Speech as a Sound Source

  • Andrew J. Lotto
  • Sarah C. Sullivan
Part of the Springer Handbook of Auditory Research book series (SHAR, volume 29)


Sound Source Speech Perception Vocal Tract Context Sentence Phonetic Category 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ainsworth WA (1975) Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in voweljudgments. In: Fant G, Tatham M (eds) Auditory Analysis andPerception of Speech. London: Academic Press, pp. 103–113.Google Scholar
  2. Aravamudhan R (2005) Perceptual overshoot with speech and nonspeechsounds. Ph.D. thesis, Kent State University, Kent, OH.Google Scholar
  3. Assmann PF, Nearey TM, Hogan JT (1982) Vowel identification:Orthographic, perceptual and acoustic aspects. J Acoust Soc Am71:975–989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bachorowski JA, Owren MJ (1999) Acoustic correlates of talker sexand individual talker-identity are present in a short vowel segmentproduced in running speech. J Acoust Soc Am 106:1054–1063.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bregman AS (1990) Auditory Scene Analysis: The PerceptualOrganization of Sound. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Broadbent DE, Ladefoged P (1960) Vowel judgments and adaptationlevel. Proc Biol Sci 151:384–399.Google Scholar
  7. Brunswik E (1956) Perception and the Representative Design ofPsychological Experiments. Berkeley, CA: University of CaliforniaPress.Google Scholar
  8. Coady JA, Kluender KR, Rhode WS (2003) Effects of contrast betweenonsets of speech and other complex spectra. J Acoust Soc114:2225–2235.Google Scholar
  9. Dalston RM (1975) Acoustic characteristics of English /w, r, l/spoken correctly by young children and adults. J Acoust Soc57:462–469.Google Scholar
  10. Darwin CJ, McKeown JD, Kirby D (1989) Perceptual compensation fortransmission channel and speaker effects on vowel quality. SpeechCommun 8:221–234.Google Scholar
  11. Delgutte B (1997) Auditory neural processing of speech. In:Hardcastle WJ, Laver J (eds) The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences.Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 507–538.Google Scholar
  12. Delgutte B, Hammond BM, Kalluri S, Litvak LM, Cariani P (1996)Neural encoding of temporal envelope and temporal interactions inspeech. In: Ainsworth W, Greenberg S (eds) Proceedings of the ESCAResearch Workshop on the Auditory Basis of Speech Perception. Keele,UK; 15–19 July. pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  13. Dent ML, Brittan-Powell EF, Dooling RJ, Pierce A (1997) Perceptionof synthetic /ba//wa/speech continuum by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). J Acoust Soc Am 102:1891–1897.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Diehl RL, Walsh MA (1989) An auditory basis for the stimulus-lengtheffect in the perception of stops and glides. J Acoust Soc Am85:2154–2164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Diehl RL, Souther AF, Convis CL (1980) Conditions on ratenormalization in speech perception. Percept Psychophys 27:435–443.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Elman JL, McClelland JL (1988) Cognitive penetration of themechanisms of perception: Compensation for coarticulation oflexically restored phonemes. J Mem Lang 27:143–165.Google Scholar
  17. Evans BG, Iverson P (2004) Vowel normalization for accent: Aninvestigation of best exemplar locations in northern and southernBritish English sentences. J Acoust Soc Am 115:352–361.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fairhall AL, Lewen GD, Bialek W, de Ruyter van Steveninck RR (2001)Efficiency and ambiguity in an adaptive neural code. Nature412:787–792.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fant G (1966) A note on vocal tract size factors and non-uniformF-pattern scalings. Speech Trans Lab Q Prog Stat Rep 7:22–30.Google Scholar
  20. Fowler CA, Best CT, McRoberts GW (1990) Young infants’ perception ofliquid coarticulatory influences on following stop consonants.Percept Psychophys 48:559–570.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Francis AL, Nusbaum HC (2002) Selective attention and theacquisition of new phonetic categories. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept]28:349–366.Google Scholar
  22. Fujisaki H, Kawashima T (1968) The roles of pitch and higherformants in the perception of vowels. IEEE Trans Audio ElectAU-16:73–77.Google Scholar
  23. Gaskell G, Marslen-Wilson WD (1996) Phonological variation andinference in lexical access. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept]22:144–158.Google Scholar
  24. Gilchrist A (1977) Perceived lightness depends on perceived spatialarrangement. Science 195:185–187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Glidden CM, Assmann PF (2004) Effects of visual gender and frequencyshifts on vowel category judgments. Acoust Res Let Online5:132–138.Google Scholar
  26. Gogel WC (1978) The adjacency principle in visual perception. Sci Am238:126–139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Goldinger SD (1997) Words and voices: Perception and production inan episodic lexicon. In: Johnson K, Mullennix JW (eds) TalkerVariability in Speech Processing. San Diego, CA: Academic Press,pp. 33–66.Google Scholar
  28. Goldinger SD (1998) Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexicalaccess. Psychol Rev 105:251–279.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Gow DW, Im AM (2004) A cross-linguistic examination of assimilationcontext effects. J Mem Lang 51:279–296.Google Scholar
  30. Green DM, McKay MJ, Licklider JCR (1959) Detection of a pulsedsinusoid in noise as a function of frequency. J Acoust Soc Am31:1446–1452.Google Scholar
  31. Healy AF, Repp BH (1982) Context independence and phonetic mediationin categorical perception. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept] 8:68–80.Google Scholar
  32. Hillenbrand JM, Getty L, Clark MJ, Wheeler K (1995) Acousticcharacteristics of American English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am97:3099–3111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hillenbrand JM, Clark MJ, Houde RA (2000) Some effects of durationon vowel recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 108:3013–3022.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Holt LL (1999) Auditory constraints on speech perception: Anexamination of spectral contrast. Diss Abstr Int (Sci) 61:556.Google Scholar
  35. Holt LL (2005) Temporally non-adjacent non-linguistic sounds affectspeech categorization. Psychol Sci 16:305–312.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Holt LL (2006) The mean matters: Effects of statistically-definednon-speech spectral distributions on speech categorization. J AcoustSoc Am 120:2801–2817.Google Scholar
  37. Holt LL, Lotto AJ (2002) Behavioral examinations of the level ofauditory processing of speech context effects. Hear Res167:156–169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Holt LL, Lotto AJ, Kluender KR (2000) Neighboring spectral contentinfluences vowel identification. J Acoust Soc Am 108:710–722.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Iverson P, Kuhl PK, Akahane-Yamada R, Diesch E, Tohkura Y,Kettermann A, Siebert C (2003) A perceptual interference accountof acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes. Cognition87:B47–B57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnson K (1990) The role of perceived speaker identity in F0normalization of vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 88:642–654.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Johnson K (1997) Speech perception without speaker normalization: Anexemplar model. In: Johnson K, Mullennix JW (eds) Talker Variabilityin Speech Processing. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 145–166.Google Scholar
  42. Johnson K, Flemming E, Wright R (1993a) The hyperspace effect:Phonetic targets are hyperarticulated. Language 69:505–528.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson K, Ladefoged P, Lindau M (1993b) Individual differences invowel production. J Acoust Soc Am 94:701–714.Google Scholar
  44. Johnson K, Strand EA, D’Imperio M (1999) Auditory-visual integrationof talker gender in vowel perception. J Phonet 27:359–384.Google Scholar
  45. Joos M (1948) Acoustic Phonetics. Language 24:1–136.Google Scholar
  46. Jusczyk PW (1997) The Discovery of Spoken Language. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Jusczyk PW, Pisoni DB, Reed M, Fernald A, Myers M (1983) Infants’discrimination of the duration of a rapid spectrum change innonspeech signals. Science 222:175–177.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Kidd GR (1989) Articulatory-rate context effects in phonemeidentification. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept] 15:736–748.Google Scholar
  49. Kiefte M, Kluender KR (2001) Spectral tilt versus formant frequencyin static and dynamic vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 109:2294–2295.Google Scholar
  50. Kiefte M, Kluender KR (2005) The relative importance of spectraltilt in monopthongs and diphthongs. J Acoust Soc Am 117:1395–1404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Kim M-RC, Lotto AJ (2002) An investigation of acousticcharacteristics of Korean stops produced by non-heritage learners.The Korean Language in America 7:177–188.Google Scholar
  52. Kluender KR, Lotto AJ (1999) Virtues and perils of an empiricistapproach to speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 105:503–511.Google Scholar
  53. Kluender KR, Lotto AJ, Holt LL, Bloedel SL (1998) Role of experiencefor language specific functional mappings of vowel sounds. J AcoustSoc Am 104:3568–3582.Google Scholar
  54. Kuhl PK (1993) Early linguistic experience and phonetic perception:Implications for theories of developmental speech perception. JPhonet 21:125–139.Google Scholar
  55. Ladefoged P (1989) A note on “Information conveyed by vowels.” JAcoust Soc Am 85:2223–2224.Google Scholar
  56. Ladefoged P, Broadbent DE (1957) Information conveyed by vowels. JAcoust Soc Am 29:98–104.Google Scholar
  57. Lindblom B (1963) Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. J AcoustSoc Am 35:1773–1781.Google Scholar
  58. Lindblom B, Studdert-Kennedy M (1967) On the role of formanttransitions in vowel recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 42:830–843.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Lindblom B, MacNeilage P, Studdert-Kennedy M (1984) Self-organizingprocesses and the explanation of language universals. In:Butterworth B, Comrie B, Dahl Ö (eds) Explanations for LanguageUniversals. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter and Co, pp. 181–203.Google Scholar
  60. Lisker L (1986) “Voicing” in English: A catalogue of acousticfeatures signaling /b/versus /p/in trochees. Lang Speech 29:3–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Lotto AJ (2000) Language acquisition as complex category formation.Phonetica 57:189–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Lotto AJ (2004) Perceptual compensation for coarticulation as ageneral auditory process. In: Agwuele A, Warren W, Park S-H (eds)Proceedings of the 2003 Texas Linguistic Society Conference.Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 42–53.Google Scholar
  63. Lotto AJ, Holt LL (2000) The illusion of the phoneme. In: BillingsSJ, Boyle JP, Griffith AM (eds) CLS 35 The Panels. Chicago: ChicagoLinguistic Society, pp. 191–204.Google Scholar
  64. Lotto AJ, Kluender KR (1998) General contrast effects of speechperception: Effect of preceding liquid on stop consonantidentification. Percept Psychophys 60:602–619.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Lotto AJ, Kluender KR, Holt LL (1997) Perceptual compensation forcoarticulation by Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).J Acoust Soc Am 102:1134–1140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Lotto AJ, Kluender KR, Holt LL (1998) The perceptual magnet effectdepolarized. J Acoust Soc Am 103:3648–3655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Lotto AJ, Sullivan SC, Holt LL (2003) Central locus for nonspeechcontext effects on phonetic identification. J Acoust Soc Am113:53–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Lotto AJ, Sato M, Diehl RL (2004) Mapping the task for the secondlanguage learner: The case of Japanese acquisition of /r/and /l/.In: Slifka J, Manuel S, Matthies M (eds) From Sound to Sense: 50+Years of Discoveries in Speech Communication. Electronic ConferenceProceedings, Boston; 12 June. pp. C181–C186.Google Scholar
  69. Lutfi RA (2001) Auditory detection of hollowness. J Acoust Soc Am110:1010–1019.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Lutfi RA, Oh EL (1997) Auditory discrimination of material changesin a struck-clamped bar. J Acoust Soc Am 102:3647–3656.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Mann VA (1980) Influence of preceding liquid on stop-consonantperception. Percept Psychophys 28:407–412.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Mann VA (1986) Distinguishing universal and language-dependentlevels of speech perception: Evidence from Japanese listeners’perception of English /l/and /r/. Cognition 24:169–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Miller JD (1989) Auditory-perceptual interpretation of the vowel. JAcoust Soc Am 85:2114–2134.Google Scholar
  74. Miller JL, Baer T (1983) Some effects of speaking rate on theproduction of /b/and /w/. J Acoust Soc Am 73:1751–1755.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Miller JL, Liberman AM (1979) Some effects of later-occurringinformation on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel.Percept Psychophys 25:457–465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Movshon JA, Lennie P (1979) Pattern-selective adaptation in visualcortical neurons. Nature 278:850–852.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Näätänen R, Winkler I (1999)The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitivescience. Psychol Bull 125:826–859.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Näätänen R, Gaillard AW,Mantysalo S (1978) Early selective attention effect on evokedpotential reinterpreted. Acta Psychol 42:313–329.Google Scholar
  79. Nearey TM (1989) Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowelperception. J Acoust Soc Am 85:2088–2113.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Nearey TM, Assmann PF (1986) Modeling the role of inherent spectralchange in vowel identification. J Acoust Soc Am 80:1297–1308.Google Scholar
  81. Nordstrom PE (1977) Female and infant vocal tracts simulated frommale area functions. J Phonet 5:81–92.Google Scholar
  82. Nordstrom PE, Lindblom B (1975) A normalization procedure for vowelformant data. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Leeds, England, p. 212.Google Scholar
  83. Palmer AR, Summerfield Q, Fantini DA (1995) Responses ofauditory-nerve fibers to stimuli producing psychophysicalenhancement. J Acoust Soc Am 97:1786–1799.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Peterson GE, Barney HL (1952) Control methods used in a study of thevowels. J Acoust Soc Am 24:175–184.Google Scholar
  85. Peterson GE, Lehiste I (1960) Duration of syllable nuclei inEnglish. J Acoust Soc Am 32:693–703.Google Scholar
  86. Pisoni DB, Carrell TD, Gans SJ (1983) Perception of the duration ofrapid spectrum changes in speech and nonspeech signals. PerceptPsychophys 34:314–322.Google Scholar
  87. Potter RK, Steinberg JC (1950) Toward the specification of speech. JAcoust Soc Am 22:807–820.Google Scholar
  88. Remez RE, Rubin PE, Nygaard LC, Howell WA (1987) Perceptualnormalization of vowels produced by sinusoidal voices. J Exp Psychol[Hum Percept] 13:40–61.Google Scholar
  89. Repp BH (1982) Phonetic trading relations and context effects: Newevidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychol Bull 92:81–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Repp BH, Healy AF, Crowder RG (1979) Categories and context in theperception of isolated steady-state vowels. J Exp Psychol [HumPercept] 5:129–145.Google Scholar
  91. Sato M, Lotto AJ, Diehl RL (2003) Patterns of acoustic variance innative and non-native phonemes: The case of Japanese production of/r/and /l/. J Acoust Soc Am 114:2392.Google Scholar
  92. Saul AB, Cynader MS (1989) Adaptation in single units in visualcortex: The tuning of aftereffects in the spatial domain. VisNeurosci 2:593–607.Google Scholar
  93. Scott SK, Wise RJS (2003) Functional imaging and language: Acritical guide to methodology and analysis. Speech Commun 41:7–21.Google Scholar
  94. Stephens JDW, Holt LL (2003) Preceding phonetic context affectsperception of non- speech sounds. J Acoust Soc Am 114:3036–3039.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Stevens KN (1986) Models of phonetic recognition II: A feature-basedmodel of speech recognition. In: Mermelstein P (ed) Proceedings ofthe Montreal Satellite Symposium on Speech Recognition, pp. 67–68.Google Scholar
  96. Stevens KN (2002) Toward a model for lexical access based onacoustic landmarks and distinctive features. J Acoust Soc Am111:1872–1891.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Stevens EB, Kuhl PK, Padden DM (1988) Macaques show context effectsin speech perception. J Acoust Soc Am 84(Suppl. 1):577.Google Scholar
  98. Story BH (2005) A parametric model of the vocal tract area functionfor vowel and consonant simulation. J Acoust Soc Am 117:3231–3254.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Story BH, Titze IR (2002) A preliminary study of vowel qualitytransformation based on modifications to the neutral vocal tractarea function. J Phonet 30:485–509.Google Scholar
  100. Strange W (1989) Evolving theories of vowel perception. J Acoust SocAm 85:2081–2087.Google Scholar
  101. Sullivan SC, Lotto AJ, Diehl RL (2005) Optimal auditorycategorization on a single dimension. In: Forbus K, Gentner D,Regier T (eds) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference ofthe Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum,p. 1639.Google Scholar
  102. Summerfield Q (1981) Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy inphonetic perception. J Exp Psychol [Hum Percept] 7:1074–1095.Google Scholar
  103. Summerfield Q, Assmann PF (1987) Auditory enhancement in speechperception. In: Schouten MEH (ed) NATO Advanced Research Workshop onthe Psychophysics of Speech Perception. Dordrecht, Netherlands:Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, pp. 140–150.Google Scholar
  104. Summerfield Q, Assmann PF (1989) Auditory enhancement and theperception of concurrent vowels. Percept Psychophys 45:529–536.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. Summerfield Q, Haggard M, Foster J, Gray S (1984) Perceiving vowelsfrom uniform spectra: Phonetic exploration of an auditoryaftereffect. Percept Psychophys 35:203–213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Sussman HM (1986) A neuronal model of vowel normalization andrepresentation. Brain Lang 28:12–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. Syrdal AK, Gopal HS (1986) A perceptual model of vowel recognitionbased on the auditory representation of American English vowels. JAcoust Soc Am 79:1086–1100.Google Scholar
  108. Traunmüller H (1981) Perceptual dimension of openness in vowels.J Acoust Soc Am 69:1465–1475.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Ulanovsky N, Las L, Nelken I (2003) Processing of low-probabilitysounds by cortical neurons. Nat Neurosci 6:391–398.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. Ulanovsky N, Las L, Farkas D, Nelken I (2004) Multiple time scalesof adaptation in auditory cortex neurons. J Neurosci24:10440–10453.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Viemeister NF (1980) Adaptation of masking. In: van den Brink G,Bilsen FA (eds) Psychophysical, Physiological, and BehaviouralStudies in Hearing. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University Press,pp. 190–199.Google Scholar
  112. Viemeister NF, Bacon SP (1982) Forward masking by enhancedcomponents in harmonic complexes. J Acoust Soc Am 71:1502–1507.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. Wade T, Holt LL (2005a) Effects of later-occurring nonlinguisticsounds on speech categorization. J Acoust Soc Am 118:1701–1710.Google Scholar
  114. Wade T, Holt LL (2005b) Perceptual effects of preceding non-speechrate on temporal properties of speech categories. Percept Psychophys67:939–950.Google Scholar
  115. Watkins AJ (1988) Spectral transitions and perceptual compensationfor effects on transmission channels. In: Ainsworth W, Holmes J(eds) Proceedings of the 7th Symposium of the Federation ofAcoustical Societies of Europe: Speech’ 88, Edinburgh, England.pp. 711–718.Google Scholar
  116. Watkins AJ (1991) Central, auditory mechanisms of perceptualcompensation for spectral-envelope distortion. J Acoust Soc Am90:2942–2955.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. Watkins AJ, Makin SJ (1994) Perceptual compensation for speakerdifferences and for spectral-envelope distortion. J Acoust Soc Am96:1263–1282.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Watkins AJ, Makin SJ (1996) Some effects of filtered contexts on theperception of vowels and fricatives. J Acoust Soc Am 99:588–594.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. Wayland SC, Miller JL, Volaitis LE (1994) The influence ofsentential speaking rate on the internal structure of phoneticcategories. J Acoust Soc Am 95:2694–2701.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. Whalen DH (1990) Coarticulation is largely planned. J Phonet18:3–35.Google Scholar
  121. Yamada RA, Tohkura Y (1990) Perception and production ofsyllable-initial English /r/and /l/by native speakers of Japanese.In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken LanguageProcessing, Kobe, Japan; 19–22 November. pp. 757–760.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew J. Lotto
  • Sarah C. Sullivan

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations