Phonotactics and Syllable Stress: Implications for the Processing of Spoken Nonsense Words

Two experiments using bisyllabic CVCCVC nonsense words that varied in phonotactic probability and stress placement were conducted to examine the influences of phonotactic and metrical information on spoken word recognition. Experiment 1 examined participants' intuitions about the phonological “goodness” of nonsense words. Experiment 2 examined processing times for the same stimuli in a speeded auditory repetition task. The results of both studies provide further evidence that the phonotactic configuration and stress placement of spoken stimuli have important implications for the representation and processing of spoken words.

[1]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Do English-Learning Infants use Syllable Weight to Determine Stress? , 1995, Language and speech.

[2]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. , 1994 .

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

[4]  W. Levelt,et al.  Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? , 1994, Cognition.

[5]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants′ Sensitivity to the Sound Patterns of Native Language Words , 1993 .

[6]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' preference for the predominant stress patterns of English words. , 1993, Child development.

[7]  A. Cutler,et al.  Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception , 1992 .

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

[9]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access , 1991 .

[10]  Anne Cutler,et al.  Exploiting prosodic probabilities in speech segmentation , 1991 .

[11]  G. Altmann,et al.  Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives - Workshop Overview , 1989, AI Mag..

[12]  Gerry Altmann,et al.  Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives - Workshop Overview , 1989, AI Mag..

[13]  Anne Cutler,et al.  The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical access , 1988 .

[14]  Anne Cutler,et al.  The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary , 1987 .

[15]  Kenneth Ward Church,et al.  Phonological parsing and lexical retrieval , 1987, Cognition.

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

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

[18]  Samuel Jay Keyser,et al.  CV Phonology: A Generative Theory of the Syllable , 1988 .

[19]  Brian W. Eukel.  Phonotactic basis for word frequency effects: Implications for lexical distance metrics , 1980 .

[20]  John J. L. Morton,et al.  Interaction of information in word recognition. , 1969 .

[21]  S. Messer,et al.  Implicit phonology in children , 1967 .

[22]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Studies in the Psychological Correlates of the Sound System of American English , 1964 .

[23]  Donald C. Hildum,et al.  Expectancy and the perception of syllables. , 1956 .