The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception
Abstract
The present work reviews theories and empirical findings, including results from two new experiments, that bear on the perception of English vowels, with an emphasis on the comparison of data analytic ‘‘machine recognition’’ approaches with results from speech perception experiments. Two major sources of variability (viz., speaker differences and consonantal context effects) are addressed from the classical perspective of overlap between vowel categories in F1×F2 space. Various approaches to the reduction of this overlap are evaluated. Two types of speaker normalization are considered. ‘‘Intrinsic’’ methods based on relationships among the steady-state properties (F0, F1, F2, and F3) within individual vowel tokens are contrasted with ‘‘extrinsic’’ methods, involving the relationships among the formant frequencies of the entire vowel system of a single speaker. Evidence from a new experiment supports Ainsworth’s (1975) conclusion [W. Ainsworth, Auditory Analysis and Perception of Speech (Academic, London, 1975)] that both types of information have a role to play in perception. The effects of consonantal context on formant overlap are also considered. A new experiment is presented that extends Lindblom and Studdert-Kennedy’s (1967) finding [B. Lindblom and M. Studdert-Kennedy, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 43, 840–843)] of perceptual effects of consonantal context on vowel perception to /dVd/ and /bVb/ contexts. Finally, the role of vowel-inherent dynamic properties, including duration and diphthongization, is briefly reviewed. All of the above factors are shown to have reliable influences on vowel perception, although the relative weight of such effects and the circumstances that alter these weights remain far from clear. It is suggested that the design of more complex perceptual experiments, together with the development of quantitative pattern recognition models of human vowel perception, will be necessary to resolve these issues.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x04000056 · Cited by 2,678
Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access.
Goldinger, S. D. (1998) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.105.2.251 · Cited by 1,587
Talker-specific learning in speech perception
Nygaard, L. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03206860 · Cited by 591
Infant vocalizations in response to speech: vocal imitation and developmental change
Kuhl, P. K., & Meltzoff, A. N. (1996) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.417951 · Cited by 560
Episodic encoding of voice attributes and recognition memory for spoken words.
Palmeri, T. J., Goldinger, S. D., & Pisoni, D. B. (1993) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.19.2.309 · Cited by 450
Metadata
- Authors
- Nearey, T. M.
- Venue
- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
- Publisher
- Acoustical Society of America (ASA)
- Published
- 1989-05-01
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2088-2113
- ISSN
- 0001-4966 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8524
- OpenAlex
- W2058511777
- Cited by
- 466
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1121/1.397861
- The paper
- Nearey, T. M. (1989). Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.397861
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.