Cargando…

How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification

It has long been known that the identification of aural stimuli as speech is context-dependent (Remez et al., 1981). Here, we demonstrate that the discrimination of speech stimuli from their non-speech transforms is further modulated by their linguistic structure. We gauge the effect of phonological...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berent, Iris, Balaban, Evan, Vaknin-Nusbaum, Vered
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Research Foundation 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21949509
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00182
_version_ 1782211795934511104
author Berent, Iris
Balaban, Evan
Vaknin-Nusbaum, Vered
author_facet Berent, Iris
Balaban, Evan
Vaknin-Nusbaum, Vered
author_sort Berent, Iris
collection PubMed
description It has long been known that the identification of aural stimuli as speech is context-dependent (Remez et al., 1981). Here, we demonstrate that the discrimination of speech stimuli from their non-speech transforms is further modulated by their linguistic structure. We gauge the effect of phonological structure on discrimination across different manifestations of well-formedness in two distinct languages. One case examines the restrictions on English syllables (e.g., the well-formed melif vs. ill-formed mlif); another investigates the constraints on Hebrew stems by comparing ill-formed AAB stems (e.g., TiTuG) with well-formed ABB and ABC controls (e.g., GiTuT, MiGuS). In both cases, non-speech stimuli that conform to well-formed structures are harder to discriminate from speech than stimuli that conform to ill-formed structures. Auxiliary experiments rule out alternative acoustic explanations for this phenomenon. In English, we show that acoustic manipulations that mimic the mlif–melif contrast do not impair the classification of non-speech stimuli whose structure is well-formed (i.e., disyllables with phonetically short vs. long tonic vowels). Similarly, non-speech stimuli that are ill-formed in Hebrew present no difficulties to English speakers. Thus, non-speech stimuli are harder to classify only when they are well-formed in the participants’ native language. We conclude that the classification of non-speech stimuli is modulated by their linguistic structure: inputs that support well-formed outputs are more readily classified as speech.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3171785
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Frontiers Research Foundation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31717852011-09-23 How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification Berent, Iris Balaban, Evan Vaknin-Nusbaum, Vered Front Psychol Psychology It has long been known that the identification of aural stimuli as speech is context-dependent (Remez et al., 1981). Here, we demonstrate that the discrimination of speech stimuli from their non-speech transforms is further modulated by their linguistic structure. We gauge the effect of phonological structure on discrimination across different manifestations of well-formedness in two distinct languages. One case examines the restrictions on English syllables (e.g., the well-formed melif vs. ill-formed mlif); another investigates the constraints on Hebrew stems by comparing ill-formed AAB stems (e.g., TiTuG) with well-formed ABB and ABC controls (e.g., GiTuT, MiGuS). In both cases, non-speech stimuli that conform to well-formed structures are harder to discriminate from speech than stimuli that conform to ill-formed structures. Auxiliary experiments rule out alternative acoustic explanations for this phenomenon. In English, we show that acoustic manipulations that mimic the mlif–melif contrast do not impair the classification of non-speech stimuli whose structure is well-formed (i.e., disyllables with phonetically short vs. long tonic vowels). Similarly, non-speech stimuli that are ill-formed in Hebrew present no difficulties to English speakers. Thus, non-speech stimuli are harder to classify only when they are well-formed in the participants’ native language. We conclude that the classification of non-speech stimuli is modulated by their linguistic structure: inputs that support well-formed outputs are more readily classified as speech. Frontiers Research Foundation 2011-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3171785/ /pubmed/21949509 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00182 Text en Copyright © 2011 Berent, Balaban and Vaknin-Nusbaum. http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement This is an open-access article subject to a non-exclusive license between the authors and Frontiers Media SA, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and other Frontiers conditions are complied with.
spellingShingle Psychology
Berent, Iris
Balaban, Evan
Vaknin-Nusbaum, Vered
How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title_full How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title_fullStr How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title_full_unstemmed How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title_short How Linguistic Chickens Help Spot Spoken-Eggs: Phonological Constraints on Speech Identification
title_sort how linguistic chickens help spot spoken-eggs: phonological constraints on speech identification
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21949509
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00182
work_keys_str_mv AT berentiris howlinguisticchickenshelpspotspokeneggsphonologicalconstraintsonspeechidentification
AT balabanevan howlinguisticchickenshelpspotspokeneggsphonologicalconstraintsonspeechidentification
AT vakninnusbaumvered howlinguisticchickenshelpspotspokeneggsphonologicalconstraintsonspeechidentification