Using links between speech perception and speech production to evaluate different acoustic metrics: a preliminary report.

This paper examines whether correlations between speech perception and speech production exist, and, if so, whether they might provide a way of evaluating different acoustic metrics. The cues listeners use for many phonemic distinctions are not known, often because many different acoustic cues are highly correlated with one another, making it difficult to distinguish among them. Perception-production correlations may provide a new means of doing so. In the present paper, correlations were examined between acoustic measures taken on listeners' perceptual prototypes for a given speech category and on their average production of members of that category. Significant correlations were found for VOT among stop consonants, and for spectral peaks (but not centroids or skewness) for voiceless fricatives. These results suggest that correlations between speech perception and production may provide a methodology for evaluating different proposed acoustic metrics.

[1]  Philip F. Seitz,et al.  Across‐speaker and within‐speaker variability of British English sibilant spectral characteristics , 1987 .

[2]  J S Perkell,et al.  Temporal measures of anticipatory labial coarticulation for the vowel/u/: within- and cross-subject variability. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[4]  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.

[5]  C A Fowler,et al.  Invariants, specifiers, cues: An investigation of locus equations as information for place of articulation , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[8]  Harvey M. Sussman,et al.  Locus equations as phonetic descriptors of consonantal place of articulation , 1996 .

[9]  Marija Tabain,et al.  Non-Sibilant Fricatives in English: Spectral Information above 10 kHz , 1998, Phonetica.

[10]  Dennis H. Klatt,et al.  Software for a cascade/parallel formant synthesizer , 1980 .

[11]  A. Liberman,et al.  The motor theory of speech perception revised , 1985, Cognition.

[12]  J E Flege,et al.  Linguistic and Developmental Effects on the Production and Perception of Stop Consonants , 1986, Phonetica.

[13]  Kuldip K. Paliwal,et al.  Correlation between the production and perception of the English glides /w, r, l, j/ , 1984 .

[14]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  Stop-consonant recognition: Release bursts and formant transitions as functionally equivalent, context-dependent cues , 1977 .

[15]  P J Bailey,et al.  Perception and Production : Some Correlations on Voicing of an Initial Stop , 1973, Language and speech.

[16]  F Bell-Berti,et al.  Some Relationships between Speech Production and Perception , 1979, Phonetica.

[17]  J. L. Miller,et al.  Effect of speaking rate on the perceptual structure of a phonetic category , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: IV. Some effects of perceptual learning on speech production. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  James Emil Flege,et al.  Adults' perception and production of the English vowel /i/. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[20]  Kuldip K. Paliwal,et al.  Correlation between production and perception of English vowels , 1983 .

[21]  S. Blumstein,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of English voiceless fricatives: a descriptive analysis , 1988 .

[22]  D. Klatt.  Voice onset time, frication, and aspiration in word-initial consonant clusters. , 1975, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[23]  J. Flege.  Age of learning and second language speech. , 1999 .

[24]  R. Daniloff,et al.  Multiple-Phoneme-Misarticulating Children's Perception and Production of Voice Onset Time , 1984, Perceptual and motor skills.

[25]  H. Sussman,et al.  A cross-linguistic investigation of locus equations as a phonetic descriptor for place of articulation. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[26]  S. Soli.  Second formants in fricatives: Acoustic consequences of fricative‐vowel coarticulation , 1981 .

[27]  K. Stevens,et al.  On the Properties of Voiceless Fricative Consonants , 1961 .

[28]  S. Blumstein,et al.  On the role of the amplitude of the fricative noise in the perception of place of articulation in voiceless fricative consonants. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[29]  T. M. Nearey,et al.  Context Effects in a Double-Weak Theory of Speech Perception , 1992, Language and speech.

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

[31]  Wiktor Jassem,et al.  The Formants of Fricative Consonants , 1965 .

[32]  M. Hedrick,et al.  Effect of acoustic cues on labeling fricatives and affricates. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[33]  R A Fox,et al.  Individual Variation in the Perception of Vowels: Implications for a Perception-Production Link , 1982, Phonetica.

[34]  H. Sussman,et al.  An investigation of locus equations as a source of relational invariance for stop place categorization , 1991 .

[35]  P. Strevens.  Spectra of Fricative Noise in Human Speech , 1960 .

[36]  Richard Wright,et al.  The Hyperspace Effect: Phonetic Targets Are Hyperarticulated. , 1993 .

[37]  A. Jongman,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of English fricatives. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  R. A. Hoffman,et al.  Generalizability of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale Norms , 1984 .

[39]  W. Cooper,et al.  Perceptuo-motor adaptation to speech: an analysis of bisyllabic utterances and a neural model. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  R. N. Ohde,et al.  Effect of relative amplitude of frication on perception of place of articulation. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  P J Bailey,et al.  Perception-Production Relations in the Voicing Contrast for Initial Stops in 3-Year-Olds , 1981, Phonetica.

[42]  A M Liberman,et al.  Perception of the speech code. , 1967, Psychological review.

[43]  WILLIAM E. COOPER,et al.  Feature processing in the perception and production of speech , 1974, Nature.

[44]  K. Harris.  Cues for the Discrimination of American English Fricatives in Spoken Syllables , 1958 .

[45]  William E. Cooper,et al.  Perceptuomotor adaptation to a speech feature , 1974 .

[46]  L. Lisker,et al.  A Cross-Language Study of Voicing in Initial Stops: Acoustical Measurements , 1964 .

[47]  Harvey M. Sussman,et al.  The Phonological Reality of Locus Equations across Manner Class Distinctions: Preliminary Observations , 1993 .

[48]  G. W. Hughes,et al.  Spectral Properties of Fricative Consonants , 1956 .