Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine which articulatory features serve as important distinctive features of perception by measuring latency in speech shadowing. Fifteen subjects shadowed a recording of consonant-vowel syllables orally and by means of a hand-held switch. Vocal shadowing was tape recorded and the onsets of the stimuli and the manual responses were recorded on a polygraph. The oral responses were used to indicate perceptual confusions and the manual responses were used as the basis for measuring the shadowing latency for each consonant. After eliminating the dental fricatives because of perceptual confusions, the remaining consonants (p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, s, z, ∫, 3, m, n, 1, r, j, w,) were classified according to a feature system and the latency scores were analysed. An analysis of variance indicated significant differences among sounds arranged according to features. A post hoc comparison between all possible features (interrupted, grave, acute, diffuse, strident, voiced, tense, nasal) showed that three features were primarily responsible for the significant variance: stridency (or, minus interrupted) voicing, and nasalization. The results do not seem to support the concept of a hierarchy of features which order the decisions made in consonant identification.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chomsky, N. and Halle, M. ( 1968). Sound Pattern of English (New York).

Fant, G. ( 1969). Distinctive features and phonetic dimensions. Speech Transmission Laboratory -Quarterly Progress and Status Report, 2-3, 1.

Halle, M. ( 1964). On the bases of phonology. In J. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.), The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.).

Jakobson, R. and Halle, M. ( 1956). Fundamentals of Language (s' Gravenhage).

Jakobson, R. , Fant, C.G.M. and Halle, M. ( 1963). Preliminaries to Speech Analysis (Cambridge, Mass.) .

Kozhevnikov, V.A. and Chistovich, L.A. ( 1966). Speech: Articulation and Perception (Washington, D.C.) .

Lane, H. ( 1965). The motor theory of speech perception: a critical review . Psych. Rev. 72, 275.

Malmberg, B. ( 1963). Structural Linguistics and Human Communication (New York) .

Miller, G.A. and Nicely, P.A. ( 1955). An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 27, 338.

10.

Miltich, A. and Sharf, D.J. ( 1969). Response latency in the perception of phonation. Speech and Hearing Science Research Reports, Univ. Michigan, Speech and Hearing Science Laboratory, 1, 17.

11.

Peters, R.W. ( 1963). Dimensions of perception for consonants. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 35, 1985 .

12.

Sharf, D.J. and Baehr, T.J. ( 1969). Quantitative analysis of articulation correspondences . Stat. Meth. Ling., 5, 36.

13.

Sheffe, H. ( 1959). The Analysis of Variance (New York).

14.

Wickelgren, W.A. ( 1966). Distinctive features and errors in short-term memory for English consonants. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 39, 388.

Response Latency Differences in Speech Shadowing as an Indicator of Distinctive Features of Consonants

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References