Voice Quality and Identity

Podesva, Robert J.; Callier, Patrick

doi:10.1017/s0267190514000270

Cited by 70 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 117 publications

(145 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a similar vain, prosody has attracted attention as a diagnostic tool for linguistic and other impairments such as the autism spectrum disorder (e.g., Jun & Bishop, 2015;McCann & Peppe, 2003;Shriberg et al, 2001). The realization that such variation, or accents, in prosody can be a rich source of social meaning (including talker identity), rather than a mere source of noise, has galvanized substantial excitement in the fields of sociolinguistics and experimental / clinical psychology (Cutler, 2015;Dilley, Wieland, Gamache, McAuley, & Redford, 2013;Fitzsimons et al, 2001;Green, 2002;Holliday, 2019;Podesva & Callier, 2015;Shriberg et al, 2001;Woynaroski et al, 2017 among others). At the same time, the excitement illuminated a pertinent question regarding variability in empirical approaches to intonational speech prosody (Cole, 2015;McQueen & Dilley, 2019).…”

Section: Implications For Intonational Speech Prosodymentioning

confidence: 99%

Encoding and decoding of meaning through structured variability in intonational speech prosody

Buxó-Lugo¹,

Kurumada²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speech prosody, the rhythm and intonation in particular, plays an important role in communication of meaning. Rising vs. falling intonation contours signaling the speaker’s indented communicative meanings (i.e., asking a question vs. making a statement) has been widely recognized as a primary example of such prosody. However, what appears to be a straightforward mapping between acoustic features of prosody and hypothesized meanings in fact presents a challenge to the human perceptual and computational mechanisms. Perceptible features of prosody vary across contexts (e.g., talkers), creating ubiquitous ambiguity in the mapping. Here, we first characterize the structured nature of the variability in intonational speech prosody used to signal a question vs. a statement in English. We then demonstrate that the listener can learn to adapt their expectations about the prosody-meaning mapping according to an inferred underlying structure of the environmental input. We argue that the rich and dynamic representations of the prosodic input allow listeners to infer the mapping that is most likely given characteristics of a current context.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Intonational Speech Prosodymentioning

confidence: 99%

Encoding and decoding of meaning through structured variability in intonational speech prosody

Buxó-Lugo¹,

Kurumada²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In nonpathological voices at least, breathy phonation can show variation that goes hand in hand with various sociopragmatic functions. For instance, an increase in breathiness can cue the end of a turn, 2,3 identity-related aspects (eg, 4,5 ), and interpersonal relationships and emotions (eg, 6,7,4 ). Breathiness has also been identified as one of the phenomena sensitive to sex differences, with females being breathier than males (eg, 8 : pp.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normophonic Breathiness in Czech and Danish: Are Females Breathier Than Males?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study compares the voice quality of female and male speech in two languages: Czech, a Slavic language, and Danish, a Germanic language. For both languages, the results based on a total of 120 vocally healthy speakers are in line with the claim that females are universally breathier than males. This was supported by the Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) and H1*-H2* measures, which are generally known as the most robust correlates of breathiness, and also by the H1*-A3* measure. However, the sex distinction was unsupported or even contradictory when using some other measures suggested to reflect breathiness, which provides an incentive to insist on employing a number of acoustic measures in future voice research. The perceptual component of the study nevertheless suggests that these contradictory findings are due to differences in perceived roughness rather than breathiness, and that CPP and H1*-H2* do reflect breathiness differences, and CPP in particular. We therefore conclude that it is indeed the case that female speakers are breathier than male speakers. Finally, in terms of the two robust measures (CPP and H1*-H2*), no language-specific differences in the magnitude of the effect of sex on breathiness were found.

show abstract

“…Indeed, some speakers produce creaky voice over large portions of phrases, and not just at the ends of prosodic domains. Such cases might be used to index speaker identity [12]. In our study, we refer to both phrase-final creak and longer durations of creaky voice as 'phrasal creak.'…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic Differences Between English /t/ Glottalization and Phrasal Creak

Garellek¹,

Seyfarth²

2016

Interspeech 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In American English, the presence of creaky voice can derive from distinct linguistic processes, including phrasal creak (prolonged irregular voicing, often at edges of prosodic phrases) and coda /t/ glottalization (when the alveolar closure for syllablefinal /t/ is replaced by or produced simultaneously with glottal constriction). Previous work has shown that listeners can differentiate words in phrasal creak from those with /t/ glottalization, which suggests that there are acoustic differences between the creaky voice derived from phrasal creak and /t/ glottalization. In this study, we analyzed vowels preceding syllable-final /t/ in the Buckeye Corpus, which includes audio recordings of spontaneous speech from 40 speakers of American English. Tokens were coded for presence of phrasal creak (prolonged irregular voicing extending beyond the target syllable) and /t/ glottalization (whether the /t/ was produced only with glottal constriction). Eleven spectral measures of voice quality, including both harmonic and noise measures, were extracted automatically and discriminant analyses were performed. The results indicate that the discriminant functions can classify these sources of creaky voice above chance, and that Cepstral Peak Prominence, a measure of harmonics-to-noise ratio, is important for distinguishing phrasal creak from glottalization.

show abstract

Voice Quality and Identity

Cited by 70 publications

References 117 publications

Encoding and decoding of meaning through structured variability in intonational speech prosody

Encoding and decoding of meaning through structured variability in intonational speech prosody

Normophonic Breathiness in Czech and Danish: Are Females Breathier Than Males?

Acoustic Differences Between English /t/ Glottalization and Phrasal Creak

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About