Compensation for coarticulation reflects gesture perception, not spectral contrast

This article reports three experiments designed to explore the basis for speech perceivers’ apparent compensations for coarticulation. In the first experiment, the stimuli were members of three /da/-to-/ga/ continua hybridized from natural speech. The monosyllables had originally been produced in disyllables/ada/ and /aga/ to make Continuum 1, /alda/ and /alga/ (Continuum 2), and /arda/ and /arga/ (Continuum 3). Members of the second and third continua were influenced by carryover coarticulation from the preceding /l/ or /r/ context. Listeners showed compensation for this carryover coarticulation in the absence of the precursor /al/ or /ar/ syllables. This rules out an account in which compensation for coarticulation reflects a spectral contrast effect exerted by a precursor syllable, as previously has been proposed by Lotto, Holt, and colleagues (e.g., Lotto, Kluender, & Holt, 1997; Lotto & Kluender, 1998). The second experiment showed an enhancing effect of the endpoint monosyllables in Experiment 1 on identifications of preceding natural hybrids along an /al/-to-/ar/ continuum. That is, coarticulatory /l/ and /r/ information in /da/ and /ga/ syllables led to increased judgments of /l/ and /r/, respectively, in the precursor /al/-to-/ar/ continuum members. This was opposite to the effect, in Experiment 3, of /da/and /ga/ syllables on preceding tones synthesized to range in frequency from approximately the endingF3 of /ar/ to the endingF3 of /al/. The enhancing, not contrastive, effect in Experiment 2, juxtaposed to the contrastive effect in Experiment 3, further disconfirms the spectral contrast account of compensation for coarticulation. A review of the literature buttresses that conclusion and provides strong support for an account that invokes listeners’ attention to information in speech for the occurrence of gestural overlap.

[1]  Β. Lindblom,et al.  On the Role of Formant Transitions in Vowel Recognition , 1968 .

[2]  H. McGurk,et al.  Hearing lips and seeing voices , 1976, Nature.

[3]  B. Walden,et al.  Effects of training on the visual recognition of consonants. , 1977, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[4]  A. Liberman,et al.  Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  V. Mann.  Influence of preceding liquid on stop-consonant perception , 1980 .

[6]  V. Mann,et al.  Influence of vocalic context on perception of the [∫]-[s] distinction , 1978 .

[7]  V. Mann.  Influence of preceding liquid on stop-consonant perception. , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  C A Fowler,et al.  Production and perception of coarticulation among stressed and unstressed vowels. , 1981, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[9]  V. Mann,et al.  Influence of preceding fricative on stop consonant perception. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Speech perception without traditional speech cues. , 1981, Science.

[11]  Alvin M. Liberman,et al.  Some differences between phonetic and auditory modes of perception , 1983, Cognition.

[12]  J. Fodor.  The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[13]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Perception of the duration of rapid spectrum changes in speech and nonspeech signals , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  D. Whalen.  Subcategorical phonetic mismatches slow phonetic judgments , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  C. Fowler.  Segmentation of coarticulated speech in perception , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  R M Warren,et al.  Criterion shift rule and perceptual homeostasis. , 1985, Psychological review.

[17]  A. Liberman,et al.  The motor theory of speech perception revised , 1985, Cognition.

[18]  Kim E. A. Silverman,et al.  F₀ Segmental Cues Depend on Intonation: The Case of the Rise after Voiced Stops , 1986 .

[19]  David Ralph Williams.  Role of dynamic information in the perception of coarticulated vowels , 1986 .

[20]  C. Fowler.  An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct realist perspective , 1986 .

[21]  N. R. Petersen.  Perceptual Compensation for Segmentally Conditioned Fundamental Frequency Perturbation , 1986 .

[22]  Patricia K. Kuhl,et al.  The special-mechanisms debate in speech research: Categorization tests on animals and infants. , 1987 .

[23]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Cognitive penetration of the mechanisms of perception: Compensation for coarticulation of lexically restored phonemes , 1988 .

[24]  A Löfqvist,et al.  The cricothyroid muscle in voicing control. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  R. Diehl,et al.  An auditory basis for the stimulus-length effect in the perception of stops and glides. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  S. Sapir.  The intrinsic pitch of vowels: Theoretical, physiological, and clinical considerations , 1989 .

[27]  C A Fowler,et al.  Sound-producing sources as objects of perception: rate normalization and nonspeech perception. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  V. Mann,et al.  Perceptual order and the effect of vocalic context on fricative perception , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Carol A. Fowler,et al.  Vowel duration and closure duration in voiced and unvoiced stops: there are no contrast effects here , 1992 .

[30]  C A Fowler,et al.  Listeners do hear sounds, not tongues. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  A. Lotto,et al.  Perceptual compensation for coarticulation by Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  Jennifer S. Pardo,et al.  Perceiving the causes of coarticulatory acoustic variation: Consonant voicing and vowel pitch , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  C A Fowler,et al.  Intrinsicf0 differences in spoken and sung vowels and their perception by listeners , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  A. Lotto,et al.  General contrast effects in speech perception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonant identification , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  M. Pitt,et al.  Is Compensation for Coarticulation Mediated by the Lexicon , 1998 .

[36]  V. Mann,et al.  Contrast effects do not underlie effects of preceding liquids on stop-consonant identification by humans. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  A. Liberman,et al.  On the relation of speech to language , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[38]  A. Lotto,et al.  Neighboring spectral content influences vowel identification. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[39]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Speech listening specifically modulates the excitability of tongue muscles: a TMS study , 2002, The European journal of neuroscience.

[40]  Joseph D. W. Stephens,et al.  Preceding phonetic context affects perception of nonspeech (L) , 2003 .

[41]  W. S. Rhode,et al.  Effects of contrast between onsets of speech and other complex spectra. , 2003, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  Joseph D. W. Stephens,et al.  Preceding phonetic context affects perception of nonspeech. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[43]  M. Pitt,et al.  Lexical activation (and other factors) can mediate compensation for coarticulation , 2003 .

[44]  Perceptual overshoot in listeners with cochlear implants , 2004 .

[45]  Lori L Holt,et al.  A critical evaluation of visually moderated phonetic context effects , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  Carol A. Fowler,et al.  Parsing coarticulated speech in perception: effects of coarticulation resistance , 2005, J. Phonetics.

[47]  A. Lotto,et al.  Putting phonetic context effects into context: A commentary on Fowler (2006) , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.