Literature DB >> 32123070

Speakers are able to categorize vowels based on tongue somatosensation.

Jean-François Patri1,2, David J Ostry3,4, Julien Diard5, Jean-Luc Schwartz1, Pamela Trudeau-Fisette6, Christophe Savariaux1, Pascal Perrier7.   

Abstract

Auditory speech perception enables listeners to access phonological categories from speech sounds. During speech production and speech motor learning, speakers' experience matched auditory and somatosensory input. Accordingly, access to phonetic units might also be provided by somatosensory information. The present study assessed whether humans can identify vowels using somatosensory feedback, without auditory feedback. A tongue-positioning task was used in which participants were required to achieve different tongue postures within the /e, ε, a/ articulatory range, in a procedure that was totally nonspeech like, involving distorted visual feedback of tongue shape. Tongue postures were measured using electromagnetic articulography. At the end of each tongue-positioning trial, subjects were required to whisper the corresponding vocal tract configuration with masked auditory feedback and to identify the vowel associated with the reached tongue posture. Masked auditory feedback ensured that vowel categorization was based on somatosensory feedback rather than auditory feedback. A separate group of subjects was required to auditorily classify the whispered sounds. In addition, we modeled the link between vowel categories and tongue postures in normal speech production with a Bayesian classifier based on the tongue postures recorded from the same speakers for several repetitions of the /e, ε, a/ vowels during a separate speech production task. Overall, our results indicate that vowel categorization is possible with somatosensory feedback alone, with an accuracy that is similar to the accuracy of the auditory perception of whispered sounds, and in congruence with normal speech articulation, as accounted for by the Bayesian classifier.

Entities:  

Keywords:  categorical perception; somatosensory feedback; speech production

Year:  2020        PMID: 32123070      PMCID: PMC7084080          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1911142117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  21 in total

1.  Somatosensory basis of speech production.

Authors:  Stéphanie Tremblay; Douglas M Shiller; David J Ostry
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-06-19       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries.

Authors:  A M LIBERMAN; K S HARRIS; H S HOFFMAN; B C GRIFFITH
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1957-11

Review 3.  Computational neuroanatomy of speech production.

Authors:  Gregory Hickok
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 34.870

4.  Neural modeling and imaging of the cortical interactions underlying syllable production.

Authors:  Frank H Guenther; Satrajit S Ghosh; Jason A Tourville
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2005-07-22       Impact factor: 2.381

5.  Listening with eye and hand: cross-modal contributions to speech perception.

Authors:  C A Fowler; D J Dekle
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Lipreading sentences with vibrotactile vocoders: performance of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects.

Authors:  L E Bernstein; M E Demorest; D C Coulter; M P O'Connell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Somatosensory function in speech perception.

Authors:  Takayuki Ito; Mark Tiede; David J Ostry
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Dynamics of self-monitoring and error detection in speech production: evidence from mental imagery and MEG.

Authors:  Xing Tian; David Poeppel
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.225

9.  The effect of imagination on stimulation: the functional specificity of efference copies in speech processing.

Authors:  Xing Tian; David Poeppel
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Categorical speech representation in human superior temporal gyrus.

Authors:  Edward F Chang; Jochem W Rieger; Keith Johnson; Mitchel S Berger; Nicholas M Barbaro; Robert T Knight
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-03       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  1 in total

1.  Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one's own voice pitch sensitivity.

Authors:  Razieh Alemi; Alexandre Lehmann; Mickael L D Deroche
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.