SEPARATION OF CO-OCCURRING SYLLABLES: SEQUENTIAL AND SIMULTANEOUS GROUPING or CAN SCHEMATA OVERRULE PRIMITIVE GROUPING CUES IN SPEECH PERCEPTION? William.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Speech Sounds Introduction to Linguistics for Computational Linguists.
Advertisements

Tom Lentz (slides Ivana Brasileiro)
CNBH, Physiology Department, Cambridge University 2. Experimental procedure The experiment is a 2AFC paradigm design in which.
Analysis of Spoken Language Department of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 Vowel.
Tone perception and production by Cantonese-speaking and English- speaking L2 learners of Mandarin Chinese Yen-Chen Hao Indiana University.
Transfer of English Phonology onto Mandarin L2 Speech.
Sounds that “move” Diphthongs, glides and liquids.
Human Speech Recognition Julia Hirschberg CS4706 (thanks to John-Paul Hosum for some slides)
Hearing relative phases for two harmonic components D. Timothy Ives 1, H. Martin Reimann 2, Ralph van Dinther 1 and Roy D. Patterson 1 1. Introduction.
CS 551/651: Structure of Spoken Language Lecture 12: Tests of Human Speech Perception John-Paul Hosom Fall 2008.
The perception of dialect Julia Fischer-Weppler HS Speaker Characteristics Venice International University
II. PHONOLOGY             .
Phonetic variability of the Greek rhotic sound Mary Baltazani University of Ioannina, Greece  Rhotics exhibit considerable phonetic variety cross-linguistically.
Associations of behavioral parameters of speech emotional prosody perception with EI measures in adult listeners Elena Dmitrieva Kira Zaitseva, Alexandr.
SPEECH PERCEPTION 2 DAY 17 – OCT 4, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context Snedeker and Trueswell (2003) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
Interlanguage Production of English Stop Consonants: A VOT Analysis Author: Liao Shu-jong Presenter: Shu-ling Hung (Sherry) Advisor: Raung-fu Chung Date:
Ling 240: Language and Mind Acquisition of Phonology.
Spoken Language Analysis Dept. of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 At the Segment-Prosody.
Voice source characteristics in speaker segregation Patti Adank.
EP and BP Rhythm: Acoustic and Perceptual Evidence Sónia Frota Universidade de Lisboa Marina Vigário, Fernando Martins.
Niebuhr, D‘Imperio, Gili Fivela, Cangemi 1 Are there “Shapers” and “Aligners” ? Individual differences in signalling pitch accent category.
PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY
Speech Perception Overview of Questions Can computers perceive speech as well as humans? Does each word that we hear have a unique pattern associated.
Vocal Emotion Recognition with Cochlear Implants Xin Luo, Qian-Jie Fu, John J. Galvin III Presentation By Archie Archibong.
Experiment 2: MEG Study Materials and Methods: 11 right-handed subjects with 20:20 vision were run. 3 subjects’ data was discarded because of poor performance.
SPEECH PERCEPTION The Speech Stimulus Perceiving Phonemes Top-Down Processing Is Speech Special?
Introduction to Speech Production Lecture 1. Phonetics and Phonology Phonetics: The physical manifestation of language in sound waves. –How sounds are.
1 Phonetics Study of the sounds of Speech Articulatory Acoustic Experimental.
Chapter three Phonology
The Description of Speech
Conclusions  Constriction Type does influence AV speech perception when it is visibly distinct Constriction is more effective than Articulator in this.
Phonology, phonotactics, and suprasegmentals
Phonetics HSSP Week 5.
Segment Duration and Vowel Quality in German Lexical Stress Perception Klaus J. Kohler University of Kiel, Germany Paper presented at Speech Prosody 2012.
The partner effect in non- native speech Speech Accommodation Group Jiwon Hwang May 9, 2007.
Phonetics and Phonology
Speech Perception. Phoneme - a basic unit of a speech sound that distinguishes one word from another Phonemes do not have meaning on their own but they.
Speech Perception 4/6/00 Acoustic-Perceptual Invariance in Speech Perceptual Constancy or Perceptual Invariance: –Perpetual constancy is necessary, however,
Nasal endings of Taiwan Mandarin: Production, perception, and linguistic change Student : Shu-Ping Huang ID No. : NA3C0004 Professor : Dr. Chung Chienjer.
1 Speech Perception 3/30/00. 2 Speech Perception How do we perceive speech? –Multifaceted process –Not fully understood –Models & theories attempt to.
Mr Background Noise and Miss Speech Perception in: by Elvira Perez and Georg Meyer.
Connected speech processes Coarticulation Suprasegmentals.
Speech Perception 4/4/00.
♥♥♥♥ 1. Intro. 2. VTS Var.. 3. Method 4. Results 5. Concl. ♠♠ ◄◄ ►► 1/181. Intro.2. VTS Var..3. Method4. Results5. Concl ♠♠◄◄►► IIT Bombay NCC 2011 : 17.
SPEECH PERCEPTION DAY 16 – OCT 2, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Evaluating prosody prediction in synthesis with respect to Modern Greek prenuclear accents Elisabeth Chorianopoulou MSc in Speech and Language Processing.
LATERALIZATION OF PHONOLOGY 2 DAY 23 – OCT 21, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Calibration of Consonant Perception in Room Reverberation K. Ueno (Institute of Industrial Science, Univ. of Tokyo) N. Kopčo and B. G. Shinn-Cunningham.
Epenthetic vowels in Japanese: a perceptual illusion? Emmanual Dupoux, et al (1999) By Carl O’Toole.
How Does auditory perception organization works ? by Elvira Perez and Georg Meyer Dept. Psychology, Liverpool University, UK Hoarse Meeting, Chrysler Ulm,
1 Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception Sandra Anacleto uOttawa.
Neurophysiologic correlates of cross-language phonetic perception LING 7912 Professor Nina Kazanina.
Unit 5 Phonetics and Phonology. Phonetics Sounds produced by the human speech organs are called the “phonic/auditory medium” Phonetics is the study of.
Speech Perception.
Language Perception.
Stop + Approximant Acoustics
Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Syllable Pitch Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 16 April 2003.
Phonetic features in ASR Kurzvortrag Institut für Kommunikationsforschung und Phonetik Bonn 17. Juni 1999 Jacques Koreman Institute of Phonetics University.
Detection of Vowel Onset Point in Speech S.R. Mahadeva Prasanna & Jinu Mariam Zachariah Department of Computer Science & Engineering Indian Institute.
Transitions + Perception March 25, 2010 Tidbits Mystery spectrogram #3 is now up and ready for review! Final project ideas.
1 Acoustic Phonetics 3/28/00. 2 Nasal Consonants Produced with nasal radiation of acoustic energy Sound energy is transmitted through the nasal cavity.
Acoustic Phonetics 3/14/00.
A STUDY ON PERCEPTUAL COMPENSATION FOR / /- FRONTING IN A MERICAN E NGLISH Reiko Kataoka February 14, 2009 BLS 35.
The Core of Linguistics. Phonetics Speech sounds are produced by human beings. Then transmitted through the medium of air in the form of sound waves,
Danielle Werle Undergraduate Thesis Intelligibility and the Carrier Phrase Effect in Sinewave Speech.
an Introduction to English
Voice conversion using Artificial Neural Networks
Speech Perception.
Speech Perception (acoustic cues)
Presentation transcript:

SEPARATION OF CO-OCCURRING SYLLABLES: SEQUENTIAL AND SIMULTANEOUS GROUPING or CAN SCHEMATA OVERRULE PRIMITIVE GROUPING CUES IN SPEECH PERCEPTION? William J. Barry*, Georg Meyer** & Jacques Koreman* * Institute of Phonetics, University of the Saarland, Saarbrücken, Germany ** Dept. of Communication and Neuroscience, Keele University, Keele, UK 29 th European Mathematical Psychologists Group meeting (Keele, UK) 28 August - 2 September 1998

OVERVIEW Introduction Primitives and schemata in ASA Double-vowel experiments Utterances Linguistic primitives and schemata Experiment 1 Experiment 2 Conclusions

PRIMITIVES AND SCHEMATA SCHEMATA PRIMITIVES

PRIMITIVES AND SCHEMATA SCHEMATA PRIMITIVES On- and offset(time domain) F 0 and harmonicity(frequency domain)

DOUBLE VOWELS SCHEMATA PRIMITIVES On- and offset(time domain) STYLISED SPECTROGRAM

DOUBLE VOWELS SCHEMATA PRIMITIVES F 0 and harmonicity(frequency domain) STYLISED SPECTROGRAM

UTTERANCES SCHEMATA? PRIMITIVES?

LINGUISTIC PRIMITIVES SCHEMATA ACOUSTIC CUES

LINGUISTIC SCHEMATA SYLLABLES ACOUSTIC CUES

LINGUISTIC SCHEMATA PHONOLOGICAL FEATURES ACOUSTIC CUES

LINGUISTIC SCHEMATA (1) /a:l/ PRIMITIVES [alveolar][nasal] /e:n/ synthesised [a:l]synthesised [e:n]

LINGUISTIC SCHEMATA /a:l/ PRIMITIVES /e:n/ LINGUISTIC SCHEMATA (2) /a:l/ PRIMITIVES /e:n/ synthesised [a:l]synthesised [e:n]

EXPERIMENT 1 Stimuli:pairs of simultaneous synthetic VC syllables /e:/ /a:/ /o:/ /l/ /n/ Subjects:10 German listeners who were able to identify more than 95% of the individual synthetic VC syllables correctly

EXPERIMENT 1 Task:identify the pair of synthetic VC syllables /e:/ /a:/ /o:/ /l/ /n/ Primitives available to the listeners: 40-ms VC place transition with formants going from vowel to consonant target nasality cue starting early in vowel

EXPERIMENT 1 Phonetic background to the acoustic cues: The place cue in the vowel transition has been shown to be more important for the perception of the consonant’s place of articulation than cues available in the consonant itself. Nasality cues are very variable in speech production, varying strongly between languages and speakers, and should therefore be expected to play a less important role in perception. place nasality

EXPERIMENT 1 Task:identify the pair of synthetic VC syllables pre-nas. V non-nas. V n l n l consistent stimuliinconsistent stimuli trans Inconsistent stimuli were also presented in which the nasalised vowel was linked with /l/ Non-nasalised vowel was linked with /n/ leading to conflicting nasality and place cues BUT pre-nas. cues no pre-nas. cues

EXPERIMENT 1 Task:identify the pair of synthetic VC syllables pre-nas. V non-nas. V n l n l consistent stimuliinconsistent stimuli correct incorrect trans We say a VC pair is identified correctly if the place transitions are used for the decision. In the case of inconsistent stimuli this means that the nasality cue must be ignored! NOTE pre-nas. cues no pre-nas. cues

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 1:Do listeners use the nasality cue?

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 1:Do listeners use the nasality cue? Answer A:No. Predicted experimental result: No difference between consistent and inconsistent stimuli.

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 1:Do listeners use the nasality cue? Answer A:No. Predicted experimental result: Consistent stimuli better identified than inconsistent ones. Answer B:Yes.

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 1:Do listeners use the nasality cue? consistent inconsistent CONDITION % PAIRS CORRECT Significant difference between consistent and inconsistent condition (p<0.01)

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 1:Do listeners use the nasality cue? Answer A:No. Corresponding experimental result: Consistent stimuli better identified than inconsistent ones. Whether listeners use nasality as a primitive or schema is unclear. Answer B:Yes.

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 2:Do listeners map place cues onto phonetic feature schema?

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 2:Do listeners map place cues onto phonetic feature schema? Answer A:No. Predicted experimental result: Given the identification rate of the vowel, the distinction in the identification of the consonant is above chance. Reason: the acoustically different place transitions are used to link the vowel with the correct consonant in VC schema.

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 2:Do listeners map place cues onto phonetic feature schema? Answer A:No. Answer B:Yes. Predicted experimental result: Given the identification rate of the vowel, the distinction in the identification of the consonant is at chance level. Reason: the acoustically different place transitions are mapped onto the same place schema (both cons. are alveolar) and cannot contribute to link the vowel with the correct consonant.

EXPERIMENT 1 Identification of VC pairs given correct vowel pair is at chance level Question 2:Do listeners map place cues onto phonetic feature schema? vowel pair correct consistent inconsistent CONDITION % PAIRS CORRECT vowel pair correct VC pair correct chance level VC pair correct, given correct vowel pair

EXPERIMENT 1 Question 2:Do listeners map place cues onto phonetic feature schema? Answer A:No. Answer B:Yes. Corresponding experimental result: Given the identification rate of the vowel, the distinction in the identification of the consonant is at chance level. Reason: the acoustically different place transitions are mapped onto the same place schema (both cons. are alveolar) and cannot contribute to link the vowel with the correct consonant.

EXPERIMENT 1 CONCLUSIONS Listeners use acoustic continuity cues to link speech sounds: lower VC identification rate for inconsistent than for consistent stimuli shows that the nasality cue is used. Nasality cue may be a primitive or a schema. Listeners map the place-of-articulation primitives onto a schema: linking of the vowel with /n/ or /l/ is at chance level despite acoustically different place transitions, because the (phonetically important) place transitions are mapped onto the same schema for the two consonants.

EXPERIMENT 2 Stimuli:the same pairs of simultaneous synthetic VC syllables, but this time also at different F 0 ’s Subjects:10 German listeners who were able to identify more than 95% of the individual synthetic VC syllables correctly

EXPERIMENT 2 Task:identify the pair of synthetic VC syllables Primitives available to the listeners: 40-ms VC place transition with formants going from vowel to consonant target nasality cue starting early in vowel F 0

EXPERIMENT 2 Note:  F 0 provides “primitive” melody and harmonicity link between V and C  F 0 cannot trigger a schema at the level of the stimulus offered for identification (VC syllable), although it may trigger a schema at higher levels of prosodic-phonological structuring, i.e. in intonation

EXPERIMENT 2 Question:Do listeners use the F 0 cue more than they do nasality?

EXPERIMENT 2 Question:Do listeners use the F 0 cue more than they do nasality? Answer A:No. Predicted experimental result: Consistent stimuli better identified in the different-F 0 condition, but distinction between consistent and inconsistent stimuli maintained or even enhanced.

EXPERIMENT 2 Question:Do listeners use the F 0 cue more than they do nasality? Answer A:No. Predicted experimental result: F 0 cue overrides the distinction between consistent and inconsistent stimuli in the different-F 0 condition. Answer B:Yes.

EXPERIMENT 2 Question:Do listeners use the F 0 cue more than they do nasality? conincon same F 0 different F 0 % PAIRS CORRECT conincon Significant difference consistent/inconstent only for same F 0 (p<0.01)

EXPERIMENT 2 Question:Do listeners use the F 0 cue more than they do nasality? Answer A:No. Corresponding experimental result: F 0 cue overrides the distinction between consistent and inconsistent stimuli in the different-F 0 condition. Answer B:Yes.

EXPERIMENT 2 CONCLUSIONS F 0 presents a strong continuation cue linking the V and C The F 0 primitive cue overrides the nasality cue

very tentative... HYPOTHESES Primitives trigger schemata if possible Place transitions in experiment 1 triggered same place schema and therefore could not override nasality cue. Problem: we have no proof that nasality triggers a schema.

very tentative... HYPOTHESES Primitives trigger schemata if possible Place transitions in experiment 1 triggered same place schema and therefore could not override nasality cue. Problem: we have no proof that nasality triggers a schema. Competing primitives are weighted In experiment 2, it is shown that the F 0 primitive is a stronger cue than the inconsistent nasality cue.

very tentative... HYPOTHESES Primitives trigger schemata if possible Place transitions in experiment 1 triggered same place schema and therefore could not override nasality cue. Problem: we have no proof that nasality triggers a schema. Competing primitives are weighted In experiment 2, it is shown that the F 0 primitive is a much stronger cue than the inconsistent nasality cue. Streams are preselected on the basis of F 0 In experiment 2, the inconsistent nasality cue cannot be used by the listener because the F 0 primitive has split the signal into two streams. or

THANK YOU