Phonological Abstraction in the Mental Lexicon

A perceptual learning experiment provides evidence that the mental lexicon cannot consist solely of detailed acoustic traces of recognition episodes. In a training lexical decision phase, listeners heard an ambiguous [f-s] fricative sound, replacing either [f] or [s] in words. In a test phase, listeners then made lexical decisions to visual targets following auditory primes. Critical materials were minimal pairs that could be a word with either [f] or [s] (cf. English knife-nice), none of which had been heard in training. Listeners interpreted the minimal pair words differently in the second phase according to the training received in the first phase. Therefore, lexically mediated retuning of phoneme perception not only influences categorical decisions about fricatives (Norris, McQueen, & Cutler, 2003), but also benefits recognition of words outside the training set. The observed generalization across words suggests that this retuning occurs prelexically. Therefore, lexical processing involves sublexical phonological abstraction, not only accumulation of acoustic episodes.

[1]  Emmanuel Dupoux,et al.  Subliminal Speech Priming , 2005, Psychological science.

[2]  Louisa M. Slowiaczek,et al.  Phonological Representations in Prelexical Speech Processing: Evidence from Form-Based Priming , 2000 .

[3]  S. Goldinger.  Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. , 1998, Psychological review.

[4]  J. Morais,et al.  Phonological priming between monosyllabic spoken words. , 1995 .

[5]  J. H. Neely.  Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. , 1977 .

[6]  J. McQueen,et al.  Perceptual learning in speech: stability over time. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Douglas L. Hintzman,et al.  "Schema Abstraction" in a Multiple-Trace Memory Model , 1986 .

[8]  Kelli J. Johnson.  The auditory/perceptual basis for speech segmentation , 1997 .

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

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

[11]  Anne Cutler,et al.  The Dynamic Nature of Speech Perception , 2006, Language and speech.

[12]  Takashi Otake,et al.  Asymmetric mapping from phonetic to lexical representations in second-language listening , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[13]  Anne Cutler,et al.  Coping with speaker-related variation via abstract phonemic categories , 2006 .

[14]  Louis ten Bosch,et al.  How Should a Speech Recognizer Work? , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  A. Samuel,et al.  Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal? , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[17]  C. Fisher,et al.  Learning phonotactic constraints from brief auditory experience , 2002, Cognition.

[18]  J. McQueen,et al.  Perceptual learning in speech: Stability over time (L) , 2006 .

[19]  Grover Hudson,et al.  PHONOLOGY AND LANGUAGE USE , 2004 .

[20]  C. Pallier,et al.  The Influence of Native-Language Phonology on Lexical Access: Exemplar-Based Versus Abstract Lexical Entries , 2001, Psychological science.

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

[22]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Lexical information drives perceptual learning of distorted speech: evidence from the comprehension of noise-vocoded sentences. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[23]  D. Norris.  Shortlist: a connectionist model of continuous speech recognition , 1994, Cognition.

[24]  A. Samuel,et al.  Generalization in perceptual learning for speech , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Valeriy Shafiro,et al.  The influence of native language phonology on auditory and visual word recognition in Russian–English bilinguals , 2005 .

[26]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Phonological Variation in Lexical Access: Abstractness, Inference, and English Place Assimilation. , 1995 .

[27]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The TRACE model of speech perception , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  T. M. Nearey.  Phoneme-like units and speech perception , 2001 .

[29]  A. Weber,et al.  Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition , 2004 .

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

[31]  J. McQueen,et al.  The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  Jacques Mehler,et al.  The Role of Syllables in Speech Processing: Infant and Adult Data [and Discussion] , 1981 .

[33]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM) , 1996 .

[34]  G. Miller,et al.  Cognitive science. , 1981, Science.

[35]  D. Klatt.  Review of selected models of speech perception , 1989 .

[36]  Dennis H. Klatt,et al.  Speech perception: a model of acoustic–phonetic analysis and lexical access , 1979 .

[37]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Integrating Form and Meaning: A Distributed Model of Speech Perception. , 1997 .

[38]  D Norris,et al.  Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.