Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Satsuki Nakai; James M. Scobbie (2016)
Publisher: Ubiquity Press
Journal: Laboratory Phonology
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: VOT; category boundary; English; spontaneous speech; rate normalization, rate normalization, English, VOT, category boundary, spontaneous speech, P101-410, Language. Linguistic theory. Comparative grammar
Some languages, such as many varieties of English, use short-lag and long-lag VOT to distinguish word- and syllable- initial voiced vs. voiceless stop phonemes. According to a popular view, the optimal category boundary location between the two types of stops moves towards larger values as articulation rate becomes slower (and speech segments longer), and listeners accordingly shift the perceptual VOT category boundary. According to an alternative view, listeners need not shift the category boundary with a change in articulation rate, because the same VOT category boundary location remains optimal across articulation rates in normal speech, although a shift in optimal boundary location can be induced in the laboratory by instructing speakers to use artificially extreme articulation rates. In this paper we applied rate-independent VOT category boundaries to word-initial stop phonemes in spontaneous English speech data, and compared their effectiveness against that of Miller, Green and Reeves’s (1986) rate-dependent VOT category boundary applied to laboratory speech. The classification accuracies of the two types of category boundaries were comparable, when factors other than articulation rate are controlled, suggesting that perceptual VOT category boundaries need not shift with a change in articulation rate under normal circumstances. For example, Optimal VOT category boundary locations for homorganic word-initial stops differed considerably depending on the following vowel, however, when boundary location was assumed to be affected by the relative frequency of voiced vs. voiceless categories in each vowel context.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Allen, J. S., & Miller, J. L. 1999. Efects of syllable-initial voicing and speaking rate on the temporal characteristics of monosyllabic words. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106(4), 2031-2039. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.427949
    • Arvaniti, A. 1999. Efects of speaking rate on the timing of single and geminate sonorants. Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 599-602.
    • Aylett, M., & Turk, A. E. 2006. Language redundancy predicts syllabic duration and the spectral characteristics of vocalic syllable nuclei. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(5), 3048-3058. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2188331
    • Baese-Berk, M. M., & Goldrick, M. 2009. Mechanisms of interaction in speech production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(4), 527-554. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/01690960802299378
    • Baese-Berk, M. M., Hefner, C. C., Dilley, L. C., Pitt, M. A., Morrill, T. H., & McAu - ley, J. D. 2014. Long-term temporal tracking of speech rate afects spokenword recognition. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1546-1553. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0956797614533705
    • Balota, D. A., Boland, J. E., & Shields, L. W. 1989. Priming in pronunciation: Beyond pattern recognition and onset latency. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(1), 14-36. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90026-0
    • Baran, J. A., Laufer, M. Z., & Danilof, R. 1977. Phonological contrastivity in conversation: A comparative study of voice onset time. Journal of Phonetics, 5, 339-350.
    • Bard, E. G., Anderson, A. H., Sotillo, C., Aylett, M., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Newlands, A. 2000. Controlling the intelligibility of referring expressions in dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(1), 1-22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2667
    • Bard, E. G., Shillcock, R. C., & Altmann, G. T. 1988. The recognition of words after their acoustic ofsets in spontaneous speech: Efects of subsequent context. Perception and Psychophysics, 44(5), 395-408. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210424
    • Beckman, J., Helgason, P., McMurray, B., & Ringen, C. 2011. Rate efects on Swedish VOT: Evidence for phonological overspecification. Journal of Phonetics, 39(1), 39-49. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.11.001
    • Bell, A., Brenier, J. M., Gregory, M., Girand, C., & Jurafsky, D. 2009. Predictability efects on durations of content and function words in conversational English. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(1), 92-111. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.003
    • Blumstein, S. E., & Stevens, K. N. 1980. Perceptual invariance and onset spectra for stop consonants in diferent vowel environments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67(2), 648-662. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.383890
    • Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. 2012. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.3.23). Retrieved from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/
    • Bradlow, A. R. 2002. Confluent talker-and listener-oriented forces in clear speech produc - tion. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 7 (pp. 241-273). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110197105.241
    • British Broadcasting Corporation. 2010. Radio technical standards: BWAV specification . Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/dq/pdf/radio/delivery_requirements_ mar_10.pdf.
    • Brouwer, S., Mitterer, H., & Huettig, F. 2012. Speech reductions change the dynamics of competition during spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(4), 539-571. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.555268
    • Bybee, J. 2000. The phonology of the lexicon: Evidence from lexical difusion. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. 65-85). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
    • Cho, T., & Ladefoged, P. 1999. Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics, 27(2), 207-229. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0094
    • Clarke, C., & Luce, P. 2005. Perceptual adaptation to speaker characteristics: VOT boundaries in stop voicing categorization. Proceedings of ISCA Workshop on Plasticity in Speech Perception, 23-26.
    • Cooper, F. S., Delattre, P. C., Liberman, A. M., Borst, J. M., & Gerstman, L. J. 1952. Some experiments on the perception of synthetic speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24(6), 597-606. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1906940
    • Cutler, A., & Carter, D. M. 1987. The predominance of strong initial syllables in the English vocabulary. Computer Speech and Language, 2(3-4), 133-142. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/0885-2308(87)90004-0
    • Dahan, D., & Mead, R. L. 2010. Context-conditioned generalization in adaptation to distorted speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(3), 704-728. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017449
    • Diehl, R. L., & Walsh, M. A. 1989. An auditory basis for the stimulus-length efect in the perception of stops and glides. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85(5), 2154-2164. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.397864
    • Dilley, L. C., & Pitt, M. A. 2010. Altering context speech rate can cause words to appear or disappear. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1664-1670. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0956797610384743
    • Docherty, G. J., Watt, D., Llamas, C., Hall, D., & Nycz, J. 2011. Variation in voice onset time along the Scottish-English border. Proceedings of the XVIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 591-594.
    • Dorman, M. F., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Raphael, L. J. 1977. Stop-consonant recognition: Release bursts and formant transitions as functionally equivalent, context-dependent cues. Perception and Psychophysics, 22(2), 109-122. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/ BF03198744
    • Eisner, F., Melinger, A., & Weber, A. 2013. Constraints on the transfer of perceptual learning in accented speech. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1-9. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2013.00148
    • Ernestus, M. 2000. Voice assimilation and segment reduction in casual Dutch: A corpus-based study of the phonology-phonetics interface. Utrecht, Netherlands: Landelijke Onderzoekschool Taalwetenschap.
    • Field, A. P. 2005. Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
    • Fosler-Lussier, E., & Morgan, N. 1999. Efects of speaking rate and word frequency on pronunciations in conversational speech. Speech Communication, 29, 137-158. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6393(99)00035-7
    • Frank, A., & Jaeger, T. F. 2008. Speaking rationally: Uniform information density as an optimal strategy for language production. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 933-938.
    • Fricke, M. 2013. Phonological encoding and phonetic duration. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No. 3616451).
    • Fujisaki, H., Nakamura, K., & Imoto, T. 1975. Auditory perception of duration of speech and non-speech stimuli. In G. Fant & M. A. A. Tatham (Eds.), Auditory analysis and perception of speech (pp. 197-219). London: Academic Press. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/B978-0-12-248550-3.50017-9
    • Gahl, S., Yao, Y., & Johnson, K. 2012. Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(4), 789-806. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.11.006
    • Gaitenby, J. 1965. The elastic word. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, 2, 3-1.
    • Green, K. P., & Miller, J. L. 1985. On the role of visual rate information in phonetic perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 38(3), 269-276. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/ BF03207154
    • Green, K. P., Stevens, E. B., & Kuhl, P. K. 1994. Talker continuity and the use of rate information during phonetic perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 55(3), 249-260. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03207596
    • Haggard, M., Summerfield, Q., & Roberts, M. 1981. Psychoacoustical and cultural deter - minants of phoneme boundaries: Evidence from trading F₀ cues in the voiced-voiceless distinction. Journal of Phonetics, 9, 49-62.
    • Harrington, J., Cox, F., & Evans, Z. 1997. An acoustic phonetic study of broad, general, and cultivated Australian English vowels. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 17(2), 155- 184. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07268609708599550
    • Hay, J., Nolan, A., & Drager, K. 2006. From fush to feesh: Exemplar priming in speech perception. Linguistic Review 23(3), 351-379. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ TLR.2006.014
    • Higgins, M. B., Netsell, R., & Schulte, L. 1998. Vowel-related diferences in laryngeal articulatory and phonatory function. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(4), 712-724. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jslhr.4104.712
    • Hirata, Y., & Lambacher, S. G. 2004. Role of word-external contexts in native speakers' identification of vowel length in Japanese. Phonetica, 61, 177-200. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1159/000084157
    • Holland, M. K., & Lockhead, G. R. 1968. Sequential efects in absolute judgments of loud - ness. Perception and Psychophysics, 3(6), 409-414. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/ BF03205747
    • Johnson, K. 1997. Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In K. Johnson & J. W. Mullennix (Eds.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 145- 165). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    • Johnson, K. 2004. Massive reduction in conversational American English. In K. Yoneyama & K. Maekawa (Eds.), Spontaneous speech: Data and analysis. (pp. 29-54). Tokyo: National International Institute for Japanese Language.
    • Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Gregory, M., & Raymond, W. D. 2001. Evidence from reduction in lexical production. In J. Bybee (Ed.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 229-254). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ tsl.45.13jur
    • Kataoka, R., & Johnson, K. 2007. Frequency efects in cross-linguistic stop place perception: A case of /t/ - /k/ in Japanese and English. Retrieved from University of California, Berkley, Phonology Lab Annual Report Web site: http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/phonlab/ annual_report/documents/2007/Kataoka_Johnson.pdf
    • Kessinger, R. H., & Blumstein, S. E. 1997. Efects of speaking rate on voice-onset time in Thai, French, and English. Journal of Phonetics, 25(2), 143-168. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1006/jpho.1996.0039
    • Kessinger, R. H., & Blumstein, S. E. 1998. Efects of speaking rate on voice-onset time and vowel production: Some implications for perception studies. Journal of Phonetics, 26(2), 117-128. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1997.0069
    • Kidd, G. R. 1989. Articulatory-rate context efects in phoneme identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15(4), 736-748. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.15.4.736
    • Klatt, D. H. 1975. Voice onset time, frication, and aspiration in word-initial consonant clusters. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 18(4), 686-706. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1044/jshr.1804.686
    • Klatt, D. H. 1979. Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. Journal of Phonetics, 7, 279-312.
    • Kraljic, T., & Samuel, A. G. 2005. Perceptual learning for speech: Is there a return to normal? Cognitive Psychology, 51(2), 141-178. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. cogpsych.2005.05.001
    • Ladefoged, P., & Broadbent, D. E. 1957. Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 29(1), 98-104. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1121/1.1908694
    • Lehiste, I. 1972. The timing of utterances and linguistic boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51(6B), 2018-2024. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1913062
    • Lieberman, P. 1963. Some efects of semantic and grammatical context on the production and perception of speech. Language and Speech, 6, 172-187.
    • Lieberman, P., & Blumstein, S. E. 1988. Speech physiology, speech perception, and acoustic phonetics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/CBO9781139165952
    • Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. 1964. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word, 20(3), 384-422. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00 437956.1964.11659830
    • Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. 1967. Some efects of context on voice onset time in English stops. Language and Speech, 10(1), 1-28.
    • Lisker, L., & Abramson, A. S. 1970. The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics. Proceedings of the VIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 563-567.
    • Magloire, J., & Green, K. P. 1999. A cross-language comparison of speaking rate efects on the production of voice onset time in English and Spanish. Phonetica, 56(3-4), 158- 185. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000028449
    • Maye, J., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. 2008. The weckud wetch of the wast: Lexical adaptation to a novel accent. Cognitive Science, 32(3), 543-562. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/03640210802035357
    • Miller, J. L., & Dexter, E. R. 1988. Efects of speaking rate and lexical status on phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(3), 369-378. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.14.3.369
    • Miller, J. L., Green, K. P., & Reeves, A. 1986. Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast. Phonetica, 43(1-3), 106-115. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000261764
    • Miller, J. L., Grosjean, F., & Lomanto, C. 1984. Articulation rate and its variability in spontaneous speech: A reanalysis and some implications. Phonetica, 41(4), 215-225. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000261728
    • Miller, J. L., & Liberman, A. M. 1979. Some efects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception and Psychophysics, 25(6), 457-465. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03213823
    • Mitterer, H., Scharenborg, O., & McQueen, J. M. 2013. Phonological abstraction without phonemes in speech perception. Cognition, 129(2), 356-361. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.011
    • Mullennix, J. W., Bihon, T., Bricklemyer, J., Gaston, J., & Keener, J. M. 2002. Efects of variation in emotional tone of voice on speech perception. Language and Speech, 45(3), 255-283. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00238309020450030301
    • Mullennix, J. W., Pisoni, D. B., & Martin, C. S. 1989. Some efects of talker variability on spoken word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85(1), 365-378. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.397688
    • Munson, B. 2007. Lexical access, lexical representation, and vowel production. In J. Cole & J. I. Hualde (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 9 (pp. 201-228). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    • Nagao, K., & de Jong, K. 2007. Perceptual rate normalization in naturally produced ratevaried speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121(5), 2882-2898. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2713680
    • Nakai, S. 2013. An explanation for phonological word-final vowel shortening: Evidence from Tokyo Japanese. Laboratory Phonology, 4(2), 513-553. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1515/lp-2013-0016
    • Nakai, S., & Turk, A. E. 2011. Separability of prosodic phrase boundary and phonemic information. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 129(2), 966-976. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.3514419
    • Nearey, T. M., & Rochet, B. L. 1994. Efects of place of articulation and vowel con - text on VOT production and perception for French and English stops. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 24(1), 1-18. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0025100300004965
    • Newman, R. S., & Sawusch, J. R. 1996. Perceptual normalization for speaking rate: Efects of temporal distance. Perception and Psychophysics, 58(4), 540-560. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.3758/BF03213089
    • Niedzielski, N. 1999. The efect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62-85. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0261927X99018001005
    • Nooteboom, S. G. 1979. Complex control of simple decisions in the perception of vowel length. Proceedings of the IXth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 2, 298-304.
    • Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. 2003. Perceptual learning in speech. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 204-238. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(03)00006-9
    • Oh, E. 2011. Efects of speaker gender on voice onset time in Korean stops. Journal of Phonetics, 39(1), 59-67. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.11.002
    • Pierrehumbert, J. 2002. Word-specific phonetics. In C. Gussenhoven, T. Rietveld, & N. Warner (Eds.), Laboratory phonology 7 (pp. 101-139). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110197105.101
    • Pind, J. 1995. Speaking rate, voice-onset time, and quantity: The search for higher-order invariants for two Icelandic speech cues. Perception and Psychophysics, 57(3), 291-304. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03213055
    • Pisoni, D. B., Carrell, T. D., & Gans, S. J. 1983. Perception of the duration of rapid spectrum changes in speech and nonspeech signals. Perception and Psychophysics, 34(4), 314-322. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03203043
    • Reinisch, E., & Sjerps, M. J. 2013. The uptake of spectral and temporal cues in vowel perception is rapidly influenced by context. Journal of Phonetics, 41(2), 101-116. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2013.01.002
    • Reinisch, E., Wozny, D. R., Mitterer, H., & Holt, L. L. 2014. Phonetic category recalibration: What are the categories? Journal of Phonetics, 45, 91-105. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.wocn.2014.04.002
    • Repp,B.H.1979.Relativeamplitudeofaspirationnoiseasavoicingcueforsyllable-initialstop consonants. Language and Speech, 22(2), 173-189. doi:10.1177/002383097902200207
    • Rubenstein, H., & Pollack, I. 1963. Word predictability and intelligibility. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2(2), 147-158. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022- 5371(63)80079-1
    • Schiavetti, N., Whitehead, R. L., Metz, D. E., Whitehead, B., & Mignerey, M. 1996. Voice onset time in speech produced during simultaneous communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 39(3), 565-572. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/ jshr.3903.565
    • Scobbie, J. M. 2006. Flexibility in the face of incompatible English VOT systems. In L. Goldstein, D. H. Whalen, & C. T. Best (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology 8: Varieties of phonological competence (pp. 367-392). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    • Selkirk, E. 1996. The prosodic structure of function words. In K. Demuth & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 187-213). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Turk, A. E. 1996. A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25(2), 193-247. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01708572
    • Shockey, L. 1987. Rate and reduction: Some preliminary evidence. In R. Channon & L. Shockey (Eds.), In honor of Ilse Lehiste (pp. 217-225). Dordrecht: Foris. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110886078.217
    • Sommers, M. S., Nygaard, L. C., & Pisoni, D. B. 1994. Stimulus variability and spoken word recognition. I. Efects of variability in speaking rate and overall amplitude. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(3), 1314-1324. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1121/1.411453
    • Stevens, K. N., & Klatt, D. H. 1974. Role of formant transitions in the voiced‐voiceless distinction for stops. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 55(3), 653-659. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1914578
    • Stuart-Smith, J., Sonderegger, M., Rathcke, T., & Macdonald, R. 2015. The private life of stops: VOT in a real-time corpus of spontaneous Glaswegian. Laboratory Phonology, 6(3-4), 505-549. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lp-2015-0015
    • Summerfield, Q. 1975. How a full account of segmental perception depends on prosody and vice versa. In A. Cohen & S. G. Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and process in speech perception (pp. 51-68). Berlin: Springer-Verlag. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-642-81000-8_4
    • Summerfield, Q. 1981. Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(5), 1074- 1095. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.7.5.1074
    • Syrdal, A. K., & Gopal, H. S. 1979. A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79(4), 1086-1100. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.393381
    • Toscano, J. C. 2011. Perceiving speech in context: Compensation for contextual variability during acoustic cue encoding and categorization. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No.3473251).
    • Toscano, J. C., & McMurray, B. 2012. Cue-integration and context efects in speech: Evi - dence against speaking-rate normalization. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 74(6), 1284-1301. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0306-z
    • Turk, A. E., Nakai, S., & Sugahara, M. 2006. Acoustic segment durations in prosodic research: A practical guide. In S. Sudhof, D. Lenertová, R. Meyer, S. Pappert, P. Augur - zky, I. Mleinek, … J. Schlieβer (Eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 1-27). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110914641.1
    • VanDam, M. 2007. Plasticity of phonological categories. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (UMI No.3277973).
    • Volaitis, L. E., & Miller, J. L. 1992. Phonetic prototypes: Influence of place of articulation and speaking rate on the internal structure of voicing categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92(2), 723-735. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.403997
    • Wedel, A. B. 2006. Exemplar models, evolution and language change. Linguistic Review, 23(3), 247-274. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/TLR.2006.010
    • Wells, J. C. 1996. Accents of English 2: The British Isles. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
    • Wright, R. 2004. A review of perceptual cues and cue robustness. In B. Hayes, R. M. Kirchner, & D. Steriade (Eds.), Phonetically based phonology (pp. 34-57). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486401.002
    • Xu, Y. 2010. In defense of lab speech. Journal of Phonetics, 38(3), 329-336. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.04.003
    • Yao, Y. 2009. Understanding VOT variation in spontaneous speech. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Linguists.
    • Yuan, J., Liberman, M., & Cieri, C. 2006. Towards an integrated understanding of speaking rate in conversation. Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, 541-544.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article