), 16–27.
9.
DavisB. L.JacksA.MarquardtT. P. (2005). Vowel patterns in developmental apraxia of speech: Three longitudinal case studies. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 19(4), 249–274.
10.
DragerK. (2006). From bad to bed: The relationship between perceived age and vowel perception in New Zealand English. Te Reo, 48, 55–68.
11.
DragerK. (2011). Speaker age and vowel perception. Language and Speech, 54(1), 99–121.
12.
EdwardsJ.BeckmanM. E. (2008a). Methodological questions in studying consonant acquisition. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 22(12), 937–956.
13.
EdwardsJ.BeckmanM. E. (2008b). Some cross-linguistic evidence for modulation of implicational universals by language-specific frequency effects in phonological development. Language Learning and Development, 4(2), 122–156.
14.
EisenbergS. L.HitchcockE. R. (2010). Using standardized tests to inventory consonant and vowel production: A comparison of 11 tests of articulation and phonology. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41(4), 488–503.
15.
FlegeJ. E. (1992). Speech learning in a second language. In FergusonC.MennL.Stoel-GammonC. (EDS.), Phonological development: Models, research, and implications (565–604). York Press.
16.
FlegeJ. E. (1995). Second language speech learning: Theory, findings, and problems. In StrangeW. (Ed.), Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language research (pp. 233–277). York Press.
17.
FlegeJ. E.MunroM. J.FoxR. A. (1994). Auditory and categorical effects on cross-language vowel perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95(6), 3623–3641.
18.
HarringtonJ.KleberF.ReuboldU. (2008). Compensation for coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in standard southern British: An acoustic and perceptual study. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(5), 2825–2835.
19.
HillenbrandJ.GettyL. A.ClarkM. J.WheelerK. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical society of America, 97(5), 3099–3111.
20.
IrwinJ. V.WongS. P. (Eds.) (1983) Phonological development in children: 18 to 72 months. Southern Illinois University Press.
21.
JohnsonD. (2000). Cool Edit Pro v 1.2 [Computer Program]. Phoenix, AZ: Syntrillium Software Corporation.
22.
KeatingP. A.HuffmanM. K. (1984). Vowel variation in Japanese. Phonetica, 41(4), 191–207.
23.
KendallT.FridlandV. (2012). Variation in perception and production of mid front vowels in the US Southern Vowel Shift. Journal of Phonetics, 40(2), 289–306.
24.
KleinschmidtD. F.JaegerT. F. (2015). Robust speech perception: Recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel. Psychological Review, 122(2), 148–203.
25.
KleinschmidtD. F.WeatherholtzK.Florian JaegerT. (2018). Sociolinguistic perception as inference under uncertainty. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 818–834.
LabovW.AshS.BobergC. (2006). Atlas of North American English: Phonetics, phonology and sound change. Mouton de Gruyter.
28.
LenthR. V. (2016). Least-squares means: The R Package lsmeans. Journal of Statistical Software, 69(1), 1–33.
29.
LewisB. A.FreebairnL. A.HansenA. J.IyengarS. K.TaylorH. G. (2004). School-age follow-up of children with childhood apraxia of speech. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35(2), 122–140.
30.
LibermanA. M.CooperF. S.ShankweilerD. P.Studdert-KennedyM. (1967). Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review, 74(6), 431–461.
31.
LobanovB. M. (1971). Classification of Russian vowels spoken by different speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49(2B), 606–608.
32.
McCulloughE. A.ClopperC. G. (2016). Perceptual subcategories within non-native English. Journal of Phonetics, 55, 19–37.
33.
MunsonB.JohnsonJ. M.EdwardsJ. (2012). The role of experience in the perception of phonetic detail in children’s speech: A comparison between speech-language pathologists and clinically untrained listeners. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 21(2), 124–139.
34.
NeareyT. M. (2013). Vowel inherent spectral change in the vowels of North American English. In MorrisonG. S.AssmanP. F. (Eds.), Vowel inherent spectral change (pp. 49–85). Springer.
35.
NiedzielskiN. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62-85.
36.
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(1), 576–588.
37.
PinheiroJBatesDDebRoySSarkarD, R Core Team (2019). nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-140. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme/
38.
PlummerA. R.MénardL.MunsonB.BeckmanM. E. (2013). Comparing vowel category response surfaces over age-varying maximal vowel spaces within and across language communities. In InterSpeech2013, 421–425.
39.
PollockK. (2013). The Memphis vowel project: Vowel errors in children with and without phonological disorders. In BallM. J.GibbonF. E. (Eds.), Handbook of vowels and vowel disorders (pp. 260–287). Psychology Press.
SchellingerS (2008). The role of intermediate productions and listener expectations on the perception of children’s speech. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
42.
SchneiderW.EschmanA.ZuccolottoA. (2002). E-Prime (Version 1.0). [Computer software and manual]. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc. https://www.pstnet.com/
43.
ShawJ. A.BestC.DochertyG.EvansB. G.FoulkesP.HayJ.MulakK. E. (2018). Resilience of English vowel perception across regional accent variation. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology, 9(1), 11. https://www.journal-labphon.org/articles/10.5334/labphon.87/
44.
StrangeW.Akahana-YamadaR.KuboR.TrentS. A.NishiK.JenkinsJ. J. (1998). Perceptual assimilation of American English vowels by Japanese listeners. Journal of Phonetics, 26(4), 311–344.
45.
Stoel-GammonC.HerringtonP. B. (1990). Vowel systems of normally developing and phonologically disordered children. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 4(2), 145–160.
46.
TemplinM. (1957). Certain language skills in children: Their development and inter-relationships. Institute of Child Welfare. Monograph, 26. University of Minnesota Press.
47.
VorperianH. K.KentR. D. (2007). Vowel acoustic space development in children: A synthesis of acoustic and anatomic data. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(6), 1510–1545.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
