Cross-language differences in cue use for speech segmentation.

Two artificial-language learning experiments directly compared English, French, and Dutch listeners' use of suprasegmental cues for continuous-speech segmentation. In both experiments, listeners heard unbroken sequences of consonant-vowel syllables, composed of recurring three- and four-syllable "words." These words were demarcated by (a) no cue other than transitional probabilities induced by their recurrence, (b) a consistent left-edge cue, or (c) a consistent right-edge cue. Experiment 1 examined a vowel lengthening cue. All three listener groups benefited from this cue in right-edge position; none benefited from it in left-edge position. Experiment 2 examined a pitch-movement cue. English listeners used this cue in left-edge position, French listeners used it in right-edge position, and Dutch listeners used it in both positions. These findings are interpreted as evidence of both language-universal and language-specific effects. Final lengthening is a language-universal effect expressing a more general (non-linguistic) mechanism. Pitch movement expresses prominence which has characteristically different placements across languages: typically at right edges in French, but at left edges in English and Dutch. Finally, stress realization in English versus Dutch encourages greater attention to suprasegmental variation by Dutch than by English listeners, allowing Dutch listeners to benefit from an informative pitch-movement cue even in an uncharacteristic position.

[1]  D. Klatt Vowel Lengthening is Syntactically Determined in a Connected Discourse. , 1975 .

[2]  D. Scott,et al.  Duration as a cue to the perception of a phrase boundary. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  J. Levin,et al.  Coherent Analysis-of-Variance Hypothesis-Testing Strategies: A General Model , 1982 .

[4]  Jacqueline Vaissière,et al.  Language-Independent Prosodic Features , 1983 .

[5]  Anne Cutler,et al.  The syllable's differing role in the segmentation of French and English. , 1986 .

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

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

[8]  Jan Edwards,et al.  Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency , 1990 .

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

[10]  J. Mehler,et al.  Mora or syllable? Speech segmentation in Japanese , 1993 .

[11]  R. Baayen,et al.  Prefix stripping re-revisited , 1994 .

[12]  A. Cutler,et al.  Mora or Phoneme? Further Evidence for Language-Specific Listening , 1994 .

[13]  B. Hayes Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies , 1995 .

[14]  A Cutler,et al.  The strong/weak syllable distinction in English. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  R N Aslin,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996, Science.

[16]  Thierry Dutoit,et al.  The MBROLA project: towards a set of high quality speech synthesizers free of use for non commercial purposes , 1996, Proceeding of Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. ICSLP '96.

[17]  E. Newport,et al.  WORD SEGMENTATION : THE ROLE OF DISTRIBUTIONAL CUES , 1996 .

[18]  A. Cutler,et al.  Vowel harmony and speech segmentation in Finnish , 1997 .

[19]  C. Palmer Music performance. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[20]  D. Norris,et al.  The Possible-Word Constraint in the Segmentation of Continuous Speech , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  V. V. van Heuven,et al.  Spectral balance as a cue in the perception of linguistic stress. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  J. Vroomen,et al.  The Roles of Word Stress and Vowel Harmony in Speech Segmentation , 1998 .

[23]  J. McQueen Segmentation of Continuous Speech Using Phonotactics , 1998 .

[24]  A. V. Lugt The use of sequential probabilities in the segmentation of speech , 2001 .

[25]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Word Segmentation by 8-Month-Olds: When Speech Cues Count More Than Statistics , 2001 .

[26]  Ulrich Hans Frauenfelder,et al.  Contribution of prosody to the segmentation and storage of "words" in the acquisition of a new mini-language , 2002, Speech Prosody 2002.

[27]  A. Cutler,et al.  Constraints of Lexical Stress on Lexical Access in English: Evidence from Native and Non-native Listeners , 2002, Language and speech.

[28]  Marina Nespor,et al.  Signal-Driven Computations in Speech Processing , 2002, Science.

[29]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  When cues collide: use of stress and statistical cues to word boundaries by 7- to 9-month-old infants. , 2003, Developmental psychology.

[30]  R. Reber,et al.  The use of Control Groups in Artificial Grammar Learning , 2003, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[31]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  Spectral tilt as a cue to word segmentation in infancy and adulthood , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  A. Cutler,et al.  Exploring the Role of Lexical stress in Lexical Recognition , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[34]  A. Weber,et al.  First-language phonotactics in second-language listening. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  A. Cutler,et al.  Explaining cross-linguistic differences in effects of lexical stress on spoken-word recognition , 2006, Speech Prosody 2006.

[36]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Infants' early ability to segment the conversational speech signal predicts later language development: a retrospective analysis. , 2006, Developmental psychology.

[37]  Joris H. Janssen,et al.  Dutch listeners' use of suprasegmental cues to English stress , 2007 .

[38]  Jessica F. Hay,et al.  Perception of rhythmic grouping: Testing the iambic/trochaic law , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[39]  Antoni Rodríguez-Fornells,et al.  Stress placement and word segmentation by Spanish speakers , 2007 .

[40]  J. Mehler,et al.  Finding Words and Rules in a Speech Stream , 2008, Psychological science.

[41]  James S. Magnuson,et al.  The link between statistical segmentation and word learning in adults , 2008, Cognition.

[42]  D. Norris,et al.  Shortlist B: a Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. , 2008, Psychological review.

[43]  A. Cutler Greater sensitivity to prosodic goodness in non-native than in native listeners (L). , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  H. Woodrow,et al.  A Quantitative Study of Rhythm: The Effect of Variations in Intensity, Rate and Duration , 2009 .

[45]  Ruben van de Vijver,et al.  Pisoni, D., Remez, R. (eds.), The handbook of speech perception; Oxford, Blackwell, 2005 , 2009 .

[46]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  At 11 months, prosody still outranks statistics. , 2009, Developmental science.