In:Multimodal Communication from a Construction Grammar Perspective
Edited by Kiki Nikiforidou and Mirjam Fried
[Constructional Approaches to Language 38] 2025
► pp. 69–115
Utterance comprehension in spontaneous speech
Phonetic reductions and lexico-grammatical context
Published online: 16 January 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.38.03mac
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.38.03mac
Abstract
The nature of spontaneous speech raises questions concerning the relationship between phonetic
reductions and unimpaired comprehension of an utterance. The results of a pilot experiment based on individual
production and community perception in Czech spontaneous conversations suggest that there is detectable patterning in
how and where speakers tend to save articulatory effort without compromising listeners’ comprehension. We identify
several non-phonetic factors that appear to motivate the reductions and their position in utterances: information
structure, semantic content, morphosyntactic redundancy, and syntactic organization. Based on our findings, we suggest
that constructional representations should incorporate the ways in which grammatical organization and phonetics may
‘fill in’ for each other in the course of the collaborative interpretive effort during spontaneous interaction.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data collection and methodology
- 2.1Word-reduction-rate method
- 2.2Experimental probe: The relationship between reductions and comprehensibility
- 2.2.1Step one: Distribution of reductions across utterances
- 2.2.2Step two: Word identifiability out of context
- 3.Results: WRR distribution trends
- 3.1Reduction rates in production
- 3.2Word identifiability vis-à-vis utterance comprehension
- 3.3Word identifiability vis-à-vis respondent success rate
- 4.Potential motivations for phonetic reductions
- 4.1Lexical category
- 4.2Discourse-based motivation
- 4.2.1Information structure and WRR trajectories
- 4.2.2Utterance boundaries
- 4.3Reductions vis-à-vis morphology
- 4.4Phonetic chunks and their lexico-syntactic conditioning
- 4.4.1Candidates for phonetic chunks
- 4.4.2Relationship between WRR and syntactic clause boundaries
- 5.Challenges for a constructional account of spontaneous speech
- 6.Summary and conclusions
Notes Glosses used throughout the chapter References Appendix
References (56)
Aylett, M., & Turk, A.E. (2004). The
smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic
prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and
Speech, 47, 31–56.
Bell, A., Brenier, J. M., Gregory, M., Girand, C., & Jurafsky, D. (2009). Predictability
effects on durations of content and function words in conversational
English. Journal of Memory and
Language, 60, 92–111.
Boas, H. C. (in
prep.). Finding constructions and their networks: Some proposals for
constructicography and its contributions to Construction
Grammar. In A. Ziem et al. (Eds.), Advances
in Constructicography.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. J. M. (2019). Praat:
Doing phonetics by computer (Version
6.1.08). Downloaded 5. 12. 2019, [URL]
Boulenger, V., Hoen, M., Jacquier, C., & Meunier, F. (2011). Interplay
between acoustic/phonetic and semantic processes during spoken sentence comprehension: An ERP
study. Brain and
Language, 116(2), 51–63.
Brand, S., & Ernestus, M. (2019). Understanding
reduced words: the relevance of reduction degree and frequency of
occurrence. In S. Calhoun, P. Escudero, M. Tabain, & P. Warren (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Melbourne, Australia 2019 (pp. 97–101). Canberra, Australia: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association Inc..
Brouwer, S., Mitterer, H., & Huettig, F. (2012a). Speech
reductions change the dynamics of competition during spoken word
recognition. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 27(4), 539–571.
(2012b). Can
hearing puter activate pupil? Phonological competition and the processing of reduced spoken words in
spontaneous conversations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 65(11), 2193–2220.
Bybee, J. (2007). Frequency
of use and the organization of
language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J., File-Muriel, R., & Napoleão de Souza, R. (2016). Special
reduction: A usage-based approach. Language and
Cognition, 8(3), 421–446.
Bybee, J., & Scheibman, J. (1999). The
effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in
English. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language
Sciences, 37(4), 575–596.
Dankovičová, J. (1997). The
domain of articulation rate variation in Czech. Journal of
Phonetics, 25, 287–312.
Ernestus, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2007). The
comprehension of acoustically reduced morphologically complex words: The roles of deletion, duration, and
frequency of occurrence. In Proceedings of the 16th
International Congress of Phonetic
Sciences (pp. 773–776). Saarbrücken.
Ernestus, M. & Smith, R. (2018). 5.
Qualitative and quantitative aspects of phonetic variation in Dutch
eigenlijk. In F. Cangemi, M. Clayards, O. Niebuhr, B. Schuppler, & M. Zellers (Eds.), Rethinking
reduction: Interdisciplinary perspectives on conditions, mechanisms, and domains for phonetic
variation (pp. 129–163). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Ernestus, M., Baayen, R. H., & Schreuder, R. (2002). The
recognition of reduced word forms. Brain and
Language, 81, 162–173.
(2003). Word
order. In Handbook of
Pragmatics, 1–13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fried, M., & Machač, P. (2022). Intonation
as a cue to epistemic stance in one type of insubordinate clauses. Folia
Linguistica, 56(1), 183–214.
Fried, M., & Östman, J-O. (2004). Construction
Grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried, & J-O. Östman (Eds.), Construction
Grammar in a cross-language
perspective (pp. 11–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gahl, S., Yao, Y., & Johnson, K. (2012). Why
reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous
speech. Journal of Memory and
Language, 66, 789–806.
Greenberg, S. (1999). Speaking
in shorthand — a syllable-centric perspective for understanding pronunciation
variation. Speech
Communication, 29, 159–176.
Janse, E., & Ernestus, M. (2011). The
roles of bottom-up and top-down information in the recognition of reduced speech: Evidence from listeners with
normal and impaired hearing. Journal of
Phonetics, 39(3), 330–343.
Johnson, K. (2004). Massive
reduction in conversational American English. Proceedings of the 10th
international symposium on spontaneous speech: Data and
analysis (pp. 29–54). Tokyo, Japan.
Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Gregory, M., & Raymond, W. (2001). Probabilistic
relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical
production. In J. Bybee, & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency
and the emergence of linguistic
structure (pp. 229–254). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Keune, K., Ernestus, M., van Hout, R., & Baayen, H. (2005). Social,
geographical, and register variation in Dutch: From written mogelijk to spoken
mok. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic
Theory, 1, 183–223.
Kohler, K. J. (1990). Segmental
reduction in connected speech in German: Phonological facts and phonetic
explanations. In W. J. Hardcastle, & A. Marchal (Eds.), Speech
production and speech
modelling (pp. 21–33). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kohler, K. J., & Niebuhr, O. (2011). On
the role of articulatory prosodies in German message
decoding. Phonetica, 68(1–2), 57–87.
Kopřivová, M., Komrsková, Z., Lukeš, D., Poukarová, P., & Škarpová, M. (2017). ORTOFON: Korpus neformální mluvené češtiny s víceúrovňovým
přepisem [Corpus of informal spoken Czech in multilayered
transcription]. Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK.
Kvale, K., & Foldvik, A. K. (1991). Manual
segmentation and labelling of continuous
speech. In: ESCA Workshop on phonetics and phonology
of speaking styles: Reduction and elaboration in speech communication (paper
37). Barcelona.
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information
structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse
referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lindblom, B. (1990). Explaining
phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H
theory. In M. Hardcastle (Ed.), Speech
production and speech
modeling (pp. 403–440). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Machač, P., & Fried, M. (2021). Fonetické redukce a vyjadřování jistotních postojů v insubordinačních
strukturách [Phonetic reductions and epistemic marking in
insubordination structures]. Časopis pro moderní
filologii, 103(1), 7–35.
Machač, P., & Skarnitzl, R. (2009). Principles
of phonetic
segmentation. Praha: Nakladatelství Epocha.
(2020). Stability
of phonetic features of Czech plosives in spontaneous speech. Studies in
Applied
Linguistics, 12(2), 16–36.
Machač, P., & Zíková, M. (2013). Redukční procesy v řeči z hlediska fonetických rysů [Reduction processes in the light of phonetic
features]. In O. Uličný, & M. Prošek (Eds.), Studie
k moderní mluvnici češtiny 5, K české fonetice a
pravopisu (pp. 17–44). Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého.
(2015). Parallel
articulation: The phonetic base and the phonological potentiality. Slovo a
slovesnost, 76(1), 3–21.
Méli, A., Ballier, N., Falaise, A., & Henderson, A. (2021). An
experiment in paratone detection in a prosodically annotated EAP Spoken
Corpus. Proeedings of Interspeech
2021, ISCA (pp. 2616–2620), ff10.21437/Interspeech.2021-294ff.
Mitterer, H., & Ernestus, M. (2006). Listeners
recover /t/s that speakers reduce: Evidence from /t/-lenition in Dutch. Journal
of
Phonetics, 34(1), 73–103.
Mitterer, H., & Tuinman, A. (2012). The
role of native-language knowledge in the perception of casual speech in a second
language. Frontiers in
psychology, 3, 249.
Niebuhr, O., & Kohler, K. J. (2011). Perception
of phonetic detail in the identification of highly reduced words. Journal of
Phonetics, 39, 319–329.
Östman, J-O. (2005). Construction
discourse: A prolegomenon. In J-O. Östman, & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction
grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical
extensions (pp. 121–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2015). From
Construction Grammar to Construction Discourse … and
back. In J. Bücker, S. Günthner, & W. Imo (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik
V. Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und
Textsorten (pp. 15–43). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Pluymakers, M., Ernestus, M., & Baayen, H. (2005a). Lexical
frequency and acoustic reduction in spoken Dutch. Journal of the Acoustical
Society of
America, 118, 2561–2569.
(2005b). Articulatory
planning is continuous and sensitive to informational
redundancy. Phonetica, 62, 146–159.
Raymond, W. D., Dautricourt, R., & Hume, E. (2006). Word-internal
/t,d/ deletion in spontaneous speech: Modeling the effects of extra-linguistic, lexical, and phonological
factors. Language Variation and
Change, 18, 55–97.
Sivonen, P., Maess, B., Lattner, S., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Phonemic
restoration in a sentence context: Evidence from early and late ERP
effects. Brain
Research, 121(1), 177–189.
Strik, H., van Doremalen, J., & Cucchiarini, C. (2008). Pronunciation
reduction: How it relates to speech style, gender, and age. Proceedings of
Interspeech (pp. 1477–1480). Brisbane: ISCA.
Tucker, B. V. (2011). The effect of reduction on the
processing of flaps and /g/ in isolated words. Journal of
Phonetics, 39, 312–318.
Tucker, B. V., & Ernestus, M. (2016). Why
we need to investigate casual speech to truly understand language production, processing and the mental
lexicon. The mental
lexicon, 11(3), 375–400.
Van Bael, C., Baayen, H., & Strik, H. (2007). Segment
deletion in spontaneous speech: A corpus study using mixed effects models with crossed random
effects. Proceedings of Interspeech
2007 (pp. 2741–2744). Antwerp, Belgium.
