Literature DB >> 7759650

Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels.

J Hillenbrand1, L A Getty, M J Clark, K Wheeler.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend the classic study of vowel acoustics by Peterson and Barney (PB) [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 24, 175-184 (1952)]. Recordings were made of 45 men, 48 women, and 46 children producing the vowels /i,I,e, epsilon,ae,a, [symbol: see text],O,U,u, lambda,3 iota/ in h-V-d syllables. Formant contours for F1-F4 were measured from LPC spectra using a custom interactive editing tool. For comparison with the PB data, formant patterns were sampled at a time that was judged by visual inspection to be maximally steady. Analysis of the formant data shows numerous differences between the present data and those of PB, both in terms of average frequencies of F1 and F2, and the degree of overlap among adjacent vowels. As with the original study, listening tests showed that the signals were nearly always identified as the vowel intended by the talker. Discriminant analysis showed that the vowels were more poorly separated than the PB data based on a static sample of the formant pattern. However, the vowels can be separated with a high degree of accuracy if duration and spectral change information is included.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7759650     DOI: 10.1121/1.411872

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  315 in total

1.  Postlearning consolidation of birdsong: stabilizing effects of age and anterior forebrain lesions.

Authors:  M S Brainard; A J Doupe
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Perceptual "vowel spaces" of cochlear implant users: implications for the study of auditory adaptation to spectral shift.

Authors:  J D Harnsberger; M A Svirsky; A R Kaiser; D B Pisoni; R Wright; T A Meyer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Constraints of vowels and consonants on lexical selection: cross-linguistic comparisons.

Authors:  A Cutler; N Sebastián-Gallés; O Soler-Vilageliu; B van Ooijen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-07

4.  Current and planned cochlear implant research at New York University Laboratory for Translational Auditory Research.

Authors:  Mario A Svirsky; Matthew B Fitzgerald; Arlene Neuman; Elad Sagi; Chin-Tuan Tan; Darlene Ketten; Brett Martin
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Acoustic and perceptual categories of vocal elements in the warble song of budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus).

Authors:  Hsiao-Wei Tu; Edward W Smith; Robert J Dooling
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.231

6.  Across-site threshold variation in cochlear implants: relation to speech recognition.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  Combined spectral and temporal enhancement to improve cochlear-implant speech perception.

Authors:  Aparajita Bhattacharya; Andrew Vandali; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Cross-linguistic studies of children's and adults' vowel spaces.

Authors:  Hyunju Chung; Eun Jong Kong; Jan Edwards; Gary Weismer; Marios Fourakis; Youngdeok Hwang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Effects of Aging on Vocal Fundamental Frequency and Vowel Formants in Men and Women.

Authors:  Julie Traub Eichhorn; Raymond D Kent; Diane Austin; Houri K Vorperian
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 2.009

10.  A role for the developing lexicon in phonetic category acquisition.

Authors:  Naomi H Feldman; Thomas L Griffiths; Sharon Goldwater; James L Morgan
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 8.934

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.