Wordshape errors in language production

Stemberger, Joseph Paul

doi:10.1016/0010-0277(90)90012-9

Cited by 104 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One interpretation of these findings is that the error units are phonological segments, as has traditionally been assumed, and that the competition of ' 1986; Stemberger, 1990).…”

Section: Evidence From Sound Errorsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…This tendency can be explained by reference to syllable frames, in which the positions for onsets, nuclei, and codas are marked. However, it also suffices to assume the existence of frames that do not represent syllables, but include positions reserved for vowels and positions reserved for consonants (see Stemberger, 1990). This confine?…”

Section: Evidence From Sound Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives

Meyer

1992

Cognition

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phonological encoding in language production can be defined as a set of processes generating utterance forms on the basis of semantic and syntactic information. Most evidence about these processes stems from analyses of sound errors. In section 1 of this paper, certain important results of these analyses are reviewed. Two prominent models of phonological encoding, which are mainly based on speech error evidence, are discussed in section 2. In section 3, limitations of speech error analyses are discussed, and it is argued that detailed and comprehensive models of phonological encoding cannot be derived solely on the basis of error analyses. As is argued in section 4, a new research strategy is required. Instead of using the properties of errors to draw inferences about the generation of correct word forms, future research should directly investigate the normal process of phonological encoding

show abstract

“…One interpretation of these findings is that the error units are phonological segments, as has traditionally been assumed, and that the competition of ' 1986; Stemberger, 1990).…”

Section: Evidence From Sound Errorsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Evidence From Sound Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives

Meyer

1992

Cognition

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Slips arc more likely when a sound occurs twice (e.g., a lilting willy); the two occur rences should have the same role in syllabic structure (Dell, 1984). Slips arc more likely between, and more likely to create, two words with the same pattern of syllable structure(s) (Stemberger, 1990).…”

Section: Stages In Word Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spoken Word Recognition and Production

CUTLER¹

1995

Speech, Language, and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most language behavior consists of speaking and listening. However, the recognition and production of spoken words have not always been central topics in psycholinguistic research. Considering the two fields together in one chapter reveals differences and similarities. Spokcn-word recognition studies began in earnest in the 1970s, prompted on one hand by the develop ment of laboratory tasks involving auditory presentation and on the other hand by the realization that the growing body of data on visual word recognition (see Scidenbcrg, Chapter 5, this volume) did not necessarily apply to listening, bccausc of the temporal nature of speech signals. This recognition research has been, to a great extent, model driven. Spokcnword production research, on the other hand, has a longer history but a less intimate relationship with theory. Laboratory tasks for studying production are difficult to devise, so that much research addressed production failure, such as slips of the tongue. An unhappy result of this focus has been models of production that are largely determined by the characteristics of failed rather than succcssful operation of the processes modeled; moreover, the models have rarely prompted new research. Only in recent years have mod els and laboratory studies of successful production bccomc widely available. Despite these differences, theoretical questions in recognition and produc- Speech, Language, and Communication

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the segmental environment in uences the likelihood of a speech error but the feature environment does not. Stemberger (1990) looked at speech errors in natural speech and observed that shared segmental environment (the segments immediately after the segment in error in one word and the source of that segment in another word) has an effect only if the neighbouring segments are exactly identical. There is no effect if even a single feature is different.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, /p/ will have a higher level of activation than /h/, and /p/ will be more likely than /h/ to be substituted for the target /b/. Shared segmental environment facilitates an error (Dell, 1984;Stemberger, 1990) due to feedback from shared segments to morphemes and from secondarily activated morphemes to competing segments. For example, in planning cat, the /f/ may become activated due to the vowel shared between cat and fan.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological Segments and Features as Planning Units in Speech Production

Roelofs¹

1999

Language and Cognitive Processes

109

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author reports four experiments that examined phonological processes in spoken word production. A form-preparation paradigm was applied to the question of whether phonological features can be preplanned to facilitate spoken word production. In Experiment 1, monosyllabic words were produced in sets different in form, or in sets sharing either the initial segment or initial segments differing only in voicing. Only shared initial segments yielded facilitation. A similar pattern of results was observed when the sets were matched for the following vowel (Experiment 2), when words were produced in response to pictured objects (Experiment 3), and when place of articulation rather than voicing was manipulated (Experiment 4). The special status of identity suggests that segments are planning units independent of their features. The results are explained in terms of the WEAVER model of word-form encoding, in which a serial encoding of segments is followed by a parallel activation of features. A WEAVER simulation of the experiments is presented which supports these claims.

show abstract

Wordshape errors in language production

Cited by 104 publications

References 24 publications

Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives

Investigation of phonological encoding through speech error analyses: Achievements, limitations, and alternatives

Spoken Word Recognition and Production

Phonological Segments and Features as Planning Units in Speech Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About