Investigating the retention and time course of phonotactic constraint learning from production experience.

Warker, Jill A.

doi:10.1037/a0028648

Cited by 28 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relation between what is learned in the experiment and what had been known before was modeled by Warker and Dell (2006) by first training a connectionist network on English syllables, and then exposing the network to the particular distributions of syllables experienced by participants in the experiments, resulting in further weight changes. Warker (2013) then hypothesized that the changes resulting from experience with the experimental syllables are stored in a separate “mini-grammar” that is associated with the experimental context and hence is immune to interference from everyday English. She supported this proposal by demonstrating that the experimental learning was retained a week later.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The participants were all native English speakers, as determined by their responses on a questionnaire at the end of the study that assessed familiarity with English and other languages. Participants were only allowed participation in one of the three experiments, because the learning in these kinds of studies has been shown to persist over long periods of time (Warker, 2013). Nine additional participants were recruited for the experiment but were excluded from analysis because of evidence of non-native English (based upon their answers to the questionnaires), mispronouncing experimentally restricted consonants (for more details, see Stimuli and Procedure below), or technical difficulties resulting in incomplete data.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They estimated that the decay of activation during production was on the order of a few seconds and hence that structural priming, which persisted in their experiment for 10 minutes, was a learning effect. Some effects of altered phonotactics on slips have been demonstrated to persist for 7 days (Warker, 2013). Warker and Dell (2006) introduced a computational model of how changes in phonotactic distributions affect speech errors and attributed the effects to alterations in the weights of connections in a network, as opposed to persisting activation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production

Kittredge

Dell

2016

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The language production and perception systems rapidly learn novel phonotactic constraints. In production, for example, producing syllables in which /f/ is restricted to onset position (e.g. as /h/ is in English) causes one's speech errors to mirror that restriction. We asked whether or not perceptual experience of a novel phonotactic distribution transfers to production. In three experiments, participants alternated hearing and producing strings of syllables. In the same condition, the production and perception trials followed identical phonotactics (e.g. /f/ is onset). In the opposite condition, they followed reverse constraints (e.g. /f/ is onset for production, but /f/ is coda for perception). The tendency for speech errors to follow the production constraint was diluted when the opposite pattern was present on perception trials, thus demonstrating transfer of learning from perception to production. Transfer only occurred for perceptual tasks that may involve internal production, including an error monitoring task, which we argue engages production via prediction. Keywordsphonotactics; transfer of learning; speech errors; language perception; language production; implicit learning Speakers learn to speak by listening. But how do acts of speech perception lead to change within the production system? Our ability to speak depends on the acquisition of general patterns such as the fact that, in English, adjectives precede nouns or that one says "an" before words beginning with vowels. This paper is concerned with perception-to-production transfer of a specific kind of generalization, phonotactic constraints. Phonotactics are constraints about the ordering of segments, typically within syllables. They are language specific and hence must be learned. For example, in English, /h/ must be a syllable onset Correspondence to: Audrey K. Kittredge, audreyk@andrew.cmu.edu. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. (occur at the beginning of a syllable, e.g. /hum/) and /ng/ must be a syllable coda (occur at the end of a syllable, e.g. /song/). In Persian, though, /h/ can be a coda (e.g. /dah/ "ten"), and in Vietnamese, /ng/ can be an onset (e.g. /ngei/ "day"). HHS Public AccessKnowledge of native-language phonotactics emerges in infancy (e.g. Jusczyk et al., 1993) and, throughout life, constrains language perception and production (e.g. Pitt, 1988). Production models assume that phonotactic constraints are consulted during the encoding of word forms, particularly during the construction of syllables (e.g. Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999). Evidence for this assumption c...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production

Kittredge

Dell

2016

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous phonotactic learning experiments (e.g., Chambers, Onishi, & Fisher, 2003, 2010, 2011; Dell, Reed, Adams, & Meyer, 2000; Goldrick & Larson, 2008; Onishi, Chambers, & Fisher, 2002; Seidl, Cristià, Bernard, & Onishi, 2009; Warker, 2013; Warker & Dell, 2006) have described phonotactic patterns at the level of the syllable, but they did not directly test whether representations were at the syllable or word level (since most have used one-syllable, consonant-vowel-consonant or CVC items). The current experiments seek evidence that phonotactic knowledge can be represented at the level of the syllable (or syllable-sized unit), independent of the word, by examining whether syllable-level patterns generalize across word position and word structure, thus asking whether an onset is an onset and a coda is a coda regardless of word structure and position.…”

Section: (3) Evidence Suggesting the Word As A Possible Unit Of Reprementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phonotactic generalization is used as a tool to better understand how speech sounds are represented, thus measures that assess changes in speech processing as a result of newly-experienced phonotactic patterns allow us to better understand how sound patterns are represented. As the current goal was to assess the influence of constraint violations occurring in different word positions, a continuous recognition memory task was used (e.g., Koo & Callahan, 2012; Mintz, 2002) since production accuracy measures (in which errors on earlier sounds may affect the production of later sounds; e.g., Dell et al, 2000; Goldrick & Larson, 2008; Kittredge & Dell, 2011; Warker, 2013; Warker & Dell, 2006) or repetition latency measures (in which latency is measured from the start of the word; e.g., Chambers et al, 2010; Onishi et al, 2002; Vitevitch & Luce, 2005) may not equally reflect violations at different positions in the word. Moreover, the recognition memory task has advantages over grammaticality judgment tasks (e.g., Vitevitch, Luce, Charles-Luce, & Kemmerer, 1997), in that it is arguably a more implicit measure of phonotactic knowledge.…”

Section: (3) Evidence Suggesting the Word As A Possible Unit Of Reprementioning

confidence: 99%

An onset is an onset: Evidence from abstraction of newly-learned phonotactic constraints

Bernard

2015

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phonotactic constraints are language-specific patterns in the sequencing of speech sounds. Are these constraints represented at the syllable level (ng cannot begin syllables in English) or at the word level (ng cannot begin words)? In a continuous recognition-memory task, participants more often falsely recognized novel test items that followed than violated the training constraints, whether training and test items matched in word structure (one or two syllables) or position of restricted consonants (word-edge or word-medial position). E.g., learning that ps are onsets and fs codas, participants generalized from pef (one syllable) to putvif (two syllables), and from putvif (word-edge positions) to bufpak (word-medial positions). These results suggest that newly-learned phonotactic constraints are represented at the syllable level. The syllable is a representational unit available and spontaneously used when learning speech-sound constraints. In the current experiments, an onset is an onset and a coda a coda, regardless of word structure or word position.

show abstract

Phonological regularity, perceptual biases, and the role of phonotactics in speech error analysis

Alderete

Tupper

2018

WIRES Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speech errors involving manipulations of sounds tend to be phonologically regular in the sense that they obey the phonotactic rules of well-formed words. We review the empirical evidence for phonological regularity in prior research, including both categorical assessments of words and regularity at the granular level involving specific segments and contexts. Since the reporting of regularity is affected by human perceptual biases, we also document this regularity in a new data set of 2,228 sublexical errors that was collected using methods that are demonstrably less prone to bias. These facts validate the claim that sound errors are overwhelmingly regular, but the new evidence suggests speech errors admit more phonologically ill-formed words than previously thought. Detailed facts of the phonological structure of errors, including this revised standard, are then related to model assumptions in contemporary theories of phonological encoding. This article is categorized under: Linguistics > Linguistic Theory Linguistics > Computational Models of Language Psychology > Language.

show abstract

Investigating the retention and time course of phonotactic constraint learning from production experience.

Cited by 28 publications

References 43 publications

Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production

Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production

An onset is an onset: Evidence from abstraction of newly-learned phonotactic constraints

Phonological regularity, perceptual biases, and the role of phonotactics in speech error analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About