Perception of rhythmic grouping: Testing the iambic/trochaic law
Tóm tắt
This study was designed to test the iambic/trochaic law, which claims that elements contrasting in duration naturally form rhythmic groupings with final prominence, whereas elements contrasting in intensity form groupings with initial prominence. It was also designed to evaluate whether the iambic/trochaic law describes general auditory biases, or whether rhythmic grouping is speech or language specific. In two experiments, listeners were presented with sequences of alternating /ga/ syllables or square wave segments that varied in either duration or intensity and were asked to indicate whether they heard a trochaic (i.e., strong-weak) or an iambic (i.e., weak-strong) rhythmic pattern. Experiment 1 provided a validation of the iambic/trochaic law in Englishs-peaking listeners; for both speech and nonspeech stimuli, variations in duration resulted in iambic grouping, whereas variations in intensity resulted in trochaic grouping. In Experiment 2, no significant differences were found between the rhythmic-grouping performances of English- and French-speaking listeners. The speech/nonspeech and cross-language parallels suggest that the perception of linguistic rhythm relies largely on general auditory mechanisms. The applicability of the iambic/trochaic law to speech segmentation is discussed.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Beckman, M. E. (1986).Stress and non-stress accent (Netherlands Phonetic Archives 7). Dordrecht: Foris.
Benguerel, A.-P., &D’Arcy, J. (1986). Time-warping and the perception of rhythm in speech.Journal of Phonetics,14, 231–246.
Bent, T., Bradlow, A. R., &Wright, B. A. (2003). The influence of linguistic experience on pitch perception in speech and nonspeech sounds [Abstract].Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,113, 2256.
Bolinger, D. L. (1958). A theory of pitch accent in English.Word,14, 109–149.
Crystal, T. H., &House, A. S. (1990). Articulation rate and the duration of syllables and stress groups in connected speech.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,88, 101–112.
Cutler, A. (1994). Segmentation problems, rhythmic solutions.Lingua,92, 81–104.
Cutler, A., &Butterfield, S. (1992). Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception.Journal of Memory & Language,31, 218–236.
Cutler, A., Mehler, J., Norris, D., &Segui, J. (1986). The syllable’s differing role in the segmentation of French and English.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 385–400.
Cutler, A., &Norris, D. (1988). The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical access.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,14, 113–121.
Darwin, C. J., &Donovan, A. (1980). Perceptual studies of speech rhythm: Isochrony and intonation. In J. C. Simon (Ed.),Spoken language generation and understanding (pp. 77–85). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Delattre, P. (1965).Comparing the phonetic features of English, French, German and Spanish: An interim report. Heidelberg: Groos.
Delattre, P. (1966). A comparison of syllable length conditioning among languages.International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching,4, 183–198.
Dell, F. (1984). L’accentuation dans les phrases français. In F. Dell, D. Hirst, & J.-R. Vergnaud (Eds.),Forme sonore du langage: Structure des représentations en phonologie (pp. 65–122). Paris: Hermann.
Dell, F., &Vergnaud, J.-R. (1984). Les développements récents en phonologie: Quelques idées centrales. In F. Dell, D. Hirst, & J.-R. Vergnaud (Eds.),Forme sonore du langage: Structure des représentations en phonologie (pp. 1–42). Paris: Hermann.
Donovan, A., &Darwin, C. J. (1979). The perceived rhythm of speech. InProceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 268–274). Copenhagen: Institute of Phonetics.
Echols, C. H., Crowhurst, M. J., &Childers, J. B. (1997). The perception of rhythmic units in speech by infants and adults.Journal of Memory & Language,36, 202–225.
Fraisse, P. (1974).Psychologie du rythme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Fraisse, P. (1982). Rhythm and timing. In D. Deutsch (Ed.),The psychology of music (pp. 149–180). New York: Academic Press.
Fry, D. B. (1955). Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,27, 765–768.
Fry, D. B. (1958). Experiments in the perception of stress.Language & Speech,1 126–152.
Grammont, M. (1946).Traité pratique de prononciation française. Paris: Librairie Delagrave.
Hay, J. (2005).How auditory discontinuities and linguistic experience affect the perception of speech and non-speech in English- and Spanish-speaking listeners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Hayes, B. (1995). The rhythmic basis of the foot inventory. In B. Hayes (Ed.),Metrical stress theory: Principles and case studies (pp. 79–85). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hyman, L. (1977). On the nature of linguistic stress. In L. Hyman (Ed.),Studies in stress and accent (Occasional Papers in Linguistics 4, pp. 37–82). Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Department of Linguistics.
Jakobson, R., Fant, C. G. M., &Halle, M. (1967).Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Klatt, D. H. (1975). Vowel lengthening is syntactically determined in a connected discourse.Journal of Phonetics,3, 129–140.
Klatt, D. H. (1976). Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,59, 1208–1221.
Klatt, D. H., &Klatt, L. C. (1990). Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,87, 820–857.
Laver, J. (1994).Principles of phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lehiste, I. (1970).Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lehiste, I. (1977). Isochrony reconsidered.Journal of Phonetics,5, 253–263.
Lindblom, B., &Rapp, K. (1973).Some temporal regularities of spoken Swedish (Pub. 21). Stockholm: University of Stockholm, Institute of Linguistics.
Mattys, S. L., Jusczyk, P. W., Luce, P. A., &Morgan, J. L. (1999). Phonotactic and prosodic effects on word segmentation in infants.Cognitive Psychology,38, 465–494.
Mehler, J., Dommergues, J.-Y., Frauenfelder, U., &Segui, J. (1981). The syllable’s role in speech segmentation.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 298–305.
Oller, D. K. (1973). The effect of position in utterance on speech segment duration in English.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,54, 1235–1247.
Otake, T., Hatano, G., Cutler, A., &Mehler, J. (1993). Mora or syllable? Speech segmentation in Japanese.Journal of Memory & Language,32, 258–278.
Pierrehumbert, J. (1980).The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. [Distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington]
Rice, C. C. (1992).Binarity and ternarity in metrical theory: Parametric extensions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., &Aslin, R. N. (1996). Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues.Journal of Memory & Language,35, 606–621.
Schwartz, R. G., Petinou, K., Goffman, L., Lazowski, G., &Cartusciello, C. (1996). Young children’s production of syllable stress: An acoustic analysis.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,99, 3192–3200.
Thiessen, E. D., &Saffran, J. R. (2003). When cues collide: Use of stress and statistical cues to word boundaries by 7- to 9-month-old infants.Developmental Psychology,39, 706–716.
Tranel, B. (1987).The sounds of French: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vroomen, J., Tuomainen, J., &de Gelder, B. (1998). The roles of word stress and vowel harmony in speech segmentation.Journal of Memory & Language,38, 133–149.
Wenk, B. J., &Wioland, F. (1982). Is French really syllable-timed?Journal of Phonetics,10, 193–216.
Woodrow, H. (1909). A quantitative study of rhythm: The effect of variations in intensity, rate, and duration.Archives of Psychology,14, 1–66.
Woodrow, H. (1951). Time perception. In S. S. Stevens (Ed.),Handbook of experimental psychology (pp. 1224–1236). New York: Wiley.