Literature DB >> 28593613

Effects of distributional information on categorization of prosodic contours.

Chigusa Kurumada1, Meredith Brown2,3, Michael K Tanenhaus4,5,6.   

Abstract

Although prosody clearly affects the interpretation of utterances, the mapping between prosodic representations and acoustic features is highly variable. Listeners may in part cope with this variability by adapting to distributions of acoustic features in the input. We examined whether listeners adapt to distributional changes using the construction It looks like an X. When pronounced with an H* pitch accent on the final noun and a low boundary tone, the construction supports an affirmative interpretation (e.g., It looks like a ZEBRA [and I think it is one]). Conversely, when pronounced with a L+H* pitch accent and a rising boundary tone, it suggests a negative interpretation (e.g., It LOOKS like a zebra.... [but it is not]). Experiment 1 elicited pragmatic interpretations of resynthesized 12-step continua with these two contours as the end points. In Experiment 2, one group of listeners heard items sampled from the most ambiguous region along the continua followed by affirmative continuations (e.g., It looks like a zebra because it has stripes all over its body) and items near the contrastive endpoint followed by negative continuations (e.g., It looks like a zebra but it is actually something else). Another group heard the reverse (i.e., ambiguous items with negative continuations and non-contrastive items with affirmative continuations). The two groups of participants subsequently derived diverging interpretations for novel ambiguous items, suggesting that prosodic processing involves flexible mappings between acoustic features and prosodic representations that are meaningful in interpretation of speech.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptation; Contrastive inference; Language comprehension; Prosody

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28593613      PMCID: PMC5720936          DOI: 10.3758/s13423-017-1332-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  13 in total

1.  Analysis and synthesis of intonation using the Tilt model.

Authors:  P Taylor
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Pitch range variation in English tonal contrasts: continuous or categorical?

Authors:  Laura C Dilley
Journal:  Phonetica       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 1.759

Review 3.  Prosody and language comprehension.

Authors:  Delphine Dahan
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2015-06-25

4.  Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues.

Authors:  Meghan Clayards; Michael K Tanenhaus; Richard N Aslin; Robert A Jacobs
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-06-25

5.  The weckud wetch of the wast: lexical adaptation to a novel accent.

Authors:  Jessica Maye; Richard N Aslin; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-04-05

Review 6.  Robust speech perception: recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel.

Authors:  Dave F Kleinschmidt; T Florian Jaeger
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Is it or isn't it: listeners make rapid use of prosody to infer speaker meanings.

Authors:  Chigusa Kurumada; Meredith Brown; Sarah Bibyk; Daniel F Pontillo; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2014-08-14

Review 8.  Perception of the speech code.

Authors:  A M Liberman; F S Cooper; D P Shankweiler; M Studdert-Kennedy
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1967-11       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Accent detection is a slippery slope: Direction and rate of F0 change drives listeners' comprehension.

Authors:  Angela M Isaacs; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2010-01-01

10.  Dimension-based statistical learning of vowels.

Authors:  Ran Liu; Lori L Holt
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  2 in total

1.  Comprehenders model the nature of noise in the environment.

Authors:  Rachel Ryskin; Richard Futrell; Swathi Kiran; Edward Gibson
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2018-09-06

2.  Evidence For Selective Adaptation and Recalibration in the Perception of Lexical Stress.

Authors:  Hans Rutger Bosker
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 1.835

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.