Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Regional differences in the perception of a consonant change in progress

  • Anne-France Pinget (a1), René Kager (a1) and Hans Van de Velde (a2)
Abstract

This study aims at testing whether there are regional differences in the perception of the labiodental fricative contrast in Dutch. Previous production studies have shown that the devoicing of initial labiodental fricatives is a change in progress in the Dutch language area. We present the results of a speeded identification task in which fricative stimuli were systematically varied for two phonetic cues, voicing and duration. Listeners (n=100) were regionally stratified, and the regions (k=5) reflect different stages of this sound change in progress. Voicing turned out to be the strongest categorization cue in all regions; duration only played a minor role. Regional differences showed up in the perception of the consonantal contrast that matched regional differences in production reported in previous studies. The addition of random slopes in the mixed model regression showed the importance of within-regional variation.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Regional differences in the perception of a consonant change in progress
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Regional differences in the perception of a consonant change in progress
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Regional differences in the perception of a consonant change in progress
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Corresponding author: Anne-France Pinget, a.c.h.Pinget@uu.nl, Tel: +31 30 253 6049, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS, Universiteit Utrecht, Trans 10, 3512 JK Utrecht, The Netherlands.
References
Hide All
BarrDale J., LevyRoger, ScheepersChristoph & TilyHarry J.. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68(3). 255-278.
BenkíJosé R. 2005. Perception of VOT and first formant onset by Spanish and English speakers. In James Cohen, Kara McAlister, Kellie Rolstad, Jeff MacSwan (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism, 240–248. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
BoersmaPaul & HamannSilke. 2008. The evolution of auditory dispersion in bidirectional constraint grammars. Phonology 25. 217-270.
BoersmaPaul & WeeninkDavid. 2014. Praat: doing phonetics by computer. http://www.praat.org/ (2 December 2014).
DebrockM. 1977. An acoustic correlate of the force of articulation. Journal of Phonetics 5. 61-80.
DebrockM. 1978. Is the fortis-lenis feature really redundant in Dutch? Leuvense Bijdragen 67. 457-472.
EscuderoPaola & BoersmaPaul. 2004. Bridging the gap between L2 speech perception research and phonological theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26. 4):551-585.
EscuderoPaola, SimonEllen & MittererHolger. 2012. The perception of English front vowels by North Holland and Flemish listeners: Acoustic similarity predicts and explains cross-linguistic and L2 perception. Journal of Phonetics 40. 280-288.
FeldmanNaomi H., GriffithsTom L. & MorganJames L.. 2009. The influence of categories on perception: Explaining the perceptual magnet effect as optimal statistical inference. Psychological Review 116. 4):752-782.
FlegeJames Emil, TakagiNaoyuki & MannVirginia. 1996. Lexical familiarity and English-language experience affect Japanese adults’ perception of /r/ and /l/. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99. 1161-1173.
FoxRobert Allen, FlegeJames Emil & MunroMurray J.. 1995. The perception of English and Spanish vowels by native English and Spanish listeners: A multidimensional scaling analysis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97(4). 2540-2550.
FryDennis Butler, AbramsonArthur S., EimasPeter D. & LibermanAlvin M.. 1962. The identification and discrimination of synthetic vowels. Language and Speech 5(4). 171-189.
GandourJackson T. & HarshmanRichard A.. 1978. Crosslanguage differences in tone perception: A multidimensional scaling investigation. Language and Speech 21(1). 1-33.
GoldingerStephen D. 1997. Words and voices—perception and production in an episodic lexicon. In Keith Johnson & John W. Mullennix (eds.), Talker Variability in Speech Processing, 33-66. San Diego: Academic Press.
GuentherFrank H. & GjajaMarin N.. 1996. The perceptual magnet effect as an emergent property of neural map formation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100. 1111-1121.
GuionSusan G., FlegeJames Emil, Akahane-YamadaReiko & PruittJesica C.. 2000. An investigation of current models of second language speech perception: The case of Japanese adults’ perception of English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107. 2711-2724.
GuionSusan G., HaradaTetsuo & ClarkJ. J.. 2004. Early and late Spanish-English bilinguals’ acquisition of English word stress patterns. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7. 207-226.
GussenhovenCarlos & BremmerRolf H.. 1983. Voiced fricatives in Dutch: Sources and present-day usage. North-Western European Language Evolution 2. 55-71.
HalléPierre A., ChangYueh-Chin & BestCatherine T.. 2004. Identification and discrimination of Mandarin Chinese tones by Mandarin Chinese vs. French listeners. Journal of Phonetics 32. 395-421.
HirataYukari. 2004. Training native English speakers to perceive Japanese length contrasts in word versus sentence contexts. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 116(4). 2384-2394.
JansonTore. 1983. Sound change in perception and production. Language. 18-34.
JohnsonKeith. 1997. Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. In Keith Johnson & John W. Mullennix (eds.), Talker Variability in Speech Processing. 145-165. San Diego: Academic Press.
KendallTyler & FridlandValerie. 2012. Variation in the production and perception of mid front vowels in the US Southern Vowel Shift. Journal of Phonetics 40(2). 289-306.
KissineMikhail, Van de VeldeHans & HoutRoeland van. 2003. The devoicing of fricatives in standard Dutch. In Paula Fikkert & Leonie Cornips (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, 2003. 93-104. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
KuhlPatricia K. 1991. Human adults and human infants show a “perceptual magnet effect” for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not. Perception & Psychophysics 50(2). 93-107.
KuhlP. K., WilliamsKaren A., LacerdaFrancisco, StevensKenneth N. & LindblomBjörn. 1992. Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science 255. 606-608.
LabovWilliam. 1994. Principles of language change: Internal factors (Vol. 1). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
LadefogedPeter & BroadbentDonald E.. 1957. Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 29(1). 98-104.
LibermanAlvin M., HarrisKatherine S., HoffmanH. S. & GriffithB. C.. 1957. The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology 54(5). 358.
McAllisterRobert, FlegeJames Emil & PiskeThorsten. 2002. The influence of L1 on the acquisition of Swedish quantity by native speakers of Spanish, English and Estonian. Journal of Phonetics 30(2). 229-258.
MittererHolger. 2009. Research stuff. http://www.holgermitterer.eu/research.html. (2 December 2014).
PingetAnne-France. 2015. The actuation of sound change. Utrecht: Utrecht University, LOT series PhD Thesis.
PisoniDavid B. 1975. Auditory short-term memory and vowel perception. Memory & Cognition 3(1). 7-18.
ReppBruno H. 1984. Categorical perception: Issues, methods, findings. Speech and Language: Advances in basic research and practice 10. 243-335.
SlisIman H. & CohenAntonie. 1969. On complex regulating voiced–voiceless distinction. Language and Speech 12(2). 80-102.
SlisIman H. & HeugtenMarieke van. 1989. Voiced-voiceless distinction in Dutch fricatives. Linguistics in the Netherlands 6. 123-132.
ThomasErik R. 2011. Collecting data on phonology. In W. Maguire & A. McMahon (eds.), Analysing Variation in English, 7-29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van den BergR. J. H. 1989. Perception of voicing in Dutch two-obstruent sequences: Covariation of voicing cues. Speech Communication 8. 17-25.
Van den BergR. J. H. & SlisIman H.. 1985. Perception of Assimilation of Voice as a Function of Segmental Duration and Linguistic Context. Phonetica 42. 25-38.
Van der HarstSander. 2011. The vowel space paradox. A sociophonetic study on Dutch. Utrecht: Utrecht University, LOT series PhD Thesis.
Van de VeldeHans, GerritsenMarinel & van HoutRoeland. 1996. The devoicing of fricatives in standard Dutch: A real time study based on radio recordings. Language Variation and Change 8(2). 149-175.
Van de VeldeHans, van HoutRoeland & GerritsenMarinel. 1997. Watching Dutch Change. Journal of Sociolinguistics 1(3). 361-391.
Van ReenenPieter T. 1994. Driemaal /r/ in de Nederlandse dialecten. Taal en Tongval 46. 54-72.
Van ReenenPieter T. & WattelEvert. 1992. De uitspraak van /s/ en /z/ voor klinker in het Nederlands: zes eeuwen variatie. In Bennis Hans & Jan W. de Vries (eds.), De Binnenbouw van het Nederlands, Een bundel artikelen voor Piet Paardekooper, 291-309. Dordrecht: ICG Publications.
WillisClodius. 1972. Perception of vowel phonemes in Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada, and Buffalo, New York: An application of synthetic vowel categorization tests to dialectology. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 15. 246-255.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Linguistic Geography
  • ISSN: -
  • EISSN: 2049-7547
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-linguistic-geography
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 23
Total number of PDF views: 63 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 264 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 18th April 2017 - 23rd October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.