Academic literature on the topic '200404 Laboratory Phonetics and Speech Science'

AbstractThe present paper discusses some techniques and procedures used in experimental phonetic research. The use of technology and its recent widespread availability have been instrumental in our developing a better understanding of the basic processes of human speech production and perception. Specifically, this paper reviews some of the uses of the software package Praat for acoustic and perceptual research, as well as software products such as R, Akustyk, SuperLab, and E-Prime, among others. Finally, we offer some remarks on the basic equipment (hardware) one would need to purchase in order to carry out modern experimental phonetic research in the field as well as in the laboratory.

One of the key features of the hypokinetic dysarthria associated with Parkinson disease is dysprosody. While there has been ample research into the global characterization of speech in Parkinson disease, little is known about how people with Parkinson disease mark lexical stress. This study aimed to determine how people with Parkinson disease modulate pitch, intensity, duration, and vowel space to differentiate between two common lexical stress patterns in English: trochees (strong-weak pattern) and iambs (weak-strong pattern), in two syllable words. Twelve participants with mild to moderate idiopathic Parkinson disease and twelve age- and sex-matched controls completed a series of speech tasks designed to elicit token words of interest in prosodically-relevant speech tasks (picture identification (in isolation and lists) and giving directions (spontaneous speech). Results revealed that people with Parkinson disease produced a higher overall pitch and a smaller vowel space as compared to controls, though most lexical marking features were not significantly different. Importantly, the elicitation task had a significant effect on most dependent measures. Although lexical stress is not significantly impacted by Parkinson disease, we recommend that future research and clinical practice focus more on the use of spontaneous speech tasks rather than isolated words or lists of words due to the differences in the marking of lexical stress in the latter tasks, making them less useful as ecologically-valid assessments of prosody in everyday communication.

A great deal of the research on cross-linguistic phonetic influence demonstrates that a speaker’s knowledge of their first language (L1) significantly affects their ability to perceive and produce sounds in any other language. While current studies show that cross-linguistic transfer occurs at the L3 level, some research suggests that properties of both L1 and L2 are present in the production of L3 (Ionin, Montrul & Santos, 2011). Many studies have addressed perception, production and factors that influence foreign speech in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) (Watkins, Rauber & Baptista, 2009). As the number of multilingual individuals rises, so does the need for studies that investigate not only SLA but also that of additional languages (i.e., Third Language Acquisition). This dissertation examines how cross-linguistic influence (CLI) occurs among English, Spanish, and Brazilian Portuguese (BP), examining instances of vowel reduction, an aspect of phonological production. English and BP are assumed as vowel reducing languages, whereas Spanish displays negligible vowel reduction in comparison. The vowel productions in L3 BP of two multilingual groups, L1English-L2Spanish-L3BP (ESP) and L1 Spanish-L2 English-BP (SEP) were investigated in two tasks: a paragraph reading task (PRT) and a carrier phrase task (CPT). The study sought to determine whether i) a native speaker of a vowel reducing L1 and a non-vowel reducing L2 displays more or less vowel reduction in a vowel reducing L3 than a native speaker of a non-vowel reducing L1 and vowel reducing L2 and ii) how length of exposure to an L3 affects phonological production. Three fixed effects were considered: duration ratio, intensity ratio and height (F1). The goal was to ascertain whether the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) (Rothman 2011, 2015) or the L2 Status Factor Model (Bardel & Falk 2007, 2012; Hammarberg, 2001) would be a better predictor for how vowel reduction would occur in the L3. Results for duration ratio and vowel height showed no significant difference between groups ESP and SEP. Results for intensity ratio suggest L2 Status as a better predictor, as group SEP displayed more phonological transfer than the ESP group. A hybrid approach to L3 acquisition models is proposed.