Variability in English vowels is comparable in articulation and acoustics

Abstract The nature of the links between speech production and perception has been the subject of longstanding debate. The present study investigated the articulatory parameter of tongue height and the acoustic F1–F0 difference for the phonological distinction of vowel height in American English front vowels. Multiple repetitions of /i, ɪ, e, ɛ, æ/ in [(h)Vd] sequences were recorded in seven adult speakers. Articulatory (ultrasound) and acoustic data were collected simultaneously to provide a direct comparison of variability in vowel production in both domains. Results showed idiosyncratic patterns of articulation for contrasting the three front vowel pairs /i-ɪ/, /e-ɛ/, and /ɛ-æ/ across subjects, with the degree of variability in vowel articulation comparable to that observed in the acoustics for all seven participants. However, contrary to what was expected, some speakers showed reversals for tongue height for /ɪ/-/e/ that were also reflected in acoustics, with F1 higher for /ɪ/ than for /e/. The data suggest the phonological distinction of height is conveyed via speaker-specific articulatory-acoustic patterns that do not strictly match features descriptions. However, the acoustic signal is faithful to the articulatory configuration that generated it, carrying the crucial information for perceptual contrast.

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

[2]  K. Stevens,et al.  Development of a Quantitative Description of Vowel Articulation , 1955 .

[3]  Hosung Nam,et al.  Perception of articulatory dynamics from acoustic signatures. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Mary J Lindstrom,et al.  Tongues and lips without jaws: a comparison of methods for decoupling speech movements. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[5]  H. Traunmüller.  Perceptual dimension of openness in vowels. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Jennifer Cole,et al.  Unmasking the acoustic effects of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: A statistical modeling approach , 2010, J. Phonetics.

[7]  K. Stevens,et al.  Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: an acoustical study. , 1963, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[8]  G. Russell.  The vowel : its physiological mechanism as shown by X-ray , 1928 .

[9]  J. Hillenbrand,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  Jean-Luc Schwartz,et al.  Invariance and variability in the production of the height feature in French vowels , 2008, Speech Commun..

[11]  David J. Ostry,et al.  HOCUS: The Haskins optically-corrected ultrasound system for measuring speech articulation , 2004 .

[12]  Sidney A J Wood,et al.  Tense and lax vowels - degree of constriction or pharyngeal volume? , 1975 .

[13]  Fang Hu,et al.  A phonetic study of the vowels in Ningbo Chinese , 2005 .

[14]  P. Ladefoged.  A course in phonetics , 1975 .

[15]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[17]  Sidney A J Wood,et al.  X-ray and model studies of vowel articulation , 1982 .

[18]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Trading relations between tongue-body raising and lip rounding in production of the vowel /u/: a pilot "motor equivalence" study. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  Cynthia G. Clopper,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Cynthia G. Clopper.  Computational Methods for Normalizing Acoustic Vowel Data for Talker Differences , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[21]  Pascal Perrier,et al.  A theory of speech motor control and supporting data from speakers with normal hearing and with profound hearing loss , 2000, J. Phonetics.

[22]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Acoustic and Auditory Phonetics, 3rd Edition -- Chapter 5 , 2010 .

[23]  Pascal Perrier,et al.  On the relationship between palate shape and articulatory behavior. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  Peter Ladefoged,et al.  Elements of Acoustic Phonetics , 1962 .

[25]  B. Lindblom,et al.  Acoustical consequences of lip, tongue, jaw, and larynx movement. , 1970, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  S. Maeda.  On articulatory and acoustic variabilities , 1991 .

[27]  Keith A. Johnson,et al.  Acoustic and Auditory Phonetics , 1997, Phonetica.

[28]  Bob McMurray,et al.  Finding the signal by adding noise: The role of noncontrastive phonetic variability in early word learning. , 2010, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[29]  S. Wood.  A radiographic analysis of constriction locations for vowels , 1979 .

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

[31]  M. Turvey,et al.  Variability and Determinism in Motor Behavior , 2002, Journal of motor behavior.

[32]  H. S. Gopal,et al.  A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[33]  Jana Brunner.  Acoustic compensation and articulo-motor reorganisation in perturbed speech , 2008 .

[34]  Khalil Iskarous,et al.  Tongue-Jaw Synergy in Vowel Height Production: Evidence from American English , 2008 .

[35]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[36]  P Ladefoged,et al.  Individual differences in vowel production. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

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

[39]  D J Ostry,et al.  Coarticulation of jaw movements in speech production: is context sensitivity in speech kinematics centrally planned? , 1996, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[40]  D. Abercrombie,et al.  Elements of General Phonetics , 1967 .

[41]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  Perspectives on system identification , 2010, Annu. Rev. Control..

[42]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Control Methods Used in a Study of the Vowels , 1951 .

[43]  P. MacNeilage.  Motor control of serial ordering of speech. , 1970, Psychological review.

[44]  Frank H. Guenther,et al.  Speech motor control: Acoustic goals, saturation effects, auditory feedback and internal models , 1997, Speech Commun..

[45]  M. Honda,et al.  Comparison of electromagnetic and ultrasonic techniques for monitoring tongue motion , 1993 .

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

[47]  S. F. Disner.  Evaluation of vowel normalization procedures. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[48]  Pascal Perrier,et al.  Compensation strategies for the perturbation of the rounded vowel [u] using a lip-tube : A study of the control space in speech production , 1995 .

[49]  Robert Allen Fox,et al.  Vowel change across three age groups of speakers in three regional varieties of American English , 2011, J. Phonetics.

[50]  B. Lindblom.  Phonetic Universals in Vowel Systems , 1986 .

[51]  C. Baltaxe,et al.  Principles of phonology , 1969 .

[52]  D. Whalen,et al.  The universality of intrinsic F0 of vowels , 1995 .

[53]  Roel Smits,et al.  A comparison of vowel normalization procedures for language variation research. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.