Influences of phonetic identification and category goodness on American listeners' perception of /r/ and /l/.

Recent experiments have demonstrated that category goodness influences the perception of vowels [Iverson and Kuhl, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 553-562 (1995)]; listeners show a perceptual magnet effect characterized by shrunken perceptual distances near excellent exemplars of vowel categories and stretched distances near poor exemplars. The present study extends this investigation by examining the relative influence of phonetic identification and category goodness on the perception of American English /r/ and /l/. Eighteen /ra/ and /la/ tokens were synthesized by varying F2 and F3 frequencies. Adult listeners identified and rated the goodness of individual stimuli, and rated the similarity of stimulus pairs. Multidimensional scaling analyses revealed that the perceptual space was shrunk near the best exemplars of each category and stretched near the category boundary. In addition, individual differences in /r/ identification corresponded to the degree of shrinking near the best exemplars of the /r/ category. The results demonstrate that category goodness and phonetic identification both contribute to the perception of /r/ and /l/.

[1]  E. B. Newman,et al.  A Scale for the Measurement of the Psychological Magnitude Pitch , 1937 .

[2]  H. B. Mann,et al.  On a Test of Whether one of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other , 1947 .

[3]  B. C. Griffith,et al.  The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. , 1957, Journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  R. Shepard.  The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. II , 1962 .

[5]  Lincoln E. Moses,et al.  RANK TESTS OF DISPERSION , 1963 .

[6]  J. Kruskal.  Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method , 1964 .

[7]  J. Kruskal.  Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis , 1964 .

[8]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  Theoretical notes. Motor theory of speech perception: a reply to Lane's critical review. , 1970, Psychological review.

[9]  Robert V Farese,et al.  Speech Perception in Infants , 1971 .

[10]  B. Lindblom,et al.  Numerical Simulation of Vowel Quality Systems: The Role of Perceptual Contrast , 1972 .

[11]  Peter D. Eimas,et al.  Auditory and linguistic processing of cues for place of articulation by infants , 1974 .

[12]  J. D. Miller,et al.  Speech perception by the chinchilla: voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants , 1975, Science.

[13]  D. Pisoni.  Auditory short-term memory and vowel perception , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[14]  R M Dalston,et al.  Acoustic characteristics of English /w,r,l/ spoken correctly by young children and adults. , 1975, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[15]  Peter D. Eimas,et al.  Auditory and phonetic coding of the cues for speech: Discrimination of the [r-l] distinction by young infants , 1975 .

[16]  L. Streeter.  Language perception of 2-month-old infants shows effects of both innate mechanisms and experience , 1976, Nature.

[17]  P. Morse,et al.  Memory factors in vowel discrimination of normal and at-risk infants. , 1978, Child development.

[18]  J. L. Danhauer,et al.  Dissimilarity ratings of English consonants by normally-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals. , 1979, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[19]  Features From Normal and Sensorineural Listeners Nonsense Syllable Test Errors , 1981, Ear and hearing.

[20]  Catherine T. Best,et al.  Categorical perception of English /r/ and /l/ by Japanese bilinguals , 1981, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[21]  P K Kuhl,et al.  Enhanced discriminability at the phonetic boundaries for the voicing feature in macaques , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  P. Kuhl,et al.  Enhanced discriminability at the phonetic boundaries for the place feature in macaques. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  W. Strange,et al.  Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r-l/ by Japanese adults learning English , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  S. Gordon-Salant,et al.  Phoneme feature perception in noise by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. , 1985, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[25]  J S Logan,et al.  Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Resolution for speech sounds: basic sensitivity and context memory on vowel and consonant continua , 1988 .

[27]  C. Best,et al.  Examination of perceptual reorganization for nonnative speech contrasts: Zulu click discrimination by English-speaking adults and infants. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  B S Atal,et al.  Perceptual differences between vowels located in a limited phonetic space. , 1989, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[30]  D. Klatt,et al.  Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  Björn Lindblom,et al.  Explaining Phonetic Variation: A Sketch of the H&H Theory , 1990 .

[32]  P. Kuhl.  Human adults and human infants show a “perceptual magnet effect” for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Training Japanese listeners to identify English /r/ and /l/: a first report. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[34]  Patricia K. Kuhl,et al.  Infants' perception and representation of speech: development of a new theory , 1992, ICSLP.

[35]  J. L. Miller,et al.  Phonetic prototypes: influence of place of articulation and speaking rate on the internal structure of voicing categories. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[36]  K. Stevens,et al.  Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. , 1992, Science.

[37]  Patricia K. Kuhl,et al.  Innate Predispositions and the Effects of Experience in Speech Perception: The Native Language Magnet Theory , 1993 .

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

[39]  P. Kuhl.  Learning and representation in speech and language , 1994, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[40]  J L Miller,et al.  The influence of sentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phonetic categories. , 1994, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[41]  C. Best,et al.  Discrimination of synthetic full-formant and sinewave/ra-la/continua by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  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.

[43]  J. Sussman,et al.  Further tests of the "perceptual magnet effect" in the perception of [i]: identification and change/no-change discrimination. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[44]  P. Kuhl,et al.  Linguistic experience and the "perceptual magnet effect." , 1995 .