Bridging phonological system and lexicon: Insights from a corpus study of functional load

Abstract In this paper, we propose a functional and cross-language perspective on the organization of phonological systems based on the notion of functional load (FL). Using large corpora, we quantitatively characterize the relationships between phonological components (segments, stress and tones) by estimating their role at the lexical level. In a first analysis, we examine the relative contribution of each phonological subsystem to the pool of lexical distinctions and compare the results between two tonal (Cantonese and Mandarin) and seven non-tonal languages (English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, and Swahili). The equal weight of vowels and tones in lexical distinction is confirmed as well as the phenomenon of consonantal bias – advocated in several psycholinguistic studies – in five languages (English, French, German, Italian, and Swahili), with various corpus configurations in order to assess the influence of morphology and usage frequency. Our results reflect a strong preference toward consonant-based distinctions rather than vowel-based distinctions in a reduced (lemmatized) configuration of the lexicon. This preference is nevertheless modulated when inflectional morphology and usage frequency were considered. A second analysis consists in a cross-language comparison of the internal FL distribution within vocalic and consonantal subsystems in nine languages. We observe uneven FL distributions with only a few salient high-FL contrasts. Shared trends in terms of the mostly employed phonological features are also revealed but a few language-specific patterns are also present. These results are discussed in terms of organization and processing of the mental lexicon.

[1]  Yvan Rose.  Internal and external influences on child language productions , 2009 .

[2]  John Goldsmith,et al.  On Information theory, entropy, and phonology in the 20th century , 2000 .

[3]  J. Rauschecker,et al.  Segregation of Vowels and Consonants in Human Auditory Cortex: Evidence for Distributed Hierarchical Organization , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[4]  Tracey M. Derwing,et al.  The functional load principle in ESL pronunciation instruction: An exploratory study , 2006 .

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

[6]  Helmut Schmid,et al.  Improvements in Part-of-Speech Tagging with an Application to German , 1999 .

[7]  Boris New,et al.  Differential processing of consonants and vowels in the auditory modality: A cross-linguistic study , 2014 .

[8]  D. Surendran,et al.  Articulatory complexity, ambient frequency, and functional load as predictors of consonant development in children. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[9]  Boris New,et al.  Differential Processing of Consonants and Vowels in Lexical Access Through Reading , 2008, Psychological science.

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

[11]  T. Nazzi,et al.  Better Processing of Consonantal Over Vocalic Information in Word Learning at 16 Months of Age. , 2009, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[12]  Trudel Meisenburg,et al.  Phonological variation in French : illustrations from three continents , 2012 .

[13]  Stefan Fruehauf,et al.  Vowels And Consonants An Introduction To The Sounds Of Languages , 2016 .

[14]  Naomi Feldman,et al.  A Unified Model of Categorical Effects in Consonant and Vowel Perception , 2012, CogSci.

[15]  W. Levelt,et al.  Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form , 1994 .

[16]  Mathias Scharinger,et al.  A Comprehensive Three-dimensional Cortical Map of Vowel Space , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[17]  Ian Maddieson,et al.  LAPSyd: lyon-albuquerque phonological systems database , 2013, INTERSPEECH.

[18]  Michael S. Vitevitch,et al.  Insights into failed lexical retrieval from network science , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  Nikolaj Sergejevič Trubeckoj.  Grundzüge der Phonologie , 1989 .

[20]  Partha Niyogi,et al.  Measuring the Usefulness (Functional Load) of Phonological Contrasts , 2016 .

[21]  Keith Johnson,et al.  Phonetic Feature Encoding in Human Superior Temporal Gyrus , 2014, Science.

[22]  R. Jakobson.  Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze , 1942 .

[23]  Ian Maddieson,et al.  Investigating the "Hidden" Structure of Phonological Systems * , 2004 .

[24]  Michael J Owren,et al.  The relative roles of vowels and consonants in discriminating talker identity versus word meaning. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  Serge Sharo.  Creating General-Purpose Corpora Using Automated Search Engine Queries , 2006 .

[26]  Marcela Peña,et al.  ON THE DIFFERENT ROLES OF VOWELS AND CONSONANTS IN SPEECH PROCESSING AND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 2003 .

[27]  Janet B. Pierrehumbert,et al.  Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast , 2000 .

[28]  Boris New,et al.  Une base de données lexicales du français contemporain sur internet: LEXIQUE , 2001 .

[29]  Christopher T. Kello,et al.  Scale-Free Networks in Phonological and Orthographic Wordform Lexicons , 2007 .

[30]  C. F. Hockett.  A Manual of Phonology , 2013 .

[31]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[32]  Ian Maddieson,et al.  Issues of Phonological Complexity: Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Syllable Structures, Segment Inventories and Tone Contrasts , 2005 .

[33]  Robert D. King,et al.  Functional Load and Sound Change , 1967 .

[34]  K. Rayner,et al.  Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: Word frequency effects and individual differences , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[35]  André Martinet,et al.  Economie des changements phon??tiques , 1957 .

[36]  François Pellegrino,et al.  Cross-language comparison of functional load for vowels, consonants, and tones , 2013, INTERSPEECH.

[37]  Christopher T. Kello,et al.  Scaling laws in cognitive sciences , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[38]  J. Ohala,et al.  Phonetic Explanations for the Development of Tones , 1979 .

[39]  Laurent Besacier,et al.  Developments of Swahili resources for an automatic speech recognition system , 2012, SLTU.

[40]  Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald,et al.  Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Typological distinctions in word-formation , 2007 .

[41]  Edith A. Moravcsik,et al.  Universals of human language , 1978 .

[42]  Michael S. Vitevitch,et al.  The Structure of Phonological Networks across Multiple Languages , 2009, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos.

[43]  Gina-Anne Levow,et al.  The functional load of tone in Mandarin is as high as that of vowels , 2004, Speech Prosody 2004.

[44]  Ian Maddieson,et al.  Patterns of sounds , 1986 .

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

[46]  Christian Abry,et al.  Major trends in vowel system inventories , 1997 .

[47]  Scott A. Jackson,et al.  High functional load inhibits phonological contrast loss: A corpus study , 2013, Cognition.

[48]  Nathalie Vallée.  Systèmes vocaliques : de la typologie aux prédictions , 1994 .

[49]  B. Dodd,et al.  The phonological acquisition of Putonghua (Modern Standard Chinese) , 2000, Journal of Child Language.

[50]  Mark Borodovsky,et al.  Comparison of Equations Describing the Ranked Frequency Distributions of Graphemes and Phonemes , 1996, J. Quant. Linguistics.

[51]  N. Sebastián-Gallés,et al.  Constraints of vowels and consonants on lexical selection: Cross-linguistic comparisons , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[52]  P. Foulkes.  The Sounds of the World's Languages , 1997 .

[53]  William S.-Y. Wang.  The Measurement of Functional Load , 1967 .

[54]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[55]  J. Mehler,et al.  Linguistic Constraints on Statistical Computations , 2005, Psychological science.

[56]  P. Ladefoged,et al.  The sounds of the world's languages , 1996 .

[57]  M. Vitevitch.  What can graph theory tell us about word learning and lexical retrieval? , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

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

[59]  Alice Turk,et al.  The Smooth Signal Redundancy Hypothesis: A Functional Explanation for Relationships between Redundancy, Prosodic Prominence, and Duration in Spontaneous Speech , 2004, Language and speech.

[60]  T. Nazzi.  Use of phonetic specificity during the acquisition of new words: differences between consonants and vowels , 2005, Cognition.

[61]  T. Nazzi,et al.  Bias for consonantal information over vocalic information in 30-month-olds: cross-linguistic evidence from French and English. , 2009, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[62]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Separable processing of consonants and vowels , 2000, Nature.

[63]  Roger Levy,et al.  Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction , 2006, NIPS.

[64]  Martina Da Tos.  The Italian finire-type verbs: a case of morphomic attraction , 2013 .

[65]  David Carter,et al.  An information-theoretic analysis of phonetic dictionary access , 1987 .

[66]  A. Liberman,et al.  The Identification and Discrimination of Synthetic Vowels , 1962 .

[67]  Daniel Currie Hall,et al.  Phonological contrast and its phonetic enhancement: dispersedness without dispersion* , 2011, Phonology.

[68]  C. F. Hockett.  THE QUANTIFICATION OF FUNCTIONAL LOAD--A LINGUISTIC PROBLEM. , 1966 .

[69]  Adam Brown,et al.  Functional Load and the Teaching of Pronunciation. , 1988 .

[70]  Kumiko Tanaka-Ishii,et al.  Information Bias Inside English Words* , 2012, J. Quant. Linguistics.

[71]  Boris New,et al.  Beyond stop consonants: Consonantal specificity in early lexical acquisition , 2007 .

[72]  Kenneth N Stevens,et al.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[73]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  Effects of syllable frequency in speech production , 2006, Cognition.

[74]  A. Martinet,et al.  Economie des changements phonetiques: Traite de phonologie diachronique , 1957 .

[75]  R. F. Cancho,et al.  The global minima of the communicative energy of natural communication systems , 2007 .

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

[77]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[78]  Jae Hee Lee,et al.  Contribution of consonant versus vowel information to sentence intelligibility for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[79]  P. Niyogi,et al.  Quantifying the functional load of phonemic oppositions, distinctive features, and suprasegmentals , 2006 .

[80]  Larry M. Hyman.  Universals in phonology , 2008 .

[81]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Power Laws and Other heavy-Tailed Distributions in Linguistic Typology , 2012, Adv. Complex Syst..

[82]  Luc Steels,et al.  Spatially Distributed Naming Games , 1998, Adv. Complex Syst..

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

[84]  S. Gillis,et al.  The relation between order of acquisition, segmental frequency and function: the case of word-initial consonants in Dutch. , 2013, Journal of child language.

[85]  Vito Pirrelli,et al.  The PAISÀ Corpus of Italian Web Texts , 2014, WaC@EACL.

[86]  Edward Gibson,et al.  The Communicative Lexicon Hypothesis , 2009 .

[87]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Multilevel Exemplar Theory , 2010, Cogn. Sci..

[88]  Eduardo G. Altmann,et al.  Stochastic model for the vocabulary growth in natural languages , 2012, ArXiv.

[89]  Luciano Canepari,et al.  Dizionario di pronuncia italiana , 2000 .

[90]  Elizabeth M. Kissling.  Cross-linguistic differences in the immediate serial recall of consonants versus vowels , 2011, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[91]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[92]  Anne Cutler,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[93]  Christian E Stilp,et al.  Cochlea-scaled entropy, not consonants, vowels, or time, best predicts speech intelligibility , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[94]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  The mathematical theory of communication , 1950 .

[95]  Daniel Fogerty,et al.  The role of vowel and consonant fundamental frequency, envelope, and temporal fine structure cues to the intelligibility of words and sentences. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[96]  Ian Maddieson,et al.  The Effects of Phonological Structure on the Acoustic Correlates of Rhythm , 2011, ICPhS.

[97]  D. Ingram.  First Language Acquisition: Method, Description and Explanation , 1989 .