Prediction and imitation in speech

Abstract

It has been suggested that intra- and inter-speaker variability in speech are correlated. Interlocutors have been shown to converge on various phonetic dimensions. In addition, speakers imitate the phonetic properties of voices they are exposed to in shadowing, repetition, and even passive listening tasks. We review three theoretical accounts of speech imitation and convergence phenomena: (i) the Episodic Theory (ET) of speech perception and production (Goldinger, 1998); (ii) the Motor Theory (MT) of speech perception (Liberman and Whalen, 2000; Galantucci et al., 2006); (iii) Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT; Giles and Coupland, 1991; Giles et al., 1991). We argue that no account is able to explain all the available evidence. In particular, there is a need to integrate low-level, mechanistic accounts (like ET and MT), and higher-level accounts (like CAT). We propose that this is possible within the framework of an integrated theory of production and comprehension (Pickering and Garrod, 2013). Similarly to both ET and MT, this theory assumes parity between production and perception. Uniquely, however, it posits that listeners simulate speakers' utterances by computing forward-model predictions at many different levels, which are then compared to the incoming phonetic input. In our account phonetic imitation can be achieved via the same mechanism that is responsible for sensorimotor adaptation; i.e., the correction of prediction errors. In addition, the model assumes that the degree to which sensory prediction errors lead to motor adjustments is context-dependent. The notion of context subsumes both the preceding linguistic input and non-linguistic attributes of the situation (e.g., the speaker's and listener's social identities, their conversational roles, the listener's intention to imitate).

Phonetic convergence across multiple measures and model talkers

“…Integrated perception-production and phonetic convergence Pickering and Garrod's (2013) simulation route for language comprehension centers on complete integration between perception and production processes, which supports and promotes phonetic convergence (among other kinds of alignment; see also Gambi & Pickering, 2013). This occurs because comprehension entails a process of forward modeling simulations involving covert imitation of perceived speech that can become overt imitation.…”

“…Accordingly, when a listener hears an utterance, comprehension relies on the same processes as production, leading to convergent production in a very straightforward manner (see also Gambi & Pickering, 2013). In their account, this so-called simulation route in action perception contrasts with an association route, which relies on past experiences in perceiving rather than producing utterances.…”

Interactive alignment: A teaching-friendly view of second language pronunciation learning

“…In other words, alignment may be less likely to occur because of the diversity which typifies many L2 interactions. In fact, Gambi & Pickering (2013) recently hypothesized that the extent of alignment in pronunciation will be determined by perceived (and actual) similarity between the two interlocutors, with greatest alignment occurring when similarity is high. Presumably, such similarity is based on a variety of factors, including linguistic (e.g.…”

The neural oscillatory markers of phonetic convergence during verbal interaction

“…Previous studies have shown that the use of a nonnative language induces greater phonetic convergence (Gambi & Pickering, 2013;Trofimovich & Kennedy, 2014) and greater sensorimotor compensatory activities while listening, compared with the native language (Schmitz et al, 2018). All participants were right-handed with the exception of one male.…”