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.
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.
Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73(3), 247–264.
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.
Aylett, M., & Turk, A. (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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cohen, C. (2014). Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement. Morphology, 24(4), 291–323.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Gahl, S., & Garnsey, S. M. (2004). Knowledge of Grammar, Knowledge of Usage: Syntactic Probabilities Affect Pronunciation Variation. Language, 80(4), 748–775.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Lehiste, I. (1972). {T}he timing of utterances and linguistic boundaries. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 51(6.2), 2018–2024.
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.
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.
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.
Mattys, S. L., Barden, K., & Samuel, A. G. (2014). Extrinsic cognitive load impairs low-level speech perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 748–754.
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.
Mattys, S. L., & Wiget, L. (2011). Effects of cognitive load on speech recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(2), 145–160.
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.
Molinaro, N., Barber, H. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Grammatical agreement processing in reading: ERP findings and future directions. Cortex, 47(8), 908–930.
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.
Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 341, 739–773.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tily, H., & Kuperman, V. (2012). {R}ational phonological lengthening in spoken {D}utch. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 132(6), 3935–3940.
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.
White, L., & Turk, A. E. (2010). English words on the Procrustean bed: Polysyllabic shortening reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics, 38(3), 459–471.
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.
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.
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
2021. The duration of word-final s in English: A comparison of regular-plural and pluralia-tantum nouns. Morphology 31:4 ► pp. 383 ff.
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.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 july 2024. 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.