Lexical competition in vowel articulation revisited: Vowel dispersion in the Easy/Hard database

Abstract A widely-cited study investigating effects of recognition difficulty on the phonetic realization of words ( Wright, 2004 ). Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation. In J. Local, R. Ogden & R. Temple (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology, Vol. VI (pp. 26–50)) reported that vowel dispersion, i.e. distance from the center of the talker's F1/F2 space, was greater in words that represented difficult recognition targets (‘hard’ words) than in easy recognition targets (‘easy’ words). The goal of the current study was to test whether that effect persisted when controlling for known other determinants of F1 and F2. A second goal was to test whether the pattern observed in the recordings analysed in Wright (2004) extended to all monophthongs in the set of recordings of which the words analysed in Wright (2004) formed a subset. We find that the dispersion difference between ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ words vowel dispersion is expected, given previous observations about effects of phonetic environment on vowel formants. When segmental context is taken into account, recognition difficulty fails to be predictive of vowel dispersion, both in the subset and in the larger database. An analysis of the fitted values of models of F1 and F2 based on consonantal factors (but not recognition difficulty) shows that the formant values predicted by those models separate vowels in “easy” and “hard” words in the manner observed in W2004. We discuss the implications for the effect of phonological neighbourhood density on language production, and for the relationship between lexical retrieval, auditory recognition difficulty and pronunciation variation.

[1]  M. Fourakis,et al.  Tempo, stress, and vowel reduction in American English. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Explaining Phonetic Variation: A Sketch of the H&H Theory , 1990 .

[3]  Julia F. Strand,et al.  Sizing up the competition: quantifying the influence of the mental lexicon on auditory and visual spoken word recognition. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  R. Treiman,et al.  Syllable Structure and the Distribution of Phonemes in English Syllables , 1997 .

[5]  Akira Watanabe,et al.  Formant estimation method using inverse-filter control , 2001, IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Process..

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

[7]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognition of spoken words by native and non-native listeners: talker-, listener-, and item-related factors. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  M. Vitevitch,et al.  Sublexical and lexical representations in speech production: effects of phonotactic probability and onset density. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[9]  David C. Plaut,et al.  Strategic Control Over Rate of Processing in Word Reading: A Computational Investigation of the Tempo-Naming Task , 2000 .

[10]  J. C. Krause,et al.  Acoustic properties of naturally produced clear speech at normal speaking rates. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Effects of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

[13]  Matthew Goldrick,et al.  The effects of lexical neighbors on stop consonant articulation. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Cynthia G. Clopper,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R. Wright Phonetic Interpretation Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI: Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation , 2004 .

[16]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Roles and representations of systematic fine phonetic detail in speech understanding , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[17]  Michael S Vitevitch,et al.  The facilitative influence of phonological similarity and neighborhood frequency in speech production in younger and older adults , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[18]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[19]  William Labov,et al.  The atlas of North American English : phonetics, phonology and sound change : a multimedia reference tool , 2006 .

[20]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  Lexical frequency and acoustic reduction in spoken Dutch. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  K. Stevens,et al.  Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: an acoustical study. , 1963, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[22]  E. Thomas An Acoustic Analysis of Vowel Variation in New World English , 2001 .

[23]  B. Munson Lexical Access , Lexical Representation , and Vowel Production , 2006 .

[24]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  The Old and Thee, uh, New , 2004, Psychological science.

[25]  Julie E. Boland,et al.  Priming in pronunciation: Beyond pattern recognition and onset latency , 1989 .

[26]  Edward Flemming,et al.  The Phonetics of Schwa Vowels , 2009 .

[27]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[28]  W. Levelt,et al.  Speaking: From Intention to Articulation , 1990 .

[29]  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.

[30]  B. Lindblom,et al.  Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels , 1994 .

[31]  Mark Liberman,et al.  Speaker identification on the SCOTUS corpus , 2008 .

[32]  Paul A. Luce,et al.  Neighborhoods of Words in the Mental Lexicon. Research on Speech Perception. Technical Report No. 6. , 1986 .

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

[34]  Anne Pier Salverda,et al.  The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension , 2003, Cognition.

[35]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models , 2006 .

[36]  Kelley J. Kilanski,et al.  The effects of token frequency and phonological neighborhood density on native and non-native English speech production , 2009 .

[37]  Jake Kurczek,et al.  The ageing neighbourhood: phonological density in naming , 2014, Language and cognitive processes.

[38]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Phonotactics, Neighborhood Activation, and Lexical Access for Spoken Words , 1999, Brain and Language.

[39]  L. Stephenson Lexical Frequency and Neighbourhood Density effects on Vowel Production in Words and Nonwords , 2004 .

[40]  Yuichi Ueda,et al.  A real-time formant tracker based on the inverse filter control method , 2007 .

[41]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Speech perception, word recognition and the structure of the lexicon , 1985, Speech Commun..

[42]  William J. Hardcastle,et al.  The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, 2nd Edition , 2010 .

[43]  Coarticulation • Suprasegmentals,et al.  Acoustic Phonetics , 2019, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Human Communication Sciences and Disorders.

[44]  Cynthia G. Clopper,et al.  Effects of local lexical competition and regional dialect on vowel production. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[45]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  Articulatory Planning Is Continuous and Sensitive to Informational Redundancy , 2005, Phonetica.

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

[47]  Gary S. Dell,et al.  Neighbors in the lexicon: Friends or foes? , 2003 .

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

[49]  Alison Tunley,et al.  Coarticulatory influences of liquids on vowels in English , 1999 .

[50]  Joan L. Bybee Phonology and Language Use , 2004, Phonetica.

[51]  E. Bard,et al.  Controlling the Intelligibility of Referring Expressions in Dialogue , 2000 .

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

[53]  Rebecca Scarborough,et al.  Neighborhood-conditioned patterns in phonetic detail: Relating coarticulation and hyperarticulation , 2013, J. Phonetics.

[54]  Ulrich H. Frauenfelder,et al.  Neighborhood Density and Frequency Across Languages and Modalities , 1993 .

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

[56]  Mariapaola D'Imperio,et al.  Modeling listeners: Comments on Pluymaekers et al. and Scarborough , 2010 .

[57]  Frank E. Harrell,et al.  Regression Modeling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis , 2001 .

[58]  D. Mirman,et al.  Competition and cooperation among similar representations: toward a unified account of facilitative and inhibitory effects of lexical neighbors. , 2012, Psychological review.

[59]  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.

[60]  Matthew Goldrick,et al.  Mechanisms of interaction in speech production , 2009, Language and cognitive processes.

[61]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words , 1991 .

[62]  Erika S. Levy,et al.  Acoustic variability within and across German, French, and American English vowels: phonetic context effects. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[63]  Lee H. Wurm,et al.  Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities , 2007 .

[64]  Dani Byrd,et al.  Relations of sex and dialect to reduction , 1994, Speech Communication.

[65]  A. Neel,et al.  Vowel space characteristics and vowel identification accuracy. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[66]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  Storage and computation in the mental lexicon , 2005 .

[67]  Mariapaola D'Imperio,et al.  Lexical and contextual predictability: Confluent effects on the production of vowels , 2010 .

[68]  Winifred Strange,et al.  Perceptual invariance of coarticulated vowels over variations in speaking rate. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[69]  A Wingfield,et al.  Response Latencies in Naming Objects , 1965, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[70]  B. Munson,et al.  The effect of phonological neighborhood density on vowel articulation. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[71]  D. Balota,et al.  The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production? ☆ , 1985 .

[72]  Diane Kewley-Port,et al.  Talker differences in clear and conversational speech: acoustic characteristics of vowels. , 2007, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[73]  Michael S Vitevitch,et al.  The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[74]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Word-specific phonetics , 2001 .

[75]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[76]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Economy of Speech Gestures , 1983 .

[77]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[78]  Patrice Speeter Beddor Phonological and phonetic effects of nasalization on vowel height , 1983 .

[79]  David B. Pisoni,et al.  Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics , 1996, Speech Commun..

[80]  D. Howes On the Relation between the Intelligibility and Frequency of Occurrence of English Words , 1957 .

[81]  Marilyn Y. Chen,et al.  Acoustic correlates of English and French nasalized vowels. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[83]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Spread of CV and v-to-v coarticulation in british English: implications for the intelligibility of synthetic speech , 1994, ICSLP.

[84]  M. Aylett,et al.  Language redundancy predicts syllabic duration and the spectral characteristics of vocalic syllable nuclei. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[85]  W. Levelt,et al.  Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form , 1994 .

[86]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast , 2000 .