Phonological features, auditory objects, and illusions

Abstract It is argued that speech perception, just like visual perception, relies on a good match between memorized experience and current sensation: when sensation meshes with expectations, listeners believe they perceive ‘real’ linguistic objects in spite of possibly severe variation and degradation in the acoustic signal. Reviews of the acoustic and perceptual correlates of the features [nasal] and [voice] in various speech styles illustrate how multiple perceptual cues to a simple phonological distinction may be dispersed across syllables, and how absence of one or several such cues may be compensated by the presence of others, or by recovery processes that rely on listeners’ knowledge and expectations. Visual illusions are discussed which have apparent parallels with auditory illusions and with well-known aspects of speech perception. These include particular types of physical structure (e.g. abrupt changes, edges), enhancement of properties of a given object by juxtaposed information which either changes the percept of those properties, or else provides a context that changes the percept of what the object is, and influences of familiarity and probability which can be profound enough to fly in the face of contrary sensory evidence. These data are used to support the hypothesis that perceived linguistic units, including distinctive features, are ephemeral (and illusory) ‘auditory objects’, which are created by the listening brain using domain-general processes that underpin meaningful behaviour.

[1]  Dave Optical Illusions And Visual Phenomena , 2005 .

[2]  Diana Deutsch,et al.  Music perception. , 2007, Frontiers in bioscience : a journal and virtual library.

[3]  G Johansson,et al.  Spatio-temporal differentiation and integration in visual motion perception , 1976, Psychological research.

[4]  B. Repp Phonetic trading relations and context effects: new experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. , 1982, Psychological bulletin.

[5]  D. Deutsch,et al.  The Psychology of Music , 1983 .

[6]  D. N. Kalikow,et al.  Test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentences with controlled word predictability , 1976 .

[7]  T. Griffiths,et al.  What is an auditory object? , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  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.

[9]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Resonant neural dynamics of speech perception , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[10]  Matthew Richardson,et al.  Phonetic processing areas revealed by sinewave speech and acoustically similar non-speech , 2006, NeuroImage.

[11]  Paul Foulkes,et al.  The social life of phonetics and phonology , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[12]  A. Samuel Lexical Activation Produces Potent Phonemic Percepts , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  Noel E. Sharkey,et al.  Opening the black box of connectionist nets: Some lessons from cognitive science , 1994 .

[14]  Kenneth N Stevens,et al.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  D. Burr,et al.  The Ventriloquist Effect Results from Near-Optimal Bimodal Integration , 2004, Current Biology.

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

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

[18]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  SYNTHESIZING SYSTEMATIC VARIATION AT BOUNDARIES BETWEEN VOWELS AND OBSTRUENTS , 1999 .

[19]  J. Zacks Neuroimaging Studies of Mental Rotation: A Meta-analysis and Review , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  C A Fowler,et al.  Coarticulatory influences on the perceived height of nasal vowels. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  Charles C Lee,et al.  The distributed auditory cortex , 2007, Hearing Research.

[22]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. , 1970, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Louis Goldstein,et al.  Perceptual constraints and phonological change: a study of nasal vowel height , 1986, Phonology.

[24]  P Iverson,et al.  Mapping the perceptual magnet effect for speech using signal detection theory and multidimensional scaling. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  R. Salmelin,et al.  Time course of top-down and bottom-up influences on syllable processing in the auditory cortex. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[26]  J. Edeline The thalamo-cortical auditory receptive fields: regulation by the states of vigilance, learning and the neuromodulatory systems , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[27]  J. Pickles An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing , 1982 .

[28]  Friedemann Pulvermüller,et al.  Changes in the perceived duration of a narrowband sound induced by a preceding stimulus. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  A. Meltzoff,et al.  The bimodal perception of speech in infancy. , 1982, Science.

[30]  Daniel Pressnitzer,et al.  The psychophysics and physiology of comodulation masking release , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  C. Plack,et al.  Perceived continuity and pitch perception. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[32]  S. Hawkins PUZZLES AND PATTERNS IN 50 YEARS OF RESEARCH ON SPEECH PERCEPTION , 2004 .

[33]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Representation and competition in the perception of spoken words , 2002, Cognitive Psychology.

[34]  Catherine T. Best,et al.  Left-Hemisphere Advantage for Click Consonants is Determined by Linguistic Significance and Experience , 1999 .

[35]  I. Nelken,et al.  Processing of low-probability sounds by cortical neurons , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[36]  J. Sachs Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse , 1967 .

[37]  Ioana Chitoran,et al.  Approaches to phonological complexity , 2009 .

[38]  Carsten Eulitz REPRESENTATION OF PHONOLOGICAL FEATURES IN THE BRAIN: EVIDENCE FROM MISMATCH NEGATIVITY , 2007 .

[39]  Martin Cooke,et al.  Glimpsing speech , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[40]  Melissa Wright,et al.  CLICKS AS MARKERS OF NEW SEQUENCES IN ENGLISH CONVERSATION , 2007 .

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

[42]  P. Keating,et al.  Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[44]  Gunnar Fant,et al.  Acoustic Theory Of Speech Production , 1960 .

[45]  J. Movshon,et al.  A new perceptual illusion reveals mechanisms of sensory decoding , 2007, Nature.

[46]  M. Bar,et al.  Cortical Analysis of Visual Context , 2003, Neuron.

[47]  Lee H. Wurm,et al.  Auditory Processing of Prefixed English Words Is Both Continuous and Decompositional , 1997 .

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

[49]  L L Elliott,et al.  Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. , 1977, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[50]  Betty Tuller,et al.  Computational models in speech perception , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[51]  Sophie K. Scott,et al.  How might we conceptualize speech perception? The view from neurobiology , 2003, J. Phonetics.

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

[53]  Jacqueline Vaissière,et al.  A FIBERSCOPIC ANALYSIS OF NASAL VOWELS IN BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE , 2007 .

[54]  O. Fujimura Analysis of Nasal Consonants , 1962 .

[55]  Sharon Y. Manuel,et al.  Speakers nasalize /∂/ after /n/, but listeners still hear /∂/ , 1995 .

[56]  J. Rauschecker Cortical processing of complex sounds , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[57]  D. McFadden,et al.  Better discrimination of small changes in commonly encountered than in less commonly encountered auditory stimuli. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[58]  Laurence White,et al.  Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: a hierarchical framework. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[59]  I. Winkler,et al.  Top-down effects can modify the initially stimulus-driven auditory organization. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[60]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  What are the Essential Cues for Understanding Spoken Language? , 2001, IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst..

[61]  J. Perkell,et al.  Invariance and variability in speech processes , 1987 .

[62]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Phonemic restorations based on subsequent context , 1974 .

[63]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Parsing in a Dynamical System: An Attractor-based Account of the Interaction of Lexical and Structural Constraints in Sentence Processing , 1997 .

[64]  M. Pickering,et al.  Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue , 2004, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[65]  Melvyn A. Goodale,et al.  Dissociation of perception and action unmasked by the hollow-face illusion , 2006, Brain Research.

[66]  James D. Harnsberger,et al.  Language-specific patterns of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: acoustic structures and their perceptual correlates , 2002, J. Phonetics.

[67]  D. Roy Grounding words in perception and action: computational insights , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[68]  A. Samuel Phonemic restoration: insights from a new methodology. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[69]  Jonas Obleser,et al.  Now you hear it, now you don't: transient traces of consonants and their nonspeech analogues in the human brain. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[70]  Y. Tohkura,et al.  McGurk effect in non-English listeners: few visual effects for Japanese subjects hearing Japanese syllables of high auditory intelligibility. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[71]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Information Conveyed by Vowels , 1957 .

[72]  W. Wetzels,et al.  The lexical representation of nasality in Brazilian Portuguese , 1997 .

[73]  R. M. Warren,et al.  Illusory continuity of interrupted speech: speech rate determines durational limits. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[74]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  WHEN IS FINE PHONETIC DETAIL A DETAIL , 2007 .

[75]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Modeling embodied visual behaviors , 2007, TAP.

[76]  Lisa A. de la Mothe,et al.  Thalamic connections of the auditory cortex in marmoset monkeys: Core and medial belt regions , 2006, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[77]  J A Kelso,et al.  The nonlinear dynamics of speech categorization. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[78]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Lexical Representation and Process , 1991 .

[79]  Jessica M. Foxton,et al.  Effects of attention and unilateral neglect on auditory stream segregation. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[80]  Andrew N. Meltzoff,et al.  Factors affecting the integration of auditory and visual information in speech: The effect of vowel environment , 1988 .

[81]  J W Hall,et al.  Perceptual organization in a comodulation masking release interference paradigm: exploring the role of amplitude modulation, frequency modulation, and harmonicity. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[82]  Lynne E. Bernstein Phonetic Processing by the Speech Perceiving Brain , 2008 .

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

[84]  E. Vatikiotis-Bateson,et al.  Perceiving Biological Motion: Dissociating Visible Speech from Walking , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[86]  M. Meyerhoff,et al.  Working papers in linguistics , 1994 .

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

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

[89]  Walter Gerbino,et al.  Amodal completion: Seeing or thinking? , 1982 .

[90]  Daniel P. W. Ellis,et al.  The auditory organization of speech and other sources in listeners and computational models , 2001, Speech Commun..

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

[92]  R. M. Warren Perceptual Restoration of Missing Speech Sounds , 1970, Science.

[93]  R. Gregory The Medawar Lecture 2001 Knowledge for vision: vision for knowledge , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[94]  A S Bregman,et al.  Is a common grouping mechanism involved in the phenomena of illusory continuity and stream segregation? , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[95]  J. Hawkins,et al.  On Intelligence , 2004 .

[96]  J. Elman An alternative view of the mental lexicon , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[97]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[98]  W. Ganong Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[99]  T. Allison,et al.  Functional anatomy of biological motion perception in posterior temporal cortex: an FMRI study of eye, mouth and hand movements. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[100]  M. Sereno,et al.  Point-Light Biological Motion Perception Activates Human Premotor Cortex , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[101]  K. Stevens,et al.  Some Acoustical and Perceptual Correlates of Nasal Vowels , 1987 .

[102]  D. Pandya,et al.  Anatomy of the auditory cortex. , 1995, Revue neurologique.

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

[104]  Elizabeth Shriberg,et al.  Perceptual Restoration of Filtered Vowels with Added Noise , 1992, Language and speech.

[105]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  Abstraction as dynamic interpretation in perceptual symbol systems , 2005 .

[106]  J. Kaas,et al.  Auditory processing in primate cerebral cortex , 1999, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[107]  Yoshinao Kajikawa,et al.  Cortical connections of the auditory cortex in marmoset monkeys: Core and medial belt regions , 2006, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[108]  Joyce McDonough The Navajo Sound System , 2003 .

[109]  No Value Proceedings of the 14th international congress of phonetic sciences , 2000 .

[110]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Towards a theory of the laminar architecture of cerebral cortex: computational clues from the visual system. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[111]  Mikko Sams,et al.  McGurk effect in Finnish syllables, isolated words, and words in sentences: Effects of word meaning and sentence context , 1998, Speech Commun..

[112]  D. Pisoni,et al.  The Handbook of Speech Perception , 2004 .

[113]  Antonio Ulloa,et al.  Investigating the Neural Basis of the Auditory Continuity Illusion , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[114]  S. Grossberg The Adaptive Self-Organization of Serial Order in Behavior: Speech, Language, And Motor Control , 1987 .

[115]  F. T. Husain,et al.  Relating neuronal dynamics for auditory object processing to neuroimaging activity: a computational modeling and an fMRI study , 2004, NeuroImage.

[116]  P. Denes,et al.  On the statistics of spoken English , 1962 .

[117]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  Temporal properties of spontaneous speech - a syllable-centric perspective , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[118]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Cognition as coordinated non-cognition , 2007, Cognitive Processing.

[119]  J. Fritz,et al.  Rapid task-related plasticity of spectrotemporal receptive fields in primary auditory cortex , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[120]  A S Bregman,et al.  Perceived continuity of gliding and steady-state tones through interrupting noise , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[121]  Xiaoqin Wang,et al.  Sustained firing in auditory cortex evoked by preferred stimuli , 2005, Nature.

[122]  Joyce McDonough,et al.  Allowable variability: a preliminary investigation of word recognition in Navajo , 2000 .

[123]  Oliver J Braddick,et al.  When does the Titchener Circles illusion exert an effect on grasping? Two- and three-dimensional targets , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[124]  A. Liberman,et al.  Some Experiments on the Perception of Synthetic Speech Sounds , 1952 .

[125]  Stuart Rosen,et al.  Major/Minor Triad Identification and Discrimination by Musically Trained and Untrained Listeners , 1992 .

[126]  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.

[127]  N. Weinberger Specific long-term memory traces in primary auditory cortex , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[128]  S. Scott,et al.  The neuroanatomical and functional organization of speech perception , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[129]  Roger M. Carpenter,et al.  Auditory Perception: A New Analysis and Synthesis , 1999 .

[130]  P. Gribble,et al.  Temporal constraints on the McGurk effect , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[131]  J H Grose,et al.  Relative contributions of envelope maxima and minima to comodulation masking release. , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[132]  A Fishbach,et al.  Auditory edge detection: a neural model for physiological and psychoacoustical responses to amplitude transients. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[133]  Reginald B. Adams,et al.  A Comparison of Neural Circuits Underlying Auditory and Visual Object Categorization , 2002, NeuroImage.

[134]  Joanne L. Miller,et al.  Speech Perception , 1990, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research.

[135]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  A Multi-Tier Framework for Understanding Spoken Language , 2012 .

[136]  M. Hallet,et al.  Speech Recognition: A Model and a Program for Research* , 1998 .

[137]  Roger K. Moore Spoken language processing: Piecing together the puzzle , 2007, Speech Commun..

[138]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  ARTSTREAM: a neural network model of auditory scene analysis and source segregation , 2004, Neural Networks.

[139]  J. Werker,et al.  Phonemic and phonetic factors in adult cross-language speech perception. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[140]  Steven R. Holloway,et al.  Seeing what is not there shows the costs of perceptual learning. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[141]  Peter Ladefoged WPP, No. 103: Phonetics and Phonology in the Last 50 Years , 2004 .

[142]  Rajeev D. S. Raizada,et al.  Selective Amplification of Stimulus Differences during Categorical Processing of Speech , 2007, Neuron.

[143]  Michael A. Arbib,et al.  The handbook of brain theory and neural networks , 1995, A Bradford book.

[144]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Linking Attention to Learning, Expectation, Competition, and Consciousness , 2005 .

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

[146]  D B Pisoni,et al.  On prototypes and phonetic categories: a critical assessment of the perceptual magnet effect in speech perception. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[147]  Sue Harding,et al.  Changes in the perception of synthetic nasal consonants as a result of vowel formant manipulations , 2003, Speech Commun..

[148]  Lawrence D. Rosenblum,et al.  Primacy of Multimodal Speech Perception , 2008 .

[149]  R. Krakow,et al.  Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: evidence for partial compensation. , 1999, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[150]  John J. Foxe,et al.  Grabbing your ear: rapid auditory-somatosensory multisensory interactions in low-level sensory cortices are not constrained by stimulus alignment. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[151]  M. Halle,et al.  Preliminaries to Speech Analysis: The Distinctive Features and Their Correlates , 1961 .

[152]  Steven Greenberg,et al.  Listening to Speech : An Auditory Perspective , 2012 .

[153]  M. Arbib,et al.  Language within our grasp , 1998, Trends in Neurosciences.

[154]  D. Poeppel,et al.  The cortical organization of speech processing , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[155]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  The Influence of Quality of Information on the McGurk Effect , 1998, AVSP.

[156]  J. Fritz,et al.  Active listening: Task-dependent plasticity of spectrotemporal receptive fields in primary auditory cortex , 2005, Hearing Research.

[157]  G. Johansson Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis , 1973 .

[158]  John Hajek,et al.  Universals of sound change in Nasalization , 1998 .

[159]  Deborah A. Hall,et al.  Reading Fluent Speech from Talking Faces: Typical Brain Networks and Individual Differences , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[160]  H. McGurk,et al.  Visual influences on speech perception processes , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[161]  Lynne E. Bernstein,et al.  Modeling the interaction of phonemic intelligibility and lexical structure in audiovisual word recognition , 1998, Speech Commun..

[162]  Ruth Campbell,et al.  Sign language and the brain: a review. , 2008, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education.

[163]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[164]  J. Winer Decoding the auditory corticofugal systems , 2005, Hearing Research.

[165]  D. LeBihan,et al.  Phonological Grammar Shapes the Auditory Cortex: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[167]  J A Bashford,et al.  Effects of spectral alternation on the intelligibility of words and sentences , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[168]  Sven L Mattys,et al.  How do Syllables Contribute to the Perception of Spoken English? Insight from the Migration Paradigm , 2005, Language and speech.

[169]  J. Beck Organization and representation in perception , 1982 .

[170]  P. Ladefoged A note on "Information conveyed by vowels". , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[171]  A. Ghazanfar,et al.  Is neocortex essentially multisensory? , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[172]  Sophie K Scott,et al.  Auditory processing — speech, space and auditory objects , 2005, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[173]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Adaptive Resonance Theory , 2010, Encyclopedia of Machine Learning.

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

[175]  S E Blumstein,et al.  On the role of the amplitude envelope for the perception of [b] and [w]. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[176]  S. Hawkins,et al.  SOUND TO SENSE : INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL SESSION , 2022 .

[177]  C. Darwin Auditory grouping , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[178]  Andreas Kleinschmidt,et al.  Interaction of Face and Voice Areas during Speaker Recognition , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[179]  N. Nguyen,et al.  The dynamical approach to speech perception: From fine phonetic detail to abstract phonological categories , 2009 .

[180]  S. Grossberg Adaptive Resonance Theory , 2006 .

[181]  C. Price,et al.  Speech-specific auditory processing: where is it? , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[182]  Alon Fishbach,et al.  Primary auditory cortex of cats: feature detection or something else? , 2003, Biological Cybernetics.

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

[184]  William J. Idsardi,et al.  SOME MEG CORRELATES FOR DISTINCTIVE FEATURES , 2007 .

[185]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Logic and phenomenology of incompleteness in illusory figures: New cases and hypotheses , 2006 .

[186]  G. A. Miller,et al.  The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. , 1951, Journal of experimental psychology.

[187]  L. Barsalou Grounded cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[188]  D Kewley-Port,et al.  Time-varying features as correlates of place of articulation in stop consonants. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[189]  John K. Tsotsos,et al.  Neurobiology of Attention , 2005 .

[190]  S. Khalfa,et al.  Evidence of peripheral auditory activity modulation by the auditory cortex in humans , 2001, Neuroscience.

[191]  R. Gregory The intelligent eye , 1970 .

[192]  Ingrid S. Johnsrude,et al.  Illusory Vowels Resulting from Perceptual Continuity: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[193]  J. Morais,et al.  Intermediate Representations in Spoken Word Recognition; Evidence from Word Illusions , 1995 .

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

[195]  J. Findlay,et al.  The effect of visual attention on peripheral discrimination thresholds in single and multiple element displays. , 1988, Acta psychologica.

[196]  Michael D. Hall,et al.  Within-category discrimination of musical chords: Perceptual magnet or anchor? , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[197]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Phonetic variation as communicative system: Perception of the particular and the abstract , 2007 .

[198]  D J Van Tasell,et al.  Speech waveform envelope cues for consonant recognition. , 1987, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[199]  Y. Tohkura,et al.  Inter-language differences in the influence of visual cues in speech perception. , 1993 .

[200]  D. Klatt Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: acoustic and perceptual evidence. , 1976, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[201]  S. Blumstein,et al.  Invariant cues for place of articulation in stop consonants. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[202]  L D Braida,et al.  Effect of frequency transposition on the discrimination of amplitude envelope patterns. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[203]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  On the quantal nature of speech , 1972 .

[204]  Melvyn A. Goodale,et al.  WITHDRAWN: Dissociation of perception and action unmasked by the hollow-face illusion , 2005 .

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

[206]  I. Winkler,et al.  ‘Primitive intelligence’ in the auditory cortex , 2001, Trends in Neurosciences.

[207]  R M Warren,et al.  Perceptual restoration of obliterated sounds. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[208]  Maija S. Peltola SPEECH SOUND PERCEPTION AND NEURAL REPRESENTATIONS , 2007 .

[209]  Jean-Pierre Gagné,et al.  Auditory, visual and audiovisual clear speech , 2002, Speech Commun..

[210]  K. Sekiyama,et al.  Cultural and linguistic factors in audiovisual speech processing: The McGurk effect in Chinese subjects , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[211]  Deb Roy,et al.  Semiotic schemas: A framework for grounding language in action and perception , 2005, Artif. Intell..

[212]  Martin Cooke,et al.  A glimpsing model of speech perception in noise. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[213]  David A. Medler,et al.  Neural correlates of sensory and decision processes in auditory object identification , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[214]  B C Moore,et al.  Co-modulation masking release: spectro-temporal pattern analysis in hearing. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[215]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Influence of syllable-coda voicing on the acoustic properties of syllable-onset /l/ in English , 2004, J. Phonetics.

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

[217]  T. Griffiths,et al.  The planum temporale as a computational hub , 2002, Trends in Neurosciences.

[218]  Albert S. Bregman,et al.  The Auditory Scene. (Book Reviews: Auditory Scene Analysis. The Perceptual Organization of Sound.) , 1990 .

[219]  Frank Tong,et al.  Filling-in of visual phantoms in the human brain , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[220]  C. Micheyl,et al.  The Neurophysiological Basis of the Auditory Continuity Illusion: A Mismatch Negativity Study , 2003 .

[221]  Jorge A. Gurlekian,et al.  Recognition of the Spanish fricatives /s/ and /f/ , 1981 .

[222]  H. Hawkins,et al.  Visual attention modulates signal detectability. , 1990 .

[223]  R. Brubaker Models for the perception of speech and visual form: Weiant Wathen-Dunn, ed.: Cambridge, Mass., The M.I.T. Press, I–X, 470 pages , 1968 .

[224]  A. Samuel Lexical uniqueness effects on phonemic restoration , 1987 .