Effects of speaking rate on the behavior of tense and lax vowel durations

Gopal, H. S.

doi:10.1016/s0095-4470(19)30411-5

Cited by 21 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Across the two consonant contexts, the duration of short vowel gestures was less conditioned by consonant context than the duration of long vowel gestures, resulting in a reduction of contrast in the coronal context. This finding is consistent with general observations that the duration of short vowels is more stable than the duration of long vowels across different speech rates, prominences and phonetic contexts (Klatt 1973, Port 1981, Gopal 1990, Fletcher et al 1994, Hoole, Mooshammer & Tillmann 1994, Hoole & Mooshammer 2002, Jong & Zawaydeh 2002, Mooshammer & Fuchs 2002, Hirata 2004, White & Mády 2008, Nakai et al 2009, Beňuš 2011, Cox & Palethorpe 2011, Cox et al 2015, Peters 2015, Penney et al 2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Articulation of vowel length contrasts in Australian English

Ratko

Proctor

Cox

2022

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic studies have shown that in Australian English (AusE), vowel length contrasts are realised through temporal, spectral and dynamic characteristics. However, relatively little is known about the articulatory differences between long and short vowels in this variety. This study investigates the articulatory properties of three long–short vowel pairs in AusE: /iː–ɪ/ beat – bit, /ɐː–ɐ/ cart – cut and /oː–ɔ/ port – pot, using electromagnetic articulography. Our findings show that short vowel gestures had shorter durations and more centralised articulatory targets than their long equivalents. Short vowel gestures also had proportionately shorter periods of articulatory stability and proportionately longer articulatory transitions to following consonants than long vowels. Long–short vowel pairs varied in the relationship between their acoustic duration and the similarity of their articulatory targets: /iː–ɪ/ had more similar acoustic durations and less similar articulatory targets, while /ɐː–ɐ/ were distinguished by greater differences in acoustic duration and more similar articulatory targets. These data suggest that the articulation of vowel length contrasts in AusE may be realised through a complex interaction of temporal, spatial and dynamic kinematic cues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Articulation of vowel length contrasts in Australian English

Ratko

Proctor

Cox

2022

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As has also been frequently found for other languages the durations of lax vowels are almost incompressible due to different types of suprasegmental changes (cf. for speech rate in American English Gopal 1990and 1996, in German Hoole, Mooshammer and Tillmann 1994, for deaccentuation in German Jessen 1993, Mooshammer, Fuchs and Fischer 1999. Therefore it was interesting to see how both the rescaling and truncation models deal with changes of kinematic parameters for sequences with only slight temporal reduction.…”

Section: [Insert Figure 1]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stress distinction in German: simulating kinematic parameters of tongue-tip gestures

Mooshammer

Fuchs

2002

Journal of Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Much research in the past 20 years has investigated how changes in speaking rate affect the production of speech sounds (e.g., Adams, Weismer, & Kent, 1993; DeNil & Abbs, 1991; Flege, 1988b; Gay et al, 1974; Gopal, 1990; Kuehn, 1973; Kuehn & Moll, 1976; Ostry & Munhall, 1985). A common result from these studies is that changes in speaking rate have differential effects for the movements corresponding to vowels and consonants: Increasing rate causes an increase in the velocities of movements corresponding to consonantal gestures, but it causes less of an increase, or even a decrease, in the velocities of movements corresponding to vowel gestures (e.g., MacNeilage & Ladefoged, 1976, p. 99).…”

Section: Speaking Rate Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech sound acquisition, coarticulation, and rate effects in a neural network model of speech production.

Guenther

1995

Psychological Review

373

351

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes a neural network model of speech motor skill acquisition and speech production that explains a wide range of data on variability, motor equivalence, coarticulation, and rate effects. Model parameters are learned during a babbling phase. To explain how infants learn language-specific variability limits, speech sound targets take the form of convex regions, rather than points, in orosensory coordinates. Reducing target size for better accuracy during slower speech leads to differential effects for vowels and consonants, as seen in experiments previously used as evidence for separate control processes for the 2 sound types. Anticipatory coarticulation arises when targets are reduced in size on the basis of context; this generalizes the well-known look-ahead model of coarticulation. Computer simulations verify the model's properties.The primary goal of the modeling work described in this article is to provide a coherent theoretical framework that provides explanations for a wide range of data concerning the articulator movements used by humans to produce speech sounds. This is carried out by formulating a model that transforms strings of phonemes into continuous articulator movements for producing these phonemes. This study of speech production is largely motivated by the following question of speech acquisition: How does an infant acquire the motor skills needed to produce the speech sounds of his or her native language? Speech production involves complex interactions among several different reference frames. A phonetic frame describes the sounds a speaker wishes to produce, and the signals that convey these sound units to a listener exist within an acoustic frame. Tactile and proprioceptive signals form an orosensory frame (e.g., Perkell, 1980) that describes the shape of the vocal tract, and the muscles controlling the positions of individual articulators make up an articulatory frame. The parameters governing the interactions among these frames cannot be fixed at birth. One reason for this is the language specificity of these interactions. For example, English listeners distinguish between the sounds /r/ and /!/, but Japanese listeners do not. Corresponding differences are seen in the articulator movements of the two groups (Miyawaki et al., 1975). Thus, despite some obvious commonalities between the phonetics of different languages (e.g., widespread use of consonants like /d/, /n/, and /s/ across the world's languages), the precise nature of mappings between acoustic goals and articulator movements depends on the lanThis research was supported in part by Air Force Office of Scientific Research F49620-92-J-0499. I would like to thank Dan Bullock and Elliot Saltzman for their insightful suggestions on an earlier

show abstract

Effects of speaking rate on the behavior of tense and lax vowel durations

Cited by 21 publications

References 14 publications

Articulation of vowel length contrasts in Australian English

Articulation of vowel length contrasts in Australian English

Stress distinction in German: simulating kinematic parameters of tongue-tip gestures

Speech sound acquisition, coarticulation, and rate effects in a neural network model of speech production.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About