Acoustic differences in morphologically-distinct homophones

ABSTRACT Previous work demonstrates that a word's status as morphologically-simple or complex may be reflected in its phonetic realisation. One possible source for these effects is phonetic paradigm uniformity, in which an intended word's phonetic realisation is influenced by its morphological relatives. For example, the realisation of the inflected word frees should be influenced by the phonological plan for free, and thus be non-homophonous with the morphologically-simple word freeze. We test this prediction by analysing productions of forty such inflected/simple word pairs, embedded in pseudo-conversational speech structured to avoid metalinguistic task effects, and balanced for frequency, orthography, as well as segmental and prosodic context. We find that stem and suffix durations are significantly longer by about 4–7% in fricative-final inflected words (frees, laps) compared to their simple counterparts (freeze, lapse), while we find a null effect for stop-final words. The result suggests that wordforms influence production of their relatives.

[1]  Martin Corley,et al.  Articulatory evidence for feedback and competition in speech production , 2009 .

[2]  V. Ferreira,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Language Production , 2014 .

[3]  Ariel M. Cohen-Goldberg,et al.  Towards a theory of multimorphemic word production: The heterogeneity of processing hypothesis , 2013 .

[4]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  Articulatory Planning Is Continuous and Sensitive to Informational Redundancy , 2005, Phonetica.

[5]  Christo Kirov,et al.  Bayesian Speech Production: Evidence from Latency and Hyperarticulation , 2013, CogSci.

[6]  William Labov,et al.  A Study of the Non-Standard English of Negro and Puerto Rican Speakers in New York City. Volume I: Phonological and Grammatical Analysis. , 1968 .

[7]  ERIN CONWELL,et al.  Prosodic disambiguation of noun/verb homophones in child-directed speech* , 2016, Journal of Child Language.

[8]  T. A. Hall The Distribution of Superheavy Syllables in Modern English , 2001 .

[9]  James M Scobbie,et al.  Morphemes, Phonetics and Lexical Items: The Case of the Scottish Vowel Length Rule. , 1999 .

[10]  Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel,et al.  Durational cues to fricative codas in 2-year-olds' American English: voicing and morphemic factors. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Brenda Rapp,et al.  The interface between morphology and phonology: Exploring a morpho-phonological deficit in spoken production , 2013, Cognition.

[12]  Marianne Pouplier,et al.  Intention in articulation: Articulatory timing in alternating consonant sequences and its implications for models of speech production , 2010, Language and cognitive processes.

[13]  Sang-Im Lee-Kim,et al.  Morphological effects on the darkness of English intervocalic /l/ , 2013 .

[14]  Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel,et al.  Word-boundary-related duration patterns in English , 2000, J. Phonetics.

[15]  Dani Byrd,et al.  The elastic phrase: modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[16]  Allard Jongman,et al.  Incomplete neutralization and other sub-phonemic durational differences in production and perception: evidence from Dutch , 2004, J. Phonetics.

[17]  Beth L. Losiewicz The effect of frequency on linguistic morphology , 1992 .

[18]  Keelan Evanini,et al.  Intrinsic vowel duration and the post-vocalic voicing effect: some evidence from dialects of north american English , 2009, INTERSPEECH.

[19]  M. Gaskell,et al.  A written word is worth a thousand spoken words: The influence of spelling on spoken-word production , 2012 .

[20]  Esteban Buz,et al.  The (in)dependence of articulation and lexical planning during isolated word production , 2016, Language, cognition and neuroscience.

[21]  P. Keating PHONETIC ENCODING OF PROSODIC STRUCTURE , 2003 .

[22]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  Morphological predictability and acoustic duration of interfixes in Dutch compounds. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat: doing phonetics by computer , 2003 .

[24]  P. Lieberman Some Effects of Semantic and Grammatical Context on the Production and Perception of Speech , 1963 .

[25]  Louis Goldstein,et al.  Dynamics in grammar: Comment on Ladd and Ernestus & Baayen , 2006 .

[26]  Duane G. Watson,et al.  The Effect of Phonological Encoding on Word Duration: Selection Takes Time , 2015 .

[27]  Jonah Katz Compression effects, perceptual asymmetries, and the grammar of timing , 2010 .

[28]  Sahyang Kim,et al.  Prosodic strengthening on the /s/-stop cluster and the phonetic implementation of an allophonic rule in English , 2014, J. Phonetics.

[29]  A. Crompton,et al.  Syllables and segments in speech production , 1981 .

[30]  Frank Parker,et al.  The duration of morphemic and non-morphemic /s/ in English , 1983 .

[31]  Viktor Kharlamov,et al.  Incomplete neutralization of the voicing contrast in word-final obstruents in Russian: Phonological, lexical, and methodological influences , 2014, J. Phonetics.

[32]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies , 2012, Behavior Research Methods.

[33]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  “Compensatory shortening” in monosyllables of spoken English , 1992 .

[34]  Melissa Frazier to appear in NELS 36 Output-Output Faithfulness to Moraic Structure : Evidence from American English * , 2006 .

[35]  W. Jassem,et al.  Neutralization of voicing in Polish obstruents , 1989 .

[36]  S. Gahl Time and Thyme Are not Homophones: The Effect of Lemma Frequency on Word Durations in Spontaneous Speech , 2008 .

[37]  Laurence White,et al.  English words on the Procrustean bed: Polysyllabic shortening reconsidered , 2010, J. Phonetics.

[38]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[39]  Søren Højsgaard,et al.  A Kenward-Roger approximation and parametric bootstrap methods for tests in linear mixed models: The R Package pbkrtest , 2014 .

[40]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Lexical access and inflectional morphology , 1988, Cognition.

[41]  Barbara Schuppler,et al.  How linguistic and probabilistic properties of a word affect the realization of its final /t/: Studies at the phonemic and sub-phonemic level , 2012, J. Phonetics.

[42]  W. Levelt,et al.  Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? , 1994, Cognition.

[43]  Jordan B. Brewer,et al.  PHONETIC REFLEXES OF ORTHOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS IN LEXICAL REPRESENTATION , 2008 .

[44]  R. Baayen,et al.  Morphological effects on fine phonetic detail: The case of Dutch -igheid , 2010 .

[45]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Leading Up the Lexical Garden Path: Segmentation and Ambiguity in Spoken Word Recognition , 2002 .

[46]  SUZANNE KEMMER,et al.  The Phonology of the Lexicon : Evidence from Lexical Diffusion , 2013 .

[47]  R. Baayen,et al.  Shifting paradigms: gradient structure in morphology , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[48]  Stuart Davis Capitalistic v. Militaristic: The Paradigm Uniformity Effect Reconsidered , 2004 .

[49]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech , 2012 .

[50]  Russell V. Lenth,et al.  Least-Squares Means: The R Package lsmeans , 2016 .

[51]  Francesca Masini,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory , 2018 .

[52]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  Phonetic detail that distinguishes prefixed from pseudo-prefixed words , 2012, J. Phonetics.

[53]  Grover Hudson,et al.  PHONOLOGY AND LANGUAGE USE , 2004 .

[54]  Colin W. Wightman,et al.  Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[55]  D. K. Oller,et al.  The effect of position in utterance on speech segment duration in English. , 1973, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[56]  Patrycja Strycharczuk,et al.  Gradual or abrupt? The phonetic path to morphologisation , 2016, J. Phonetics.

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

[58]  Julia F. Strand,et al.  Many neighborhoods: Phonological and perceptual neighborhood density in lexical production and perception , 2016 .

[59]  R. R. Peterson,et al.  Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. , 1998 .

[60]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[61]  L. Feldman Modeling Morphological Processing , 2013 .

[62]  M. Fourakis,et al.  On the ‘Incomplete Neutralization’ of German Final Obstruents , 1984 .

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

[64]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change , 2002, Language Variation and Change.

[65]  Louis C. W. Pols,et al.  How efficient is speech , 2003 .

[66]  Mirjam Ernestus,et al.  The role of morphology in acoustic reduction , 2012 .

[67]  J. Hay Causes and Consequences of Word Structure , 2003 .

[68]  G. Kunter,et al.  Homophony and morphology: The acoustics of word-final S in English 1 , 2015, Journal of Linguistics.

[69]  Alexandros Christodoulou,et al.  Variation in Word Duration and Planning , 2012 .

[70]  James P. Blevins,et al.  Word-based morphology , 2006, Journal of Linguistics.

[71]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[72]  Patrycja Strycharczuk,et al.  Velocity measures in ultrasound data. Gestural timing of post-vocalic /l/ in English , 2015, ICPhS.

[73]  Gregory R. Guy Explanation in variable phonology: An exponential model of morphological constraints , 1991, Language Variation and Change.

[74]  Sarah Hawkins,et al.  PHONETIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MIS- AND DIS- IN ENGLISH PREFIXED AND PSEUDO-PREFIXED WORDS , 2007 .

[75]  J. Hay Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? , 2001 .

[76]  L. Leonard,et al.  Some differences between English plural noun inflections and third singular verb inflections in the input: the contributions of frequency, sentence position, and duration , 1999, Journal of Child Language.

[77]  Sungbok Lee,et al.  How far, how long: on the temporal scope of prosodic boundary effects. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[78]  Bruce Hayes,et al.  Gradient Well-Formedness in Optimality Theory , 2000 .

[79]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  Synthesising meaning and processing approaches to prosody: performance matters , 2015, Language, cognition and neuroscience.

[80]  T. Florian Jaeger,et al.  Signal Reduction and Linguistic Encoding , 2017 .

[81]  A. Turk,et al.  Durational correlates of English sublexical constituent structure* , 2009, Phonology.

[82]  James P. Blevins Word and Paradigm Morphology , 2016 .

[83]  Abby Walker,et al.  Phonological, lexical, and frequency factors in coronal stop deletion in early New Zealand English , 2008 .

[84]  Patrycja Strycharczuk,et al.  Morphological effects on pronunciation , 2015, ICPhS.

[85]  Sharon Peperkamp,et al.  Aspiration and the gradient structure of English prefixed words , 2015, ICPhS.

[86]  Cécile Fougeron,et al.  Articulatory properties of initial segments in several prosodic constituents in French , 2001, J. Phonetics.

[87]  Susan Shaiman,et al.  Kinematics of compensatory vowel shortening: the effect of speaking rate and coda composition on intra- and inter-articulatory timing , 2001, J. Phonetics.

[88]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity , 1992 .

[89]  R. Raffelsiefen Paradigm Uniformity Effects Versus Boundary Effects , 2004 .

[90]  Jason M. Brenier,et al.  Predictability Effects on Durations of Content and Function Words in Conversational English , 2009 .

[91]  A. Turk,et al.  The domain of phrase‐final lengthening in English , 1998 .

[92]  Anne Pier Salverda,et al.  The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension , 2003, Cognition.

[93]  Cécile Fougeron,et al.  The Oxford Handbook of Laboratory Phonology , 2011 .

[94]  R. Shi,et al.  Prosodic Cues to Noun and Verb Categories in Infant-Directed Mandarin Speech , 2010 .

[95]  A. Turk,et al.  Phonetic Reflexes of Morphological Boundaries at a Normal Speech Rate , 2004 .

[96]  Adamantios I. Gafos,et al.  Dynamics in grammar : comment on Ladd and Ernestus & Baayen * , 2005 .

[97]  Lisa M. Lavoie,et al.  Some influences on the realization of for and four in American English , 2002, Journal of the International Phonetic Association.

[98]  B. Rapp,et al.  Discreteness and interactivity in spoken word production. , 2000, Psychological review.

[99]  R. Port,et al.  Incomplete neutralization and pragmatics in German , 1989 .

[100]  G S Dell,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. , 1986, Psychological review.

[101]  Laura J. Blazej,et al.  Can we hear morphological complexity before words are complex? , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[102]  Joan L. Bybee Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form , 1985 .

[103]  R Berkovits,et al.  Progressive Utterance-Final Lengthening in Syllables with Final Fricatives , 1993, Language and speech.

[104]  Barbara Schuppler,et al.  Informal speech processes can be categorical in nature, even if they affect many different words. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[105]  Scott Seyfarth,et al.  Word informativity influences acoustic duration: Effects of contextual predictability on lexical representation , 2014, Cognition.

[106]  D E Francke The written word. , 1979, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[107]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  The functionality of incomplete neutralization in Dutch: The case of past-tense formation , 2006 .

[108]  Brenda Rapp,et al.  Mrs. Malaprop's Neighborhood: Using Word Errors to Reveal Neighborhood Structure. , 2010, Journal of memory and language.

[109]  Matthew A Goldrick,et al.  Limited interaction in speech production: Chronometric, speech error, and neuropsychological evidence , 2006 .

[110]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  Thematic role predictability and planning affect word duration , 2017 .

[111]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Decisions and mechanisms in exemplar-based phonology , 2005 .

[112]  Robert Schreuder,et al.  Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity , 1992 .

[113]  Robert Schreuder,et al.  Prosodic cues for morphological complexity in Dutch and English , 2005 .

[114]  S. Blumstein,et al.  Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters , 2006 .

[115]  A. Lahiri,et al.  Prosodic Units in Speech Production , 1997 .

[116]  Jeffrey Steele,et al.  Missing Inflection in L2 Acquisition: Defective Syntax or L1-Constrained Prosodic Representations? , 2003 .

[117]  Sven Grawunder,et al.  Assessing incomplete neutralization of final devoicing in German , 2014, J. Phonetics.

[118]  Susanne Gahl,et al.  Lexical competition in vowel articulation revisited: Vowel dispersion in the Easy/Hard database , 2015, J. Phonetics.

[119]  Joseph Keshet,et al.  Automatic analysis of slips of the tongue: Insights into the cognitive architecture of speech production , 2016, Cognition.

[120]  C. Gussenhoven,et al.  Final lengthening at prosodic boundaries in Dutch , 1995 .

[121]  Allard Jongman,et al.  Orthographic vs. morphological incomplete neutralization effects , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[122]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer , 2002 .

[123]  I. Lehiste The Timing of Utterances and Linguistic Boundaries , 1972 .

[124]  Bodo Winter,et al.  The Nature of Incomplete Neutralization in German : Implications for Laboratory Phonology , 2012 .

[125]  T. A. Hall Against extrasyllabic consonants in German and English , 2002, Phonology.

[126]  Ingo Plag,et al.  Phonological and phonetic variability in complex words: an uncharted territory , 2014 .

[127]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Paradigm Uniformity and the Phonetics-Phonology Boundary , 1996 .

[128]  Joshua de Leeuw,et al.  jsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in a Web browser , 2014, Behavior Research Methods.

[129]  Matthew Goldrick,et al.  Interaction and representational integration: Evidence from speech errors , 2011, Cognition.

[130]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[131]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Word-specific phonetics , 2001 .

[132]  Jonah Katz,et al.  Compression effects in English , 2012, J. Phonetics.

[133]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  Paradigmatic structure in speech production , 2008 .

[134]  Clara Cohen,et al.  Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement , 2014 .

[135]  H. Baayen,et al.  Paradigmatic effects in auditory word recognition: The case of alternating voice in Dutch , 2007 .