Place of articulation and first formant transition pattern both affect perception of voicing in English

Abstract Voice onset time (VOT) and first-formant (F1) transition characteristics are both important phonetic cues for voicing categorization of pretonic stops in English. These cues also covary with place of articulation in production, such that bilabials are produced with shorter VOT values, and velars are produced with longer VOT values. This study investigated the effects of place of articulation and F1transition pattern on voicing categorization of VOT continua. Listeners categorized for voicing and place of articulation the stop consonant in VCV and CV stimuli for which the variables F1transition pattern, place of articulation (bilabial, alveolar, and velar), and VOT were fully crossed. A logistic regression analysis shows that bilabial and alveolar stimuli were more likely than velar stimuli to be classified as voiceless, largely independent of F1transition pattern. Increasing F1onset frequency and shortening transition duration also made voiceless judgments more likely. The magnitude of theF1 transition effects was considerably larger than the place of articulation effect. The results are inconsistent with models of consonant classification in which acoustic–phonetic cues for place of articulation are not involved in the perception of the voicing contrast. However, the observed perceptual interaction between place of articulation and voicing may be consistent with either a feature- or segment-based model of consonant classification.

[1]  J. Laver,et al.  The handbook of phonetic sciences , 1999 .

[2]  D. Massaro,et al.  Phonological context in speech perception , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  D. Klatt,et al.  Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  N. Umeda.  Consonant duration in American English , 1977 .

[5]  L. Lisker.  “Voicing” in English: A Catalogue of Acoustic Features Signaling /b/ Versus /p/ in Trochees , 1986, Language and speech.

[6]  Q. Summerfield,et al.  On the dissociation of spectral and temporal cues to the voicing distinction in initial stop consonants. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  A. Lotto,et al.  Effects of first formant onset frequency on [-voice] judgments result from auditory processes not specific to humans. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  D H Whalen,et al.  Vowel and consonant judgments are not independent when cued by the same information. , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  W. Hardcastle.  Some observations on the Tense-Lax Distinction in Initial Stops in Korean , 1973 .

[10]  David B Pisoni,et al.  On the identification of place and voicing features in synthetic stop consonants. , 1974, Journal of phonetics.

[11]  D. Pisoni.  Identification and discrimination of the relative onset time of two component tones: implications for voicing perception in stops. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Taehong Cho,et al.  Variation and universals in VOT: evidence from 18 languages , 1999 .

[13]  A. Liberman,et al.  Some Cues for the Distinction Between Voiced and Voiceless Stops in Initial Position , 1958 .

[14]  D. Massaro,et al.  Integration of featural information in speech perception. , 1978, Psychological review.

[15]  P. Mermelstein,et al.  On the relationship between vowel and consonant identification when cued by the same acoustic information , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  The Goal of Phonetics, Its Unification and Application , 1980 .

[17]  J L Miller,et al.  Nonindependence of feature processing in initial consonants. , 1977, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[18]  J D Miller,et al.  Speech perception by the chinchilla: identification function for synthetic VOT stimuli. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  John J. Ohala,et al.  There is no interface between phonology and phonetics: a personal view , 1990 .

[20]  L. Lisker,et al.  Letter: Is it VOT or a first-formant transition detector? , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Peter D. Eimas,et al.  Perspectives on the study of speech , 1981 .

[22]  J. L. Myers,et al.  Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[23]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Context Effects in a Double-Weak Theory of Speech Perception , 1992, Language and speech.

[24]  Victor W. Zue,et al.  Acoustic Characteristics of Stop Consonants: A Controlled Study , 1976 .

[25]  A. Liberman,et al.  Some Cues for the Distinction Between Voiced and Voiceless Stops in Initial Position , 1957 .

[26]  André Rigault,et al.  Some Experiments on the Perception of Mandarin Tones , 1972 .

[27]  Alvateg Gonzalez.  Consonant Duration in English. , 1974 .

[28]  Keith R. Kluender,et al.  Virtues and perils of an empiricist approach to speech perception , 1999 .

[29]  J Hillenbrand,et al.  Perception of sine-wave analogs of voice onset time stimuli. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  D. Massaro,et al.  Evaluation and integration of acoustic features in speech perception. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  D. Massaro.  Speech Perception By Ear and Eye: A Paradigm for Psychological Inquiry , 1989 .

[32]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[33]  J. D. Miller,et al.  Speech perception by the chinchilla: voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants , 1975, Science.

[34]  B. Repp.  Phonetic trading relations and context effects: new experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. , 1982, Psychological bulletin.

[35]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Duration of Syllable Nuclei in English , 1960 .

[36]  K. Stevens,et al.  Role of formant transitions in the voiced-voiceless distinction for stops. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[37]  B. Repp.  Phonetic trading relations and context effects : new experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception , 1982 .

[38]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Speech perception as pattern recognition. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  J. Pind,et al.  The role of F1 in the perception of voice onset time and voice offset time. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Michelle Caisse.  Cross‐linguistic differences in fundamental frequency perturbation induced by voiceless unaspirated stops , 1981 .

[41]  Jerome L. Myers,et al.  Research Design and Statistical Analysis , 1991 .

[42]  M. Halle,et al.  Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: The Distinctive Features and Their Correlates , 1961 .

[43]  Alvin M. Liberman,et al.  On Pushing the Voice-Onset-Time (Vot) Boundary About , 1977, Language and speech.

[44]  Terrance M. Nearey,et al.  The segment as a unit of speech perception , 1990 .

[45]  Michael Jessen,et al.  Phonetics and Phonology of Tense and Lax Obstruents in German , 1999 .

[46]  Arthur S. Abramson,et al.  Crosslanguage Study of Voicing in Initial Stops , 1963 .

[47]  Gary Weismer,et al.  Control of the voicing distinction for intervocalic stops and fricatives: some data and theoretical considerations , 1980 .

[48]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

[49]  David W. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[50]  E. Parker,et al.  Auditory constraints on the perception of voice-onset time: the influence of lower tone frequency on judgments of tone-onset simultaneity. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[51]  K. Kluender,et al.  Effects of first formant onset properties on voicing judgments result from processes not specific to humans. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[52]  A. Liberman,et al.  Some Experiments on the Perception of Synthetic Speech Sounds , 1952 .