A corpus of consonant–vowel–consonant real words and nonwords: Comparison of phonotactic probability, neighborhood density, and consonant age of acquisition

A corpus of 5,765 consonant–vowel–consonant sequences (CVCs) was compiled, and phonotactic probability and neighborhood density were computed for both child and adult corpora. This corpus of CVCs, provided as supplementary materials, was analyzed to address the following questions: (1) Do computations based on a child corpus differ from those based on an adult corpus? (2) Do the phonotactic probability and/or the neighborhood density of real words differ from those of nonwords? (3) Do phonotactic probability and/or neighborhood density differ across CVCs that vary in consonant age of acquisition? The results showed significant differences in phonotactic probability and neighborhood density for the child versus adult corpora, replicating prior findings. The impact of this difference on future studies will depend on the level of precision needed when specifying probability and density. In addition, significant and large differences in phonotactic probability and neighborhood density were detected between real words and nonwords, which may present methodological challenges for future research. Finally, CVCs composed of earlier-acquired sounds differed significantly in probability and density from those composed of later-acquired sounds, although this effect was relatively small and is less likely to present significant methodological challenges to future studies.

[1]  R. Haase,et al.  Multivariate analysis of variance. , 1987 .

[2]  P. Luce,et al.  Probabilistic Phonotactics and Neighborhood Activation in Spoken Word Recognition , 1999 .

[3]  H. Storkel,et al.  The independent effects of phonotactic probability and neighbourhood density on lexical acquisition by preschool children , 2011, Language and cognitive processes.

[4]  Matjaz Perc,et al.  Evolution of the most common English words and phrases over the centuries , 2012, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[5]  Daniel E. Bontempo,et al.  The effect of incremental changes in phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on word learning by preschool children. , 2013, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[6]  L. Shriberg Four new speech and prosody-voice measures for genetics research and other studies in developmental phonological disorders. , 1993, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[7]  Michael S Vitevitch,et al.  The influence of sublexical and lexical representations on the processing of spoken words in English , 2003, Clinical linguistics & phonetics.

[8]  M. Vitevitch,et al.  The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms. , 1996, Language and speech.

[9]  Holly L Storkel,et al.  Methods for minimizing the confounding effects of word length in the analysis of phonotactic probability and neighborhood density. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  R. Rush,et al.  The vocabulary of first-grade children , 1982 .

[11]  Jill R. Hoover,et al.  An Online Calculator to Compute Phonotactic Probability and Neighborhood Density Based on Child Corpora of Spoken American English , 2010 .

[12]  C. Stoel-Gammon Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children. , 2011, Journal of child language.

[13]  P. Luce,et al.  Similarity neighbourhoods of words in young children's lexicons , 1990, Journal of Child Language.

[14]  B. Munson,et al.  Lexical and phonological organization in children: evidence from repetition tasks. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[15]  Holly L. Storkel,et al.  Do children acquire dense neighborhoods? An investigation of similarity neighborhoods in lexical acquisition , 2004, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[16]  Rochelle S Newman,et al.  Life Span Effects of Lexical Factors on Oral Naming , 2005, Language and speech.

[17]  Jill R. Hoover,et al.  An online calculator to compute phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on the basis of child corpora of spoken American English , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[18]  Carter Revard,et al.  On the computability of certain monsters in Noah's Ark: Using computers to study Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary and The New Merriam-Webster Pocket Dictionary , 1968, ACM National Conference.

[19]  M. Vihman,et al.  Whole-Word Phonology and Templates: Trap, Bootstrap, or Some of Each? , 2002, Language, speech, and hearing services in schools.

[20]  A. B. Smit,et al.  The Iowa Articulation Norms Project and its Nebraska replication. , 1991, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[21]  P. Luce,et al.  When Words Compete: Levels of Processing in Perception of Spoken Words , 1998 .

[22]  Scott E. Maxwell,et al.  How the power of MANOVA can both increase and decrease as a function of the intercorrelations among the dependent variables. , 1994 .

[23]  Todd M. Bailey,et al.  Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or lexical neighborhoods? , 2001 .

[24]  Michael Hammond,et al.  Phonotactic probabilities in young children's speech production , 2004, Journal of Child Language.

[25]  B. Munson,et al.  Phonological pattern frequency and speech production in adults and children. , 2001, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[26]  M. Beckman,et al.  The interaction between vocabulary size and phonotactic probability effects on children's production accuracy and fluency in nonword repetition. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[27]  P. Luce,et al.  An examination of similarity neighbourhoods in young children's receptive vocabularies , 1995, Journal of Child Language.

[28]  H. Nusbaum Sizing up the Hoosier Mental Lexicon: Measuring the Familiarity of 20,000 Words, Research on Speech Perception , 1984 .

[29]  H. Storkel,et al.  Differentiating phonotactic probability and neighborhood density in adult word learning. , 2006, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[30]  David B Pisoni,et al.  Perception of Wordlikeness: Effects of Segment Probability and Length on the Processing of Nonwords. , 2000, Journal of memory and language.

[31]  Benjamin Munson,et al.  Lexicon-phonology relationships and dynamics of early language development--a commentary on Stoel-Gammon's 'Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children'. , 2011, Journal of child language.

[32]  H. Storkel,et al.  Markedness and the grammar in lexical diffusion of fricatives , 2002, Clinical linguistics & phonetics.

[33]  M. Teper Large N , 2005, hep-lat/0509019.