Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWhite, Len
dc.contributor.authorMattys, SLen
dc.contributor.authorWiget, Len
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-13T15:32:56Z
dc.date.available2018-08-13T15:32:56Z
dc.date.issued2012en
dc.identifier.other375en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/12128
dc.description.abstract

Multiple cues influence listeners’ segmentation of connected speech into words, but most previous studies have used stimuli elicited in careful readings rather than natural conversation. Discerning word boundaries in conversational speech may differ from the laboratory setting. In particular, a speaker’s articulatory effort – hyperarticulation vs. hypoarticulation (H&H) – may vary according to communicative demands, suggesting a compensatory relationship whereby acoustic-phonetic cues are attenuated when other information sources strongly guide segmentation.We examined how listeners’ interpretation of segmentation cues is affected by speech style (spontaneous conversation vs. read), using cross-modal identity priming. To elicit spontaneous stimuli, we used a map task in which speakers discussed routes around stylized landmarks. These landmarks were two-word phrases in which the strength of potential segmentation cues – semantic likelihood and crossboundary diphone phonotactics – was systematically varied. Landmark-carrying utterances were transcribed and later re-recorded as read speech. Independent of speech style, we found an interaction between cue valence (favorable/unfavorable) and cue type (phonotactics/semantics). Thus, there was an effect of semantic plausibility, but no effect of cross-boundary phonotactics, indicating that the importance of phonotactic segmentation may have been overstated in studies where lexical information was artificially suppressed. These patterns were unaffected by whether the stimuli were elicited in a spontaneous or read context, even though the difference in speech styleswas evident in a main effect. Durational analyses suggested speaker-driven cue trade-offs congruent with an H&H account, but these modulations did not impact on listener behavior. We conclude that previous research exploiting read speech is reliable in indicating the primacy of lexically based cues in the segmentation of natural conversational speech.

en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleSegmentation cues in spontaneous speech: Robust semantics and fragile phonotactics.en
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.volume3en
plymouth.journalFrontiers in Cognitionen
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role/Professional Services staff
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (CBCB)
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV