Time and again: The changing effect of word and multiword frequency on phonetic duration for highly frequent sequences

There is growing evidence that multiword information affects processing. In this paper, we look at the effect of word and multiword frequency on the phonetic duration of words in spontaneous speech to (a) extend previous findings and (b) ask whether the relation between word and multiword information changes across the frequency continuum. If highly frequent sequences are stored holistically, then the effect of word frequency should disappear. If alternatively, increased sequence usage causes a change in the prominence of word and multiword information, we should see reduced effects of word frequency, and increased effects of sequence frequency for high frequency sequences. We first extend previous findings by showing that trigram frequency affects single word duration, even when controlling for word predictability. We then show that the effect of trigram frequency increases while the effect of word frequency decreases — but does not disappear — for highly frequent sequences. The findings provide further support for the effect of multiword information on processing and document the growing prominence of multiword information with repeated usage.

[1]  H. Baayen,et al.  Holistic Processing of Regular Four-word Sequences 1 HOLISTIC PROCESSING OF REGULAR FOUR-WORD SEQUENCES Holistic Processing of Regular Four-word Sequences : A Behavioral and ERP study of the effects of structure , frequency , and probability on immediate free recall , 2009 .

[2]  N. Ellis,et al.  An Academic Formulas List: New Methods in Phraseology Research , 2010 .

[3]  S. Gahl Time and Thyme Are not Homophones: The Effect of Lemma Frequency on Word Durations in Spontaneous Speech , 2008 .

[4]  A. Siyanova‐Chanturia,et al.  The idiom principle revisited , 2014 .

[5]  Susan M. Garnsey,et al.  Knowledge of Grammar, Knowledge of Usage: Syntactic Probabilities Affect Pronunciation Variation , 2004 .

[6]  Steven T Piantadosi,et al.  Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  P. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package) , 2014 .

[8]  Kathy Conklin,et al.  Formulaic Sequences: Are They Processed More Quickly than Nonformulaic Language by Native and Nonnative Speakers? , 2008 .

[9]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  Morphological predictability and acoustic duration of interfixes in Dutch compounds. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  John J. Godfrey,et al.  SWITCHBOARD: telephone speech corpus for research and development , 1992, [Proceedings] ICASSP-92: 1992 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[11]  Sylvie De Cock,et al.  A Recurrent Word Combination Approach to the Study of Formulae in the Speech of Native and Non-Native Speakers of English , 1998 .

[12]  N. Snider,et al.  More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases , 2010 .

[13]  Inbal Arnon,et al.  A unified lexicon and grammar? Compositional and non-compositional phrases in the lexicon , 2012 .

[14]  S. Pinker,et al.  The past and future of the past tense , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  G. Underwood,et al.  The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences , 2004 .

[16]  A. Sosa,et al.  Evidence for frequency-based constituents in the mental lexicon: collocations involving the word of , 2002, Brain and Language.

[17]  Norbert Schmitt,et al.  A Phrasal Expressions List , 2012 .

[18]  J. Elman On the Meaning of Words and Dinosaur Bones: Lexical Knowledge Without a Lexicon , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  Lee H. Wurm,et al.  What residualizing predictors in regression analyses does (and what it does not do) , 2014 .

[20]  Nick C. Ellis,et al.  Formulaic Language and Second Language Acquisition: Zipf and the Phrasal Teddy Bear , 2012, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[21]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence , 2007 .

[22]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: the reduction of don't in English , 1999 .

[23]  Susan M. Garnsey,et al.  Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1994 .

[24]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change , 2002, Language Variation and Change.

[25]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Letting structure emerge: connectionist and dynamical systems approaches to cognition , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  Hermann Ney,et al.  Improved backing-off for M-gram language modeling , 1995, 1995 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[27]  A. Siyanova‐Chanturia,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 2022 .

[28]  William D. Raymond,et al.  Probabilistic Relations between Words: Evidence from Reduction in Lexical Production , 2008 .

[29]  Colin Bannard,et al.  Stored Word Sequences in Language Learning , 2008, Psychological science.

[30]  Stuart Webb Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries [Book Review] , 2012 .

[31]  Douglas Biber,et al.  A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: multi-word patterns in speech and writing , 2009 .

[32]  A. Pawley,et al.  Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency , 2014 .

[33]  Alice Turk,et al.  The Smooth Signal Redundancy Hypothesis: A Functional Explanation for Relationships between Redundancy, Prosodic Prominence, and Duration in Spontaneous Speech , 2004, Language and speech.

[34]  Vsevolod Kapatsinski,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of prefabs: Evidence from monitoring , 2009 .

[35]  N. Ellis,et al.  Formulaic Language in Native and Second Language Speakers: Psycholinguistics, Corpus Linguistics, and TESOL , 2008 .

[36]  David Miller,et al.  The Fisher Corpus: a Resource for the Next Generations of Speech-to-Text , 2004, LREC.

[37]  Inbal Arnon,et al.  More than Words: The Effect of Multi-word Frequency and Constituency on Phonetic Duration , 2013, Language and speech.

[38]  Matthew Walenski,et al.  Moving past the past tense , 2005, Brain and Language.

[39]  Jason M. Brenier,et al.  Predictability Effects on Durations of Content and Function Words in Conversational English , 2009 .

[40]  Jonah Katz,et al.  Compression effects in English , 2012, J. Phonetics.

[41]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Predicting the dative alternation , 2007 .

[42]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical records , 1995 .

[43]  J. Bresnan,et al.  Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation in spontaneous speech , 2009, Language and Cognition.

[44]  Dan Jurafsky,et al.  Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  Yvonne Freeh,et al.  Words And Rules The Ingredients Of Language , 2016 .

[46]  Ute Römer,et al.  The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm , 2013 .

[47]  Benjamin V. Tucker,et al.  The effects of N-gram probabilistic measures on the recognition and production of four-word sequences , 2011 .

[48]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2001 .

[49]  Inbal Arnon,et al.  Why Brush Your Teeth Is Better Than Teeth – Children's Word Production Is Facilitated in Familiar Sentence-Frames , 2011 .

[50]  Lou Boves,et al.  Acoustic reduction in conversational Dutch: A quantitative analysis based on automatically generated segmental transcriptions , 2011, J. Phonetics.

[51]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech , 2012 .

[52]  D. Bates,et al.  Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4 , 2015 .

[53]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Regular morphology and the lexicon. , 1995 .