Cover not available

Article published In: The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 13:1 (2018) ► pp.38–73

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Flexible perceptual sensitivity to acoustic and distributional cues

 | University of Glasgow | University of California, Berkeley
 | The George Washington University | University of California, Berkeley
Published online: 10 August 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.16029.coh
Abstract
Pronunciation variation in many ways is systematic, yielding patterns that a canny listener can exploit in order to aid perception. This work asks whether listeners actually do draw upon these patterns during speech perception. We focus in particular on a phenomenon known as paradigmatic enhancement, in which suffixes are phonetically enhanced in verbs which are frequent in their inflectional paradigms. In a set of four experiments, we found that listeners do not seem to attend to paradigmatic enhancement patterns. They do, however, attend to the distributional properties of a verb’s inflectional paradigm when the experimental task encourages attention to sublexical detail, as is the case with phoneme monitoring (Experiment 1a–b). When tasks require more holistic lexical processing, as with lexical decision (Experiment 2), the effect of paradigmatic probability disappears. If stimuli are presented in full sentences, such that the surrounding context provides richer contextual and semantic information (Experiment 3), even otherwise robust influences like lexical frequency disappear. We propose that these findings are consistent with a perceptual system that is flexible, and devotes processing resources to exploiting only those patterns that provide a sufficient cognitive return on investment.
Article outline
  • Experiment 1a
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Design
      • Procedure
    • Results
      • Accuracy
      • Reaction time
    • Discussion
  • Experiment 1b
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Design
      • Procedure
      • Results
      • Accuracy
      • Reaction time
    • Discussion
  • Experiment 2
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Design
      • Procedure
    • Results
      • Accuracy
      • Reaction time
    • Discussion
  • Experiment 3
    • Methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Design
      • Procedure
    • Results
      • Accuracy
      • Reaction time
    • Discussion
  • General discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (50)
References
Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the Time Course of Spoken Word Recognition Using Eye Movements: Evidence for Continuous Mapping Models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(38), 419–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73(3), 247–264. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (2004). The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: a functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47(Pt 1), 31–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Language redundancy predicts syllabic duration and the spectral characteristics of vocalic syllable nuclei. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(5 Pt 1), 3048–3058. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Levelt, W. J. M., Schreuder, R., & Ernestus, M. T. C. (2008). Paradigmatic structure in speech production. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 431, 1–29.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Vasishth, S., Kliegl, R., & Bates, D. (2017). The cave of shadows: Addressing the human factor with generalized additive mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 941, 206–234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models using {lme4}. Journal Of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beddor, P. S., McGowan, K. B., Boland, J. E., Coetzee, A. W., & Brasher, A. (2013). The time course of perception of coarticulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 133(4), 2350–2366. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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(1), 92–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bell, A., Jurafsky, D., Fosler-Lussier, E., Girand, C., Gregory, M., & Gildea, D. (2003). Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 113(2), 1001–1024. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blazej, L. J., & Cohen-Goldberg, A. M. (2015). Can We Hear Morphological Complexity Before Words Are Complex ? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 41(1), 50–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2015). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Retrieved from [URL]
Brysbaert, M., New, B., & Keuleers, E. (2012). Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 441, 991–997. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, C. (2014). Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement. Morphology, 24(4), 291–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Connine, C. M., Titone, D., & Wang, J. (1993). Auditory word recognition: Extrinsic and intrinsic effects of word frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahan, D., Swingley, D., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Magnuson, J. S. (2000). Linguistic gender and spoken-word recognition in French. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(4), 465–480. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Gaskell, M. G. (2002). Leading up the lexical garden path: Segmentation and ambiguity in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(1), 218–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferreira, F., Henderson, J. M., Anes, M. D., Weeks, P. A., & McFarlane, D. K. (1996). Effects of lexical frequency and syntactic complexity in spoken-language comprehension: Evidence from the auditory moving-window technique. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(2), 324–335. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gahl, S., & Garnsey, S. M. (2004). Knowledge of Grammar, Knowledge of Usage: Syntactic Probabilities Affect Pronunciation Variation. Language, 80(4), 748–775. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gregory, M. L., Raymond, W. D., Bell, A., Fosler-Lussier, E., & Jurafsky, D. (1999). The effects of collocational strength and contextual predictability in lexical production. In Chicago Linguistics Society (Vol. 351, pp. 151–166).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heinrich, A., Flory, Y., & Hawkins, S. (2010). Influence of English r-resonances on intelligibility of speech in noise for native English and German listeners. Speech Communication, 52(11–12), 1038–1055. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyönä, J., Vainio, S., & Laine, M. (2002). A morphological effect obtains for isolated words but not for words in sentence context. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14(4), 417–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Gregory, M., & Raymond, W. D. (2001). Probabilistic Relations between Words: Evidence from Reduction in Lexical Production. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, 229–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemps, R. J. J .K., Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Prosodic cues for morphological complexity: the case of Dutch plural nouns. Memory & Cognition, 33(3), 430–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemps, R. J. J .K., Wurm, L. H., Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Prosodic cues for morphological complexity in Dutch and English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1/2), 43–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuperman, V., & Bresnan, J. (2012). The effects of construction probability on word durations during spontaneous incremental sentence production. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(4), 588–611. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuperman, V., Pluymaekers, M., Ernestus, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2007). Morphological predictability and acoustic duration of interfixes in Dutch compounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 121(4), 2261–2271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehiste, I. (1972). {T}he timing of utterances and linguistic boundaries. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51(6.2), 2018–2024. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lukyanenko, C., & Fisher, C. (2016). Where are the cookies? Two- and three-year-olds use number-marked verbs to anticipate upcoming nouns. Cognition, 1461, 349–370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Magnuson, J. S., Dixon, J. A., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Aslin, R. N. (2007). The dynamics of lexical competition during spoken word recognition. Cognitive Science, 31(1), 133–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattys, S. L., Barden, K., & Samuel, A. G. (2014). Extrinsic cognitive load impairs low-level speech perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 748–754. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattys, S. L., Brooks, J., & Cooke, M. (2009). Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors. Cognitive Psychology, 59(3), 203–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattys, S. L., & Wiget, L. (2011). Effects of cognitive load on speech recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(2), 145–160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, R. H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 941, 305–315. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Molinaro, N., Barber, H. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Grammatical agreement processing in reading: ERP findings and future directions. Cortex, 47(8), 908–930. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moscoso Del Prado Martín, F., Kostić, A., & Baayen, R. H. (2004). Putting the bits together: An information theoretical perspective on morphological processing. Cognition, 94(1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 341, 739–773. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from [URL]
Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90(1), 51–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schuppler, B., Van Dommelen, W. A., Koreman, J., & Ernestus, M. (2012). How linguistic and probabilistic properties of a word affect the realization of its final /t/: Studies at the phonemic and sub-phonemic level. Journal of Phonetics, 40(4), 595–607. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tabak, W., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Lexical statistics and lexical processing: semantic density, information complexity, sex, and irregularity in Dutch. Linguistic evidence – Empirical, Theoretical, and Computational Perspectives, (1993), 529–555. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Producing inflected verbs: A picture naming study. The Mental Lexicon, 5(1), 22–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tily, H., Gahl, S., Arnon, I., Snider, N., Kothari, A., & Bresnan, J. (2009). Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation in spontaneous speech. Language and Cognition, 1(2), 147–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tily, H., & Kuperman, V. (2012). {R}ational phonological lengthening in spoken {D}utch. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 132(6), 3935–3940. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Petten, C., Coulson, S., Rubin, S., Plante, E., & Parks, M. (1999). Time course of word identification and semantic integration in spoken language. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, L., & Turk, A. E. (2010). English words on the Procrustean bed: Polysyllabic shortening reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics, 38(3), 459–471. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Hashimoto, Daiki
2023. The effect of verbal conjugation predictability on speech signal. Morphology 33:1 ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
Schlechtweg, Marcel & Holden Härtl
2023. Quotation marks and the processing of irony in English: evidence from a reading time study. Linguistics 61:2 ► pp. 355 ff. DOI logo
Schlechtweg, Marcel, Jörg Peters & Marina Frank
2023. L1 variation and L2 acquisition: L1 German /eː/-/ɛː/ overlap and its effect on the acquisition of L2 English /ɛ/-/æ/. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Lohmann, Arne & Benjamin V. Tucker
2021. Testing the storage of prosody-induced phonetic detail via auditory lexical decision. The Mental Lexicon 16:1 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Schlechtweg, Marcel & Greville G. Corbett
2021. The duration of word-final s in English: A comparison of regular-plural and pluralia-tantum nouns. Morphology 31:4 ► pp. 383 ff. DOI logo
SCHLECHTWEG, MARCEL & GREVILLE G. CORBETT
2023. Is morphosyntactic agreement reflected in acoustic detail? Thesduration of English regular plural nouns. English Language and Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 67 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue