Phonetik / Phonologie
Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Part of a Book (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- perception experiment (2)
- read speech (2)
- Deutsch (1)
- Diphthong (1)
- Englisch (1)
- Französisch (1)
- German (1)
- Gleitlaut (1)
- Kontrastive Phonologie (1)
- acoustic correlates (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (3)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
The instructions under which raters quantify syllable prominence perception need to be simple in order to maintain immediate reactions. This leads to noise in the rating data that can be dealt with by normalization, e.g. setting central tendency = 0 and dispersion = 1 (as in Z-score normalization). Questions arise such as: Which parameter is adequate here to capture central tendency? Which reference distribution should the normalization be based on? In this paper 16 different normalization methods are evaluated. In a perception experiment using German read speech (prose and poetry), syllable prominence ratings were collected. From the rating data 16 complete “mirror” data-sets were computed according to the 16 methods. Each mirror data-set was correlated with the same set of measures from the underlying acoustic data, focusing on raw syllable duration which is seen as a rather straightforward acoustic aspect of syllable prominence. Correlation coefficients could be raised considerably by selected methods.
The perception of syllable prominence depends to a limited extent on the acoustic properties of the speech signal in question. Psychoacoustic factors are involved as well. Thus, research often relies on two types of data: subjective prominence ratings collected in perception experiments and acoustic measures. A problem with the rating data is noise resulting from individual approaches to the rating task. This paper addresses the question of how this noise can be reduced by normalization, evaluating 12 normalization methods. In a perception experiment, prominence ratings concerning German read speech were collected. From the raw rating data 12 different ‘mirror’ data-sets were computed according to the 12 methods. Each mirror data-set was correlated with the same set of underlying acoustic data. The multiple regression setup included raw syllable duration as well as within-syllable maximum F0 and intensity. Adjusted r2-values could beraised considerably with selected methods.
A frequently replicated finding is that higher frequency words tend to be shorter and contain more strongly reduced vowels. However, little is known about potential differences in the articulatory gestures for high vs. low frequency words. The present study made use of electromagnetic articulography to investigate the production of two German vowels, [i] and [a], embedded in high and low frequency words. We found that word frequency differently affected the production of [i] and [a] at the temporal as well as the gestural level. Higher frequency of use predicted greater acoustic durations for long vowels; reduced durations for short vowels; articulatory trajectories with greater tongue height for [i] and more pronounced downward articulatory trajectories for [a]. These results show that the phonological contrast between short and long vowels is learned better with experience, and challenge both the Smooth Signal Redundancy Hypothesis and current theories of German phonology.
Die wortinitialen Segmente in Deutsch ja, jung sowie die Zweitkomponenten in den so genannten schließenden Diphthongen wie in Hai, Heu, Hau weisen im Vergleich zu hohen Vokalen in Kuh, Knie eine stark variierende Artikulation auf – zudem treten diese Laute in unterschiedlichen Kontexten auf. Die hier beobachtbaren Zusammenhänge zwischen Distribution und Aussprache lassen auf durch unterschiedliche silbische Positionen bedingte Allophonie schließen (Morciniec 1958; Shannon 1984; Hall 1992; für Englisch: Jakobson/Fant/Halle 1952, S. 20). Eine solche Analyse, die zudem eine erhebliche Reduktion des Phoneminventars beinhaltet, konnte sich bislang für das Deutsche nicht durchsetzen: Gewöhnlich sind sowohl die schließenden Diphthonge als auch [j] im deutschen Phoneminventar aufgeführt; letzteres Segment wird sogar meist als Frikativ klassifiziert. Der Sprachvergleich ergibt neue phonologische Generalisierungen, die eine durch Silbenstruktur bedingte allophonische Analyse stützen. Insbesondere lassen sich Abstufungen erkennen, die auf durch Sonorität bestimmte Silbifizierungsbedingungen schließen lassen.