CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identification of Minimal Pairs of Japanese Pitch Accent in Noise-Vocoded Speech

Sugiyama, Yukiko·2022·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.887761
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The perception of lexical pitch accent in Japanese was assessed using noise-excited vocoder speech, which contained no fundamental frequency (fo) or its harmonics. While prosodic information such as in lexical stress in English and lexical tone in Mandarin Chinese is known to be encoded in multiple acoustic dimensions, such multidimensionality is less understood for lexical pitch accent in Japanese. In the present study, listeners were tested under four different conditions to investigate the contribution of non-foproperties to the perception of Japanese pitch accent: noise-vocoded speech stimuli consisting of 10 3-ERBN-wide bands and 15 2-ERBN-wide bands created from a male and female speaker. Results found listeners were able to identify minimal pairs of final-accented and unaccented words at a rate better than chance in all conditions, indicating the presence of secondary cues to Japanese pitch accent. Subsequent analyses were conducted to investigate if the listeners' ability to distinguish minimal pairs was correlated with duration, intensity or formant information. The results found no strong or consistent correlation, suggesting the possibility that listeners used different cues depending on the information available in the stimuli. Furthermore, the comparison of the current results with equivalent studies in English and Mandarin Chinese suggest that, although lexical prosodic information exists in multiple acoustic dimensions in Japanese, the primary cue is more salient than in other languages.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.887761

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 84

  1. Amano, 1999, NTT Database Series: Lexical Properties of Japanese
  2. Bates, 2014, lme4: linearmixed-effects models using 'Eigen' and S4.
  3. Beckman, 1986, Stress and Non-stress Accent, 10.1515/9783110874020 · DOI
  4. Beinum, 1980, Vowel Contrast Reduction: An Acoustic and Perceptual Study of Dutch Vowels in Various Speech Conditions
  5. Best, 1981, Perceptual equivalence of acoustic cues in speech and nonspeech perception, Percept. Psychophys, 29, 191, 10.3758/BF03207286 · DOI
  6. Blicher, 1990, Effects of syllable duration on the perception of the Mandarin tone 2/tone 3 distinction: evidence of auditory enhancement, J. Phon, 18, 37, 10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30357-2 · DOI
  7. Brunelle, 2016, Tone and phonation in Southeast Asian languages, Lang. Linguist. Compass, 10, 191, 10.1111/lnc3.12182 · DOI
  8. Chang, 2007, Tone production in whispered Mandarin, 10.5070/P71581Q7QR · DOI
  9. Chrabaszcz, 2014, Acoustic cues to perception of word stress by English, Mandarin, and Russian speakers, J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res, 57, 1468, 10.1044/2014_JSLHR-L-13-0279 · DOI
  10. Cooper, 1952, Some experiments on the perception of synthetic speech sounds, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 24, 597, 10.1121/1.1906940 · DOI
  11. Cutler, 1997, Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: a literature review, Lang. Speech, 40, 141, 10.1177/002383099704000203 · DOI
  12. Cutler, 1999, Pitch-accent in spoken word recognition in Japanese, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 105, 1877, 10.1121/1.426724 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Delattre, 1955, Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 27, 769, 10.1121/1.1908024 · DOI
  14. DiCanio, 2012, Coarticulation between tone and glottal consonants in itunyoso trique, J. Phon, 40, 162, 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.10.006 · DOI
  15. Duanmu, 2007, The Phonology of Standard Chinese, 2nd Edn, 10.1093/oso/9780199215782.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Ellermeier, 2015, Memory disruption by irrelevant noise-vocoded speech: effects of native language and the number of frequency bands, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 138, 1561, 10.1121/1.4928954 · DOI
  17. Everett, 1998, The acoustic correlates of stress in Pirah a, J. Amazon. Lang, 1, 104
  18. Fant, 1960, Acoustic Theory of Speech Production
  19. Flanagan, 1957, Estimates of the maximum precision necessary in quantizing certain “dimensions” of vowel sounds, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 29, 533, 10.1121/1.1908957 · DOI
  20. Fry, 1955, Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 27, 765, 10.1121/1.1908022 · DOI
  21. Fry, 1958, Experiments in the perception of stress, Lang. Speech, 1, 126, 10.1177/002383095800100207 · DOI
  22. Fu, 2000, Identification of temporal envelope cues in Chinese tone recognition, Asia Pacific J. Speech Lang. Hear, 5, 45, 10.1179/136132800807547582 · DOI
  23. Fu, 1998, Importance of tonal envelope cues in Chinese speech recognition, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 104, 505, 10.1121/1.423251 · DOI
  24. Gårding, 1977, “The scandinavian word accents,”, 8
  25. Garellek, 2011, The acoustic consequences of phonation and tone interactions in Jalapa Mazatec, J. Int. Phon. Assoc, 41, 185, 10.1017/S0025100311000193 · DOI
  26. Glasberg, 1990, Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data, Hear. Res., 47, 103, 10.1016/0378-5955(90)90170-T · DOI
  27. Gordon, 2001, Phonation types: a cross-linguistic overview, J. Phon, 29, 383, 10.1006/jpho.2001.0147 · DOI
  28. Gordon, 2017, Acoustic correlates of word stress: a cross-linguistic survey, Linguist. Vanguard, 3, 1, 10.1515/lingvan-2017-0007 · DOI
  29. Haraguchi, 1977, The Tone Pattern of Japanese: An Autosegmental Theory of Tonology
  30. Harris, 1958, Effect of third-formant transitions on the perception of the voiced stop consonants, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 30, 122, 10.1121/1.1909501 · DOI
  31. Heeren, 2015, Coding pitch differences in voiceless fricatives: Whispered relative to normal speech, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 138, 3427, 10.1121/1.4936859 · DOI
  32. Higashikawa, 1996, Perceived pitch of whispered vowels-relationship with formant frequencies: a preliminary study, J. Voice, 10, 155, 10.1016/S0892-1997(96)80042-7 · DOI
  33. Hyman, 2006, Word-prospdic typology, Phonology, 23, 225, 10.1017/S0952675706000893 · DOI
  34. Hyman, 2009, How (not) to do phonological typology: the case of pitch-accent, Lang. Scie, 31, 213, 10.1016/j.langsci.2008.12.007 · DOI
  35. Inkelas, 1988, Serbo-croatian pitch accent: The interaction of tone, stress, and intonation, Language, 64, 227, 10.2307/415433 · DOI
  36. Itahashi, 2005, “Basic nature of speech [written in Japanese as “onsei no kihontekiseishitsu"],”, 6
  37. Jassem, 1959, The phonology of polish stress, Word, 15, 252, 10.1080/00437956.1959.11659698 · DOI
  38. Jun, 2006, The prosodic structure and pitch accent of Northern Kyungsang Korean, J. East Asian Ling, 15, 289, 10.1007/s10831-006-9000-2 · DOI
  39. Kaiki, 1992, Vowel duration control using linguistic information, IEICE Trans. Fundament. Electron. Commun. Comput. Sci, 467
  40. Kawahara, 2015, “The phonology of Japanese accent,”, 445, 10.1515/9781614511984.445 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Kawahara, 2014, Jaw displacement and metrical structure in Japanese: the effect of pitch accent, foot structure, and phrasal stress, J. Phonet. Soc. Jpn, 18, 77, 10.24467/onseikenkyu.18.2_77s · DOI
  42. Kingston, 1994, Phonetic knowledge, Language, 70, 419, 10.1353/lan.1994.0023 · DOI
  43. Kishida, 2016, Three factors are critical in order to synthesize intelligible noise-vocoded Japanese speech, Front. Psychol, 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00517 · DOI
  44. Klatt, 1990, Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 87, 820, 10.1121/1.398894 · DOI
  45. Kohler, 2012, The perception of lexical stress in German: effects of segmental duration and vowel quality in different prosodic patterns, Phonetica, 69, 68, 10.1159/000342126 · DOI
  46. Kong, 2006, Temporal and spectral cues in mandarin tone recognition, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 120, 2830, 10.1121/1.2346009 · DOI
  47. Kuang, 2013, Thetonal space of contrastive five leveltones, Phonetica, 70, 1, 10.1159/000353853 · DOI
  48. Kubozono, 1993, The Organization of Japanese Prosody
  49. Lehiste, 1970, Suprasegmentals
  50. Liberman, 1958, Some cues for the distinction between voiced and voiceless stops in initial position, Lang. Speech, 1, 153, 10.1177/002383095800100301 · DOI
  51. Lisker, 1964, A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: acoustical measurements, Word, 20, 384, 10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830 · DOI
  52. Liu, 2004, Perception of Mandarin lexical tones when F0 information is neutralized, Lang. Speech, 47, 109, 10.1177/00238309040470020101 · DOI
  53. Loizou, 2006, “Speech processing in vocoder-centric cochlear implants,”, 109, 10.1159/000094648 · DOI
  54. Loizou, 1998, The recognition of vowels produced by men, women, boys, and girls by cochlear implant patients using a six-channel cis processor, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 103, 1141, 10.1121/1.421248 · DOI
  55. Macmillan, 2004, Detection Theory: A User's Guide, 2nd Edn, 10.4324/9781410611147 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Marguiles, 1979, Male-female differences in speaker intelligibility; normal and hearing-impaired listeners, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 65, S99, 10.1121/1.2017546 · DOI
  57. McCawley, 1968, The Phonological Component of a Grammar of Japanese
  58. Meyer-Eppler, 1957, Realization of prosodic features in whispered speech, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 29, 104, 10.1121/1.1908631 · DOI
  59. Moore, 2008, The role of temporal fine structure processing in pitch perception, masking, and speech perception for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired people, J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol, 9, 399, 10.1007/s10162-008-0143-x · DOI
  60. Nielsen, 2015, Continuous versus categorical aspects of Japanese consecutive devoicing, J. Phon, 52, 70, 10.1016/j.wocn.2015.05.003 · DOI
  61. Ortega-Llebaria, 2011, Acoustic correlates of stress in Central Catalan and Castilian Spanish, Lang. Speech, 54, 73, 10.1177/0023830910388014 · DOI
  62. Peterson, 1952, Control methods used in a study of the vowels, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 24, 175, 10.1121/1.1906875 · DOI · Paper page
  63. Peterson, 1960, Duration of syllable nuclei in English, J. Acousit. Soc. Am, 32, 693, 10.1121/1.1908183 · DOI
  64. Pierrehumbert, 1988, Japanese Tone Structure
  65. Pisoni, 1987, “Trading relations, acoustic cue integration, and context effects in speech perception,”, 155, 10.1007/978-94-009-3629-4_11 · DOI
  66. 2014, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
  67. Rosen, 1992, Temporal information in speech: acoustic, auditory and linguistic aspects, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci, 336, 367, 10.1098/rstb.1992.0070 · DOI
  68. Shannon, 1995, Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues, Science, 270, 303, 10.1126/science.270.5234.303 · DOI
  69. Sluijter, 1996, Spectral balance as an acoustic correlate of linguistic stress, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 100, 2471, 10.1121/1.417955 · DOI
  70. Sluijter, 1997, Spectral balance as a cue in the perception of linguistic stress, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 101, 503, 10.1121/1.417994 · DOI
  71. Souza, 2009, Effects of envelope bandwidth on the intelligibility of sine- and noise-vocoded speech, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 126, 792, 10.1121/1.3158835 · DOI
  72. Sugito, 1982, “Tookyoo akusento ni okeru “hana" to “hana" no seisei to chikaku,”, 182
  73. Sugiyama, 2012, The Production and Perception of Japanese Pitch Accent
  74. Sugiyama, 2017, Perception of Japanese pitch accent without F0, Phonetica, 74, 107, 10.1159/000453069 · DOI
  75. Sugiyama, 2021, The effect of fo fall, downstep, and secondary cues in perceiving japanese lexical accent, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 150, 2865, 10.1121/10.0006689 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Sugiyama, 2013, Do formant frequencies correlate with Japanese accent?, Proc. Meet. Acoust, 10.1121/1.4801061 · DOI
  77. Thomas, 1969, Perceived pitch of whispered vowels, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 46, 468, 10.1121/1.1911712 · DOI
  78. Titze, 1989, Physiologic and acoustic differences between male and female voices, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 85, 1699, 10.1121/1.397959 · DOI
  79. Vance, 1995, Final accent vs. no accent: utterance-final neutralization in Tokyo Japanese, J. Phonet, 23, 487, 10.1006/jpho.1995.0035 · DOI
  80. Weitzman, 1970, Word accent in Japanese
  81. Whalen, 1992, Information for mandarin tones in the amplitude contour and in brief segments, Phonetica, 49, 25, 10.1159/000261901 · DOI
  82. Wilson, 2016, “Cochlear implant design considerations,”, 3, 10.1007/978-1-4939-2788-3_1 · DOI
  83. Xu, 2002, Features of stimulation affecting tonal-speech perception: implications for cochlear prostheses, J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 112, 247, 10.1121/1.1487843 · DOI
  84. Zee, 1980, Tone and vowel quality, J. Phon, 8, 247, 10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31474-3 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Sugiyama, Y.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2022-05-31
Volume
13
ISSN
1664-1078
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2022.887761
Cited by
4
References
1
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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