1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
oa
A phonetic explanation of pronunciation variant effects
Rent:
Rent this article for
Access full text Article
/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432
1.
1. Andruski, J. E. , Blumstein, S. , and Burton, M. (1994). “ The effect of subphonetic differences on lexical access,” Cognition 52, 163187.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90042-6
2.
2. de Jong, K. (1998). “ Stress-related variation in the articulation of coda alveolar stops: Flapping revisited,” J. Phonetics 26, 283310.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1998.0077
3.
3. Ernestus, M. , Baayen, H. , and Schreuder, R. (2002). “ The recognition of reduced word forms,” Brain Lang. 81, 162173.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2514
4.
4. Gaskell, M. G. , and Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1996). “ Phonological variation and inference in lexical access,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 22, 144158.
5.
5. Goldinger, S. D. (1998). “ Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access,” Psychol. Rev. 105, 251279.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251
6.
6. Gow, D. W. (2003). “ Feature parsing: Feature cue mapping in spoken word recognition,” Perception Psychophys. 65, 575590.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03194584
7.
7. Gow, D. W. , Jr. (2001). “ Assimilation and anticipation in continuous spoken word recognition,” J. Mem. Lang. 45, 133159.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2764
8.
8. Johnson, K. (2006). “ Resonance in an exemplar-based lexicon: The emergence of social identity and phonology,” J. Phonetics 34, 485499.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.004
9.
9. Marslen-Wilson, W. , and Warren, P. (1994). “ Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: Words, phonemes, and features,” Psychol. Rev. 101, 653675.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.653
10.
10. Mattys, S. L. , Brooks, J. , and Cooke, M. P. (2009). “ Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors,” Cognitive Psychol. 59(3), 203243.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.04.001
11.
11. McLennan, C. T. , Luce, P. A. , and Charles-Luce, J. (2003). “ Representation of lexical form,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 29, 539553.
12.
12. McMurray, B. , Tanenhaus, M. K. , and Aslin, R. N. (2002). “ Gradient effects of within-category phonetic variation on lexical access,” Cognition 86, B33B42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00157-9
13.
13. Mitterer, H. , and McQueen, J. (2009). “ Processing reduced word-forms in speech perception using probabilistic knowledge about speech production,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 35, 244263.
14.
14. Nygaard, L. C. , Sommers, M. S. , and Pisoni, D. B. (1994). “ Speech perception as a talker contingent processes,” Psychol. Sci. 5, 4246.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00612.x
15.
15. Pitt, M. A. (2009). “ The strength and time course of lexical activation of pronunciation variants,” J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 35, 896910.
16.
16. Ranbom, L. J. , and Connine, C. M. (2007). “ Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition,” J. Mem. Lang. 57, 273298.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.001
17.
17. Sumner, M. , and Samuel, A. G. (2005). “ Perception and representation of regular variation: The case of final-/t/,” J. Mem. Lang. 52, 322338.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.11.004
18.
18. Sumner, M. , and Samuel, A. G. (2007). “ Lexical inhibition and sublexical facilitation are surprisingly long lasting,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 33, 769790.
19.
21. Tucker, B. V. (2011). “ The effect of reduction on the processing of flaps and /g/ in isolated words,” J. Phonetics 39, 312318.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.001
20.
19. Tucker, B. V. , and Warner, N. (2011). “ Inhibition of processing due to reduction of the American English flap,” in Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Saarbrücken (August 2007).
21.
20. Wagenmakers, E.-J. , Zeelenberg, R. , Steyvers, M. , Shiffrin, R. M. , and Raaijmakers, J. G. W. (2004). “ Nonword repetition in lexical decision: Support for two opposing processes,” Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 57, 11911210.
22.
22. Zeelenberg, R. , Wagenmakers, E.-J. , and Shiffrin, R. M. (2004). “ Nonword repetition priming in lexical decision reverses as a function of study task and speed stress,” J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 30, 270277.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.270
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432
Loading
/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432
2013-06-05
2014-12-25

Abstract

Effects of word-level phonetic variation on the recognition of words with different pronunciation variants (e.g., produced with/(out) [t]) are investigated via the semantic- and pseudoword-priming paradigms. A bias favoring clearly articulated words with canonical variants ([nt]) is found. By reducing the bias, words with different variants show robust and equivalent lexical activation. The equivalence of different word forms highlights a snag for frequency-based theories of lexical access: How are words and word productions with vastly different frequencies recognized equally well by listeners? A process-based account is proposed, suggesting that careful speech induces bottom-up processing and casual speech induces top-down processing.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/1.4807432.html;jsessionid=3px8dj1ppr7ea.x-aip-live-02?itemId=/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah&containerItemId=content/asa/journal/jasa
true
true
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: A phonetic explanation of pronunciation variant effects
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/134/1/10.1121/1.4807432
10.1121/1.4807432
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM