Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1995-4
Learnability Constraints on Theories of Speech Perception: From Spoken Words to Speech Sounds Review of “The Development of Speech Perception: The Transition from Speech Sounds to Spoken Words”
BEST, C.T. (in press). A direct realist view of cross-language speech perception. In Strange, W. (Ed.) Speech perception and linguistic experience: Issues in cross-language speech research. Timonium, MD: York.
2.
CUTLER, A., and SWINNEY, D.S. (1987). Prosody and the development of comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 14, 145–167.
3.
DIEHL, R.L., and WALSH, M.A. (1989). An auditory basis for the stimulus-length effect in the perception of stops and glides. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85, 2154–2164.
4.
EIMAS, P.D., SIQUELAND, E.R., JUSCZYK, P., and VIGORITO, J. (1971). Speech perception in infants. Science, 171, 303–306.
5.
FERNALD, A. (1985). Four-month-old infants prefer to listen to motherese. Infant Behavior and Development, 8, 181–195.
6.
FOWLER, C.A. (1986). An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct-realist perspective. Journal of Phonetics, 14, 3–28.
7.
KEMLER NELSON, D.G., HIRSH-PASEK, K., JUSCZYK, P.W., and WRIGHT CASSIDY, K. (1989). How the prosodic cues in motherese might assist language learning. Journal of Child Language, 16, 53–68.
8.
LENNEBERG, E.H. (1967). Biological foundations of language.New York: Wiley.
9.
LIBERMAN, A.M., and MATTINGLY, I.G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1–36.
10.
NOSOFSKY, R.M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39–57.
11.
NOSOFSKY, R.M. (1987). Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition.14, 700–708.