Discrimination in speech and nonspeech modes

Mattingly, Ignatius G.; Liberman, Alvin M.; Syrdal, Ann K.; Halwes, Terry

doi:10.1016/0010-0285(71)90006-5

Cited by 186 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, place information for a given consonant is carried by a rising transition in one vowel context and a falling transition in another (Liberman, Delattre, Cooper, & Gerstman, 1954). In isolation, these transitions sound like two different glissandi or chirps, which is just what everything we know about auditory perception leads us to expect (Mattingly, Liberman, Syrdal, & Halwes, 1971); they do not sound alike, and, just as important, neither sounds like speech. How is it, then, that, in context, they nevertheless yield the same consonant?…”

Section: An Issue That Any Theory Of Speech Perception Must Meetmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, if one were predicting sensitivity to speech from sensitivity to the analogous nonspeech sounds,' one would make exactly the wrong predictions. More recent studies have made more direct comparisons and found differences in discrimination functions when, in speech context, formant transitions cued place distinctions among stops and liquids, and when, in isolation, the same transitions were perceived as nonspeech sounds (Mattingly et al, 1971;Miyawaki, Strange, Verbrugge, Liberman, Jenkins, & Fujimura, 1975).…”

Section: Phonetic and Auditory Responses To The Cuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The motor theory of speech perception revised

1985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A motor theory of speech perception, initially proposed to account for results of early experiments with synthetic speech, is now extensively revised to accommodate recent findings, and to relate the assumptions of the theory to those that might be made about other perceptual modes. According to the revised theory, phonetic information is perceived in a biologically distinct system, a 'module' specialized to detect the intended gestures of the speaker that are the basis for phonetic categories. Built into the structure of this module is the unique but lawful relationship between the gestures and the acoustic patterns in which they are variously overlapped. In consequence, the module causes perception of phonetic structure without translation from preliminary auditory impressions. Thus, it is comparable to such other modules as the one that enables an animal to localize sound. Peculiar to the phonetic module are the relation between perception and production it incorporates and the fact that it must compete with other modules for the same stimulus variations.

show abstract

Section: An Issue That Any Theory Of Speech Perception Must Meetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phonetic and Auditory Responses To The Cuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The motor theory of speech perception revised

1985

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One stimulus is simply the second-formant transition excised from the syllable and presented in isolation. Mattingly, Liberman, Syrdal, and Halwes (1971) noted that these brief glissandi sounded like the discrete elements of birdsong, and they dubbed them "chirps." The other stimulus is the remainder of the syllable without the second-formant transition.…”

Section: Spectral/temporal Fusion: Perceptual Construction Of Phonemementioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory and linguistic processes in speech perception: Inferences from six fusions in dichotic listening.

Cutting¹

1976

Psychological Review

164

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of phenomena in speech perception have been called fusion, but little effort has been made to compare these phenomena in a systematic fashion. The present paper examines six of them. All can be exemplified using the syllable /da/ as in dot, and all occur during dichotic listening. In each type of fusion, the robustness of the fused percept is observed against variation in three parameters: the relative onset time of the two opposite-ear stimuli, their relative intensity, and their relative fundamental frequency. Patterns of results are used to confirm the arrangement of the six fusions in a hierarchy, and supporting data are summoned in an analysis of the mechanisms that underlie each with reference to speech. The six fusions are sound localization, psychoacoustic fusion, spectral fusion, spectral/temporal fusion, phonetic feature fusion, and phonological fusion. They occur at three, perhaps four, different levels of perceptual analysis. The first two levels are characterized by perceptual integration, the other (s) by perceptual disruption and recombination.

show abstract

“…Second, as many experiments have shown (e.g. Mann & Liberman, 1983;Mattingly, Liberman, Syrdal, & Halwes, 1971), a brief formant transition removed from the speech signal is heard as a rapid, integral glissando, or 'chirp,' of which the parts or 'spectral changes' cannot be perceptually individuated. ' (p. 511).…”

Section: Symptomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…' (p. 511). Mann and Liberman (1983) make this claim: 'Given transitions that change in relatively small physical steps, from one appropriate for /d/ to one appropriate for /g/, the percept changes, not in correspondingly small steps, but suddenly (Mattingly et al, 1971;Studdert-Kennedy & Shankweiler, 1970). This nearly categorical shift marks a sharp boundary between the phones [d] and [g]; it is commonly reflected and measured as a relative increase in discriminability of the stimuli at the category boundary.…”

Section: Symptomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The notion of ‘phonology’ in dyslexia research: cognitivism—and beyond

Uppstad

Tønnessen

2007

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phonology has been a central concept in the scientific study of dyslexia over the past decades. Despite its central position, however, it is a concept with no precise definition or status. The present article investigates the notion of 'phonology' in the tradition of cognitive psychology. An attempt is made to characterize the basic assumptions of the phonological approach to dyslexia and to evaluate these assumptions on the basis of commonly accepted standards of empirical science. First, the core assumptions of phonological awareness are outlined and discussed. Second, the position of Paula Tallal is presented and discussed in order to shed light on an attempt to stretch the cognitive-psychological notion of 'phonology' towards auditory and perceptual aspects. Both the core assumptions and Tallal's position are rejected as unfortunate, albeit for different reasons. Third, the outcome of this discussion is a search for what is referred to as a 'vulnerable theory' within this field. The present article claims that phonological descriptions must be based on observable linguistic behaviour, so that hypotheses can be falsified by data. Consequently, definitions of 'dyslexia' must be based on symptoms; causal aspects should not be included. In fact, we claim that causal aspects, such as 'phonological deficit', both exclude other causal hypotheses and lead to circular reasoning. If we are to use terms such as 'phonology' and 'phoneme' in dyslexia research, we must have more precise operationalizations of them.

show abstract

Discrimination in speech and nonspeech modes

Cited by 186 publications

References 19 publications

The motor theory of speech perception revised

The motor theory of speech perception revised

Auditory and linguistic processes in speech perception: Inferences from six fusions in dichotic listening.

The notion of ‘phonology’ in dyslexia research: cognitivism—and beyond

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About