On the (non)categorical perception of lexical tones

Abstract

Identification and discrimination of lexical tones in Cantonese were compared in the context of a traditional categoricalperception paradigm. Three lexical tone continua were used: one ranging from low level to high level, one from high rising to high level, and one from low falling to high rising. Identification data showed steep slopes at category boundaries, suggesting that lexical tones are perceived categorically. In contrast, discrimination curves generally showed much weaker evidence for categorical perception. Subsequent investigation showed that the presence of a tonal context played a strong role in the identification of target tones and less of a role in discrimination. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that tonal category boundaries are determined by a combination of regions of natural auditory sensitivity and the influence of linguistic experience.

Cross-domain correlation in pitch perception, the influence of native language

“…Yet comparable levels of accuracy do not equal same way of processing, nor do they imply equal sensitivity to lexical tones. Several studies have shown that lexical tones are processed in different ways by native and non-native listeners (Francis et al, 2003;Hallé et al, 2004). In light of these previous findings, presumably, in our tasks, Chinese listeners perceived their native lexical tones as phonological contrasts, whereas Dutch listeners paid attention to the acoustical differences.…”

“…Such assumption, however, neglects the important fact that lexical tones do not have the same function for tone and non-tone speakers. The absence of lexical tones makes non-tone language listeners perceive them psycho-acoustically rather than phonologically, whereas for tone language speakers, lexical tones are phonological categories rather than pure acoustical pitch variations (Francis, Ciocca, & Ng, 2003;Hallé, Chang, & Best, 2004;Xu, Gandour, & Francis, 2006). Music perception, on the other hand, calls for accurate perception of discrete pitches as small as one semitone, regardless of language background (McDermott & Oxenham, 2008;Trainor & Hannon, 2013).…”

Impaired categorical perception of lexical tones in Mandarin-speaking congenital amusics

“…Tone 1-Tone 4) on the boundary position, with the participant group as the between-subjects variable, and stimulus context and continuum type as the within-subjects variables. The analysis revealed significant main effects of group [F(1, 28) Cross-linguistic studies (Chan et al, 1975;Francis et al, 2003;Peng et al, 2010;Wang, 1976;Xu et al, 2006) comparing Mandarin-and English-/German-speaking participants on their classification of Mandarin tones have found no significant difference with respect to the position of the classification boundary, although the boundary is shallower for the nonspeakers. Therefore, the present pattern for the amusics is unlike that of nonspeakers of Mandarin and may be due to an insensitivity to pitch contour for the amusics.…”

“…Although the criterion and definition for categorical perception are still a matter of debate (e.g., Francis, Ciocca & Ng, 2003;Gerrits & Schouten, 2004;Liberman, Harris, Hoffman & Griffith, 1957;Massaro, 1998;Repp, Healy & Crowder, 1979;Schouten, Gerrits & van Hessen, 2003), there is consensus that, when stimuli are perceived categorically, two tokens from two different categories are more discernible than are two tokens from the same category with an equivalent acoustic difference between them (Massaro, 1987). Namely, categorical perception can explain why it is easier to discriminate stimuli when the pairing is between categories.…”

Processing of Acoustic and Phonological Information of Lexical Tones in Mandarin Chinese Revealed by Mismatch Negativity

“…This acrosscategory vs. within-category perception difference has been extensively studied in previous work with segmental phonemes, such as consonants and vowels (e.g., with VOT characteristics), but are less well understood in studies with suprasegmental features such as tones. It has been found recently, however, that the perception of lexical tones shows categorical perception just as do phonemes: native speakers of tonal languages are more sensitive to acrosscategory tonal variations than within-category variations (see Francis et al, 2003;Hallé et al, 2004;Xu et al, 2006;Xi et al, 2010). Xi et al (2010) used MMN to examine categorical perception of tones in Chinese.…”