Influence of syllable-coda voicing on the acoustic properties of syllable-onset /l/ in English

Properties of syllable onset /l/ that depend on the voicing of the syllable coda were measured for four speakers, representing different nonrhotic British English accents that differ in their phonetic realization of onset /l/ and in their system of phonological contrast involving onset /l/ and /r/. Onset /l/ was longer before voiced than voiceless codas for all four speakers, and darker for two of them as measured by lower F2 frequency, and for these two and one other as measured by spectral center of gravity (COG). There were no coda-dependent differences in f0 in the /l/, and F1 frequency differed only for the fourth speaker. The vowel was also longer for all four speakers when the coda was voiced (as expected), while F1 was lower and F2 normally higher. One speaker provided data with fricative or affricate onsets: fricated segments were longer before voiced codas, but no coda-dependent COG differences were found. At least when the onset includes /l/, phonological voicing of the coda seems to be reflected in complex acousticphonetic properties distributed across the whole syllable, some properties being localized, others not. We describe these properties as variations in a brightsomber dimension. In most accents, when the coda is voiceless, the syllable is relatively bright: small proportions of periodic energy which is relatively high frequency at the syllable edges, and a high proportion of silence or aperiodic energy. When the coda is voiced, the syllable is relatively somber: a high proportion of periodic energy which is relatively low frequency at the syllable edges, and relatively small amounts of silence and aperiodic energy. Other accents use other combinations, dependent on the phonetic and phonological properties of liquids in the particular accent. The association of onset darkness and coda voicing does not seem to be ascribable to anticipatory coarticulation of features essential to voicing itself; this observation provides support for nonsegmental models of speech perception in which fine phonetic detail is mapped directly to linguistic structure without reference to phoneme-sized segments.

[1]  F. Guenther,et al.  The perceptual magnet effect as an emergent property of neural map formation. , 1996, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  A. House,et al.  The Influence of Consonant Environment upon the Secondary Acoustical Characteristics of Vowels , 1953 .

[3]  W. Hardcastle,et al.  A Comparative Investigation of Coarticulation in Fricatives: Electropalatographic, Electromagnetic, and Acoustic Data , 1993, Language and speech.

[4]  P. Jusczyk.  The discovery of spoken language , 1997 .

[5]  R. Fox.  Modularity and the Motor Theory of Speech Perception , 1994 .

[6]  R. Diehl,et al.  Phonology and Phonetic Evidence: Intermediate properties in the perception of distinctive feature values , 1995 .

[7]  Kari Suomi,et al.  An outline of a developmental model of adult phonological organization and behavior , 1993 .

[8]  L. Raphael.  Preceding vowel duration as a cue to the perception of the voicing characteristic of word-final consonants in American English. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Continuous uptake of acoustic cues in spoken word recognition , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  W. V. Summers.  Effects of stress and final-consonant voicing on vowel production: articulatory and acoustic analyses. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Osamu Fujimura,et al.  Allophonic variation in English /l/ and its implications for phonetic implementation , 1993 .

[12]  Anders Löfqvist,et al.  Tongue Body Kinematics in Velar Stop Production: Influences of Consonant Voicing and Vowel Context , 1994, Phonetica.

[13]  D. E. Newton,et al.  The Nature of Resonance in English: An Investigation into Lateral Articulations. , 1996 .

[14]  Catherine G. Wolf,et al.  Voicing cues in English final stops , 1978 .

[15]  O Fujimura,et al.  Mandible height and syllable-final tenseness. , 1979, Phonetica.

[16]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  ARGUMENTS FOR A NONSEGMENTAL VIEW OF SPEECH PERCEPTION , 1995 .

[17]  Andrew P. Witkin,et al.  What Is Perceptual Organization For? , 1983, IJCAI.

[18]  W. Strange.  Speech perception and linguistic experience : issues in cross-language research , 1995 .

[19]  L. Lisker.  “Voicing” in English: A Catalogue of Acoustic Features Signaling /b/ Versus /p/ in Trochees , 1986, Language and speech.

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

[21]  D. Granville,et al.  IMPLICATIONS FOR WORD RECOGNITION OF PHONETIC DEPENDENCIES BETWEEN SYLLABLE ONSETS AND CODAS , 1999 .

[22]  D. Whalen,et al.  Lexical effects in the perception and production of American English /p/ allophones , 1997 .

[23]  Marie K. Huffman,et al.  Phonetic variation in intervocalic onset /l/'s in English , 1997 .

[24]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Perception of coda voicing from properties of the onset and nucleus of 'led' and 'let' , 2001, INTERSPEECH.

[25]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  polysp: a polysystemic, phonetically-rich approach to speech understanding , 2001 .

[26]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  The emergence of language. , 1999 .

[27]  S Hawkins,et al.  The influence of spectral prominence on perceived vowel quality. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[28]  Andrew Butcher,et al.  “Brightness”, “Darkness” and the dimensionality of vowel perception , 1974 .

[29]  R. N. Ohde,et al.  Spectral and duration properties of front vowels as cues to final stop-consonant voicing. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[30]  Daniel Jones.  An outline of English phonetics , 1956 .

[31]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  IMPLICATIONS FOR WORD RECOGNITION OF PHONETIC DEPENDENCIES BETWEEN SYLLABLE ONSETS AND CODAS , 2001 .

[32]  David C. Plaut,et al.  The emergence of phonology from the interplay of speech comprehension and production ; A distributed connectionist approach , 1998 .

[33]  Mark Huckvale,et al.  ProSynth: an integrated prosodic approach to device-independent, natural-sounding speech synthesis , 1998, Comput. Speech Lang..

[34]  Gary Weismer.  Sensitivity of voice-onset time (VOT) measures to certain segmental features in speech production , 1979 .

[35]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Frontiers of speech communication research , 1979 .

[36]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Syllable-onset acoustic properties associated with syllable-coda voicing , 1998, ICSLP.

[37]  D H Whalen,et al.  Vowel and consonant judgments are not independent when cued by the same information. , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  P. J. Alfonso,et al.  Dynamics of Vowel Articulation , 1982 .

[39]  John Coleman,et al.  Non-segmental analysis and synthesis based on a speech database , 1996, Proceeding of Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. ICSLP '96.

[40]  S. Grossberg,et al.  The resonant dynamics of speech perception: interword integration and duration-dependent backward effects. , 2000, Psychological review.

[41]  J. Westbury.  Enlargement of the supraglottal cavity and its relation to stop consonant voicing. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  D W Massaro,et al.  Consonant/vowel ratio: An improbable cue in speech , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[43]  John Kingston,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Index of names , 1990 .

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

[45]  S. Hawkins,et al.  Phonetic Interpretation Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI: Effects on word recognition of syllable-onset cues to syllable-coda voicing , 2004 .

[46]  John Local,et al.  Variable domains and variable relevance: interpreting phonetic exponents , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[47]  Brian C. J. Moore,et al.  Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level, and their use in calculating excitation patterns , 1987, Hearing Research.

[48]  W Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: words, phonemes, and features. , 1994, Psychological review.

[49]  Athanassios Protopapas,et al.  Connectionist modeling of speech perception. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[50]  Matthew Y. Chen.  Vowel Length Variation as a Function of the Voicing of the Consonant Environment , 1970 .

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

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

[53]  A J Rozsypal,et al.  Evaluation of vowel duration as a cue for the voicing distinction in the following word-final consonant. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[54]  Paula,et al.  THE EXTENT OF COARTICULATION OF ENGLISH LIQUIDS: AN ACOUSTIC AND ARTICULATORY STUDY , 1999 .

[55]  W. V. Summers,et al.  F1 structure provides information for final-consonant voicing. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[56]  Paula West,et al.  Perception of distributed coarticulatory properties of English /l/ and /r/ , 1999 .

[57]  Paul Carter,et al.  ABSTRACTNESS IN PHONOLOGY AND EXTRINSIC PHONETIC INTERPRETATION: THE CASE OF LIQUIDS IN ENGLISH. , 1999 .

[58]  Paul Carter,et al.  Structured variation in British English liquids : the role of resonance , 2002 .

[59]  Jennifer S. Pardo,et al.  On the perceptual organization of speech. , 1994, Psychological review.

[60]  P. Denes.  Effect of Duration on the Perception of Voicing , 1955 .

[61]  R. S. McGowan,et al.  The emergence of phonetic segments: evidence from the spectral structure of fricative-vowel syllables spoken by children and adults. , 1989, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[62]  C. Laeufer,et al.  Phonology and Phonetic Evidence: Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV , 1995 .

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

[64]  L A Streeter,et al.  The role of medial consonant transitions in word perception. , 1979, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[65]  Peter F. MacNeilage,et al.  The Production of Speech , 2011, Springer New York.

[66]  Wolfram Ziegler,et al.  Parallel electropalatographic and acoustic measures of fricatives , 1989 .

[67]  J. V. Santen,et al.  Effects of postvocalic voicing on the time course of vowels and diphthongs , 1992 .

[68]  P. Milenkovic,et al.  Statistical analysis of word-initial voiceless obstruents: preliminary data. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[69]  Athanassios Protopapas.  Connectionist modeling of speech perception , 1999 .

[70]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of variable-rate speech categorization. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[72]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  Design Features of Speech Sound Systems , 1983 .

[73]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Duration of Syllable Nuclei in English , 1960 .