Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-2tv5m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T18:50:09.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When to simulate and when to associate? Accounting for inter-talker variability in the speech signal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2013

Alison M. Trude
Alison M. Trude*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. trude1@illinois.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) theory could be modified to describe how listeners rapidly incorporate context to generate predictions about speech despite inter-talker variability. However, in order to do so, the content of “impoverished” predicted percepts must be expanded to include phonetic information. Further, the way listeners identify and represent inter-talker differences and subsequently determine which prediction method to use would require further specification.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , August 2013 , pp. 375 - 376
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Babel, M. (2012) Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics 40:177–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahan, D., Drucker, S. J. & Scarborough, R. A. (2008) Talker adaptation in speech perception: Adjusting the signal or the representations? Cognition 108:710–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMurray, B., Tanenhaus, M. K. & Aslin, R. N. (2009) Within-category VOT affects recovery from “lexical” garden paths: Evidence against phoneme-level inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language 60:65–91.Google Scholar
Mitterer, H. & Ernestus, M. (2008) The link between speech perception and production is phonological and abstract: Evidence from the shadowing task. Cognition 109:168–73.Google Scholar
Nielsen, K. (2011) Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation. Journal of Phonetics 39:132–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D. & McQueen, J. (2003) The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition 90:51–89.Google Scholar
Trude, A. M. & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2012) Talker-specific perceptual adaptation during on-line speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes 27: 979–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar