Papers in Speech Communication: Speech Perception

Joanne L. Miller, Raymond D. Kent, Bishnu S. Atal, Editors

Published in 1991

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

Dedication

Acknowledgments

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

Commentary

  • Paper 1. P.D. Eimas and J.D. Corbit (1973), Selective adaptation of linguistic feature detectors. Cognitive Psychology 4, 99-109
  • Paper 2. C.A. Fowler (1986), An event approach to the study of speech perception from a direct-realist perspective. Journal of Phonetics 14, 3-28
  • Paper 3. D.H. Klatt (1979), Speech perception: A model of acoustic-phonetic analysis and lexical access. Journal of Phonetics 7, 279-312
  • Paper 4. A.M. Liberman, F.S. Cooper, D.P. Shankweiler, and M. Studdert-Kennedy (1967), Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review 74, 431-461
  • Paper 5. A.M. Liberman and I. G. Mattingly (1985), The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition 21, l-36
  • Paper 6. B. Lindblom (1986) Phonetic universals in vowel systems. In J.J. Ohala and J.J. Jaeger (Eds.), Experimental Phonology, pp. 13-44. New York: Academia Press
  • Paper 7. J.L. McClelland and J.L. Elman (1986), The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology 18, 1-86
  • Paper 8. G.C . Oden and D.W. Massaro (1978), Integration of featural information in speech perception. Psychological Review 85, 172-191
  • Paper 9. K.N. Stevens and S.E. Blumstein (1978), Invariant cues for place of articulation in stop consonant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 64, 1358-1368
  • Paper 10. M. Studdert-Kennedy and D. Shankweiler (1970), Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 48, 579-594

    PERCEPTION OF CONSONANTAL DISTINCTIONS

    Commentary

  • Paper 11. C.T. Best, B. Morrongiello, and R. Robson (1981), Perceptual equivalance of acoustic cues in speech and nonspeech perception. Perception & Psychophysics 29, 191-211
  • Paper 12. W.F. Ganong, III (1980), Phonetic categorization in auditory word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 6, 110-125
  • Paper 13. D. Kewley-Port (1983), Time-varying features as correlates of place of articulation in stop consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 73, 322-335
  • Paper 14. P.K. Kuhl and J.D. Miller (1978), Speech perception by the chinchilla: Identification functions for synthetic VOT stimuli, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 63, 905-917
  • Paper 15. L. Lisker and A.S. Abramson (1970), The voicing dimension: Some experiments in comparative phonetics. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Prague 1967, pp. 563-567. Prague:Academia
  • Paper 16. H. McGurk and J. MacDonald (1976), Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature 264, 746-748
  • Paper 17. J.D. Miller, C.C. Wier, R.E. Pastore, W.J. Kelly, and R.J. Dooling (1976), Discrimination and labeling of noise-buzz sequences with varying noise-lead times: An example of categorical perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 60, 410-417
  • Paper 18. J.L. Miller and A. M. Liberman (1979), Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonant and semivowel. Perception & Psychophysics 25, 457-465
  • Paper 19. K. Miyawaki, W. Strange, R. Verbrugge, A.M. Liberman, J.J. Jenkins, and O. Fujimura (1975). An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of [r] and [l] by native speakers of Japanese and English. Perception & Psychophysics 18, 331-340
  • Paper 20. D.B. Pisoni (1977), Identification and discrimination of the relative onset time of two component tones: Implications for voicing perception in stops. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61, 1352-1361
  • Paper 21. B.H. Repp, A.M. Liberman, T. Eccardt, and D. Pesetsky (1978), Perceptual integration of acoustic cues for stop, fricative, and affricate manner. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology: Human Perception and Performance 4, 621-637
  • Paper 22. Q.Summerfield (1981), Articulatory rate and perceptual constancy in phonetic perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 7, 1074-1095
  • Paper 23. R. M. Warren (1970), Perceptual restoration of missing speech sounds. Science 167, 392-393

    PERCEPTION OF VOCALIC DISTINCTIONS

    Commentary

  • Paper 24. L.A. Chistovich and V.V Lublinskaya (1979), The center of gravity' effect in vowel spectra and critical distance between the formants: Psychoacoustical study of the perception of vowel-like stimuli. Hearing Research 1, 185-195
  • Paper 25. C.J. Darwin (1984), Perceiving vowels in the presence of another sound: Constraints on formant prception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 76, 1636-1647
  • Paper 26. P. Ladefoged and D.E. Broadbent (1957), Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 29, 98-104
  • Paper 27. B.E.F. Lindblom and M. Studdert-Kennedy (1967), On the role of formant transitions in vowel recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 42, 830-843
  • Paper 28. D.B. Pisoni (1973), Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonnts and vowels. Perception & Psychophysics 13, 253-260
  • Paper 29. W. Strange, J.J. Jenkins, and T.L. Johnson (1983), Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 74, 695-705
  • Paper 30. A.K. Syrdal and H.S. Gopal (1986), A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 79, 1086-1100

    PROSODY AND SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY

    Commentary

  • Paper 31. C.A. Fowler (1983), Converging sources of evidence on spoken and perceived rhythms of speech: Cyclic production of vowels in monosyllabic stress feet. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 112, 386-412
  • Paper 32. N.R. French and J.C. Steinberg (1947), Factors governing the intelligibility of speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 19, 90-119
  • Paper 33. I. Lehiste (1977), Isochrony reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics 5, 253-263
  • Paper 34. G.A. Miller and P.E. Nicely (1955), An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 27, 338-352
  • Paper 35. G.A. Miller, G.A. Heise, and W. Lichten (1951), The intelligibility of speech as a function of the context of the test materials. Journal of Experimental Psychology 41, 329-335
  • Paper 36. J.M. Pickett and I. Pollack (1963), Intelligibility of excerpts from fluent speech: Effects of rate of utterance and duration of excerpt. Language and Speech 6, 533-549
  • Paper 37. R. Plomp (1978), Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 63, 533-549

    DEVELOPMENTAL ISSUES

    Commentary

  • Paper 38. P.D. Eimas, E.R. Siqueland, P. Jusczyk, and J. Vigorito (1971), Speech perception in infants. Science 171, 303-306
  • Paper 39. P.K. Kuhl (1979), Speech perception in early infancy: Perceptual constancy for spectrally dissimilar vowel categories. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66, 1668-1679
  • Paper 40. J. Mehler, P. Jusczyk, G. Lambertz, N. Halsted, J. Bertoncini, and C. Amiel-Tison (1988). A precusor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition 29, 143-178
  • Paper 41. J.F. Werker and R.C. Tees (1984), Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development 7, 49-63

    Index to current volume

    Table of Contents and Index to companion volume on Speech Production

    Table of Contents and Index to companion volume on Speech Processing

    Back to top

    Back to List of Publications


    PREFACE

    Over the past few decades there has been great progress in understanding the nature of human speech production and perception, and in applying this knowledge to problems of speech processing (coding, recognition, and synthesis). Given the interdisciplinary nature of the enterprise, important papers in these areas have appeared in a wide range of journals, proceedings, and books from such diverse fields as engineering, linguistics, physics, psychology, and speech and hearing science. The current volume forms part of a three-volume series whose purpose is to bring together a number of these important papers. The series is sponsored by the Acoustical Society of America and, following the classification system of the Society's journal, one volume focuses on speech production, one on speech perception, and one on speech processing.

    The idea of the three-volume series originated within the Speech Technical Committee of the Society. The Committee discussed and enthusiastically endorsed the project at the Society's fall 1989 meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, and subsequently chose the editors and editorial boards. A formal proposal for the project was then drafted by the Chair of the Speech Technical Committee and was forwarded to the Executive Council of the Society. The Council gave final approval for the project at the Society's spring 1990 meeting in State College, Pennsylvania.

    We have organized each of the three volumes into topical sections, with the papers within each section ordered alphabetically by author. To help guide readers-especially students and nonexperts-we have written editorial commentary for each section. The commentary is intended to provide a brief context for the individual papers, placing them within the history of the discipline. We have also included a topical subject index at the end of each volume, keyed to individual papers. Finally, because the three volumes are so closely interrelated, at the end of each volume we have included the table of contents and the index of each of the other two volumes.

    We have worked closely with our editorial boards in selecting the papers that appear in these volumes. The members of the boards were involved in all stages of the selection process, from the initial generation of a list of potential papers to the final decisions on selection. In making the selections, we were guided by the goal of including papers that are important in their own right and, in addition, collectively reflect progress in the field and present a range of viewpoints, approaches, an methodologies. Given the vast literature on speech, and practical constraints on the size of the volumes, the choices were difficult, and many important papers are not included. We can only hope that the volumes, as constituted, will prove useful to the speech community as research on speech communication proceeds.

    Joanne L. Miller
    Raymond D. Kent
    Bishnu S. Atal


    Back to top

    Back to List of Publications

    © 1998 Acoustical Society of America