Frequency of Use Leads to Automaticity of Production: Evidence from Repair in Conversation

Kapatsinski, Vsevolod

doi:10.1177/0023830909351220

Cited by 18 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kapatsinski (2010) has shown that in lexical repair, more frequent words are less likely to be interrupted prior to repair than less frequent ones; at the same time, it seems reasonable to expect a higher-frequency word to allow for a faster repair than a low-frequency word.…”

Section: Statistical Modellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing and tempo in spontaneous phonological error repair

Plug

Carter

2014

Journal of Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on a study of the temporal characteristics of phonological error repair in spontaneous Dutch speech, with a focus on how the articulation rate of the correct target word production -the repair -compares to that of the preceding erroneous target word attempt -the reparandum. The study is motivated by two findings from recent independent studies: first, that selfrepair is generally associated with relative temporal compression -that is, a local increase in articulation rate -following the repair initiation; second, that the timing of the repair initiation relative to the error is consequential for the prosody of the repair component. This study investigates to what extent these findings generalise to a collection of spontaneous phonological error repairs sampled from the Spoken Dutch Corpus. The study also asks how best to quantify repair timing, considers whether timing is consequential for the duration of the 'offset-to-repair interval', and tests for effects of lexical frequency. The results confirm that temporal compression following the repair initiation is more common than temporal expansion, and that repair timing has a significant effect on both offset-to-repair duration and repair tempo -at least in a subset of the data. A frequency effect is also observed. The results suggest that proportional measures of target word completeness provide the most informative quantifications of repair timing in modelling the overall temporal organisation of phonological error repairs.

show abstract

Section: Statistical Modellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing and tempo in spontaneous phonological error repair

Plug

Carter

2014

Journal of Phonetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interaction between reparandum item completeness and lexical frequency, observed by Kapatsinski (2010) and confirmed by our analysis, complicates the issue: are high-frequency reparandum items typically completed because they are not detected as repairable in inner speech monitoring, or because once their articulation has started, it is difficult to stop even if the 'stop' signal came early? If the latter is the case, this would mean that reparandum item completeness is an unreliable indicator of detection timing at best.…”

Section:  Hypothesis Bmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…For EXPECTATIONS 3 and 4, we have found that linguistic error repairs are significantly different from both appropriateness and factual error repairs in terms of their frequency and offset timing characteristics. The observed differences between factual and linguistic error repairs are particularly notable, given that these have not been consistently distinguished in previous work on repair prosody, including Levelt & Cutler (1983), Kormos (2000 and Kapatsinski (2010).…”

Section: Relationships Between Offset Timing Repair Semantics Frequmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…Kapatsinski (2010) shows that in American English lexical repairs, the lexical frequencies of reparandum and repair items are positively correlated, but reparandum items are on average more frequent than repair items. This makes sense in terms of the likelihood of lexical activation of more and less frequent items: the more frequent the intended lexical item, 'the more frequent a competitor needs to be to become activated before…”

Section: Informativeness and Articulatory Reductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Based primarily on the findings reported by Levelt (1989) and Kapatsinski (2010), we can formulate the following concrete expectations:…”

Section: Relationships Among Predictor and Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Informativeness, Timing and Tempo in Lexical Self-Repair

Plug

2016

Lang Speech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running head: Temporal organization in lexical repairAcknowledgements: This work was supported by ESRC grant RES-061-25-0417 'Prosodic marking revisited: The phonetics of self-initiated self-repair in Dutch'. I would like to thank Paul Carter for his contribution to data selection, phonetic analysis and preliminary modelling; Mirjam Ernestus for her generous offers to provide frequency counts and recruit raters for the fill-in-the-gap task; and Christina Englert, Sanne Berends, Leen Plug, Gerard Berends, Anne van Hoek, Erik Verboom, Ilse Pit, Lisa Rommers, Nadia Klijn, Stef Piers, Thera Baayen, Marianne Plug and Ilona van der Linden for their participation in the rating exercises. I am also grateful to three Language and Speech reviewers for their constructive comments on three drafts of this article. 2 AbstractThis paper presents a study of the temporal organization of lexical repair in spontaneous Dutch speech. It assesses the extent to which offset-to-repair duration and repair tempo can be predicted on the basis of offset timing, reparandum tempo and measures of the informativeness of the crucial lexical items in the repair. Specifically, we address the expectations that repairs that are initiated relatively early are produced relatively fast throughout, and that relatively highly informative repairs are produced relatively slowly. For informativeness, we implement measures based on repair semantics, lexical frequency counts and cloze probabilities. Our results highlight differences between factual and linguistic error repairs, which have not been consistently distinguished in previous studies, and provide some evidence to support the notion that repairs that are initiated relatively early are produced relatively fast. They confirm that lexical frequency counts are rough measures of contextual predictability at best, and reveal very few significant effects of our informativeness measures on the temporal organization of lexical self-repair. Moreover, while we can confirm that most repairs have a repair portion that is fast relative to its reparandum, this cannot be attributed to the relative informativeness of the two portions. Our findings inform the current debate on the division of labour between inner and overt speech monitoring, and suggest that while the influence of informativeness on speech production is extensive, it is not ubiquitous.3

show abstract

Contrasting the Usage‐Based and Formalist Approaches

Clements¹,

Garrett²

2023

The Handbook of Usage‐Based Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frequency of Use Leads to Automaticity of Production: Evidence from Repair in Conversation

Cited by 18 publications

References 49 publications

Timing and tempo in spontaneous phonological error repair

Timing and tempo in spontaneous phonological error repair

Informativeness, Timing and Tempo in Lexical Self-Repair

Contrasting the Usage‐Based and Formalist Approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About