Literature DB >> 30034052

Variability of articulator positions and formants across nine English vowels.

D H Whalen1,2,3, Wei-Rong Chen1, Mark K Tiede1, Hosung Nam1,4.   

Abstract

Speech, though communicative, is quite variable both in articulation and acoustics, and it has often been claimed that articulation is more variable. Here we compared variability in articulation and acoustics for 32 speakers in the x-ray microbeam database (XRMB; Westbury, 1994). Variability in tongue, lip and jaw positions for nine English vowels (/u, ʊ, æ, ɑ, ʌ, ɔ, ε, ɪ, i/) was compared to that of the corresponding formant values. The domains were made comparable by creating three-dimensional spaces for each: the first three principal components from an analysis of a 14-dimensional space for articulation, and an F1xF2xF3 space for acoustics. More variability occurred in the articulation than the acoustics for half of the speakers, while the reverse was true for the other half. Individual tokens were further from the articulatory median than the acoustic median for 40-60% of tokens across speakers. A separate analysis of three non-low front vowels (/ε, ɪ, i/, for which the XRMB system provides the most direct articulatory evidence) did not differ from the omnibus analysis. Speakers tended to be either more or less variable consistently across vowels. Across speakers, there was a positive correlation between articulatory and acoustic variability, both for all vowels and for just the three non-low front vowels. Although the XRMB is an incomplete representation of articulation, it nonetheless provides data for direct comparisons between articulatory and acoustic variability that have not been reported previously. The results indicate that articulation is not more variable than acoustics, that speakers had relatively consistent variability across vowels, and that articulatory and acoustic variability were related for the vowels themselves.

Entities:  

Keywords:  English; Variability; acoustics; articulation; vowels; x-ray microbeam

Year:  2018        PMID: 30034052      PMCID: PMC6053058          DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2018.01.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Phon        ISSN: 0095-4470


  29 in total

1.  Recurrence quantification analysis of postural fluctuations.

Authors:  M A Riley; R Balasubramaniam; M T Turvey
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.840

2.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features.

Authors:  Kenneth N Stevens
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Tongue-pellet tracking by a computer-controlled x-ray microbeam system;.

Authors:  S Kiritani; K Ito; O Fujimura
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Variability and Determinism in Motor Behavior

Authors:  Michael A Riley; M T Turvey
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.328

Review 5.  Articulatory phonology: an overview.

Authors:  C P Browman; L Goldstein
Journal:  Phonetica       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.759

6.  Sensorimotor adaptation in speech production.

Authors:  J F Houde; M I Jordan
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-02-20       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Consonant environment specifies vowel identity.

Authors:  W Strange; R R Verbrugge; D P Shankweiler; T R Edman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Control of vocal-tract length in speech.

Authors:  C J Riordan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1977-10       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Factor analysis of tongue shapes.

Authors:  R Harshman; P Ladefoged; L Goldstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Inversion of articulatory-to-acoustic transformation in the vocal tract by a computer-sorting technique.

Authors:  B S Atal; J J Chang; M V Mathews; J W Tukey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-05       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  3 in total

1.  Tracing the Phonetic Space of Prosodic Focus Marking.

Authors:  Simon Roessig; Bodo Winter; Doris Mücke
Journal:  Front Artif Intell       Date:  2022-05-19

2.  Pause Postures: The relationship between articulation and cognitive processes during pauses.

Authors:  Jelena Krivokapić; Will Styler; Benjamin Parrell
Journal:  J Phon       Date:  2020-02-21

3.  Perturbing the consistency of auditory feedback in speech.

Authors:  Daniel R Nault; Takashi Mitsuya; David W Purcell; Kevin G Munhall
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 3.473

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.