Naturalistic speech misperception
This thesis presents a new corpus containing â 5,000 instances of naturally occurring misperception of conversational English, which is the result of a standardised format for the orthographic and phonetic transcriptions and meta-data of existing naturalistic corpora. I examined top-down phonetic/phonological factors and bottom-up lexical factors for their contributions in naturalistic settings. On the feature level, voicing/place/manner confusions were best explained using sonority, featural underspecification (Lahiri and Reetz, 2002) and markedness (Lombardi, 2002), and vowel height/backness confusions using perceived similarity (Steriade, 2001) and chain shifts (Labov, 1994a). On the segment level, I found that confusions can be explained with acoustic/featural distances, and extreme signal-to-noise ratio and narrow bandwidth were less ecologically valid. Furthermore, three well-known sound changes (TH-fronting, velar nasal fronting and back vowel fronting) were consistently found in naturalistic and experimental data. On the syllable level, codas are more likely to be misperceived than nuclei/onsets for monosyllables, but onsets are more likely to be misperceived for polysyllables. Fewer errors occur
Tang, K.
Naturalistic speech misperception. This thesis presents a new corpus containing â 5,000 instances of naturally occurring misperception of conversational English, which is the result of a standardised format for the orthographic and phonetic transcriptions and meta-data of existing naturalistic corpora. I examined top-down phonetic/phonological factors and bottom-up lexical factors for their contributions in naturalistic settings. On the feature level, voicing/place/manner confusions were best explained using sonority, featural underspecification (Lahiri and Reetz, 2002) and markedness (Lombardi, 2002), and vowel height/backness confusions using perceived similarity (Steriade, 2001) and chain shifts (Labov, 1994a). On the segment level, I found that confusions can be explained with acoustic/featural distances, and extreme signal-to-noise ratio and narrow bandwidth were less ecologically valid. Furthermore, three well-known sound changes (TH-fronting, velar nasal fronting and back vowel fronting) were consistently found in naturalistic and experimental data. On the syllable level, codas are more likely to be misperceived than nuclei/onsets for monosyllables, but onsets are more likely to be misperceived for polysyllables. Fewer errors occur
naturalistic speech present_new corpus contain instance naturally_occur conversational english standardise format orthographic phonetic transcription meta data exist naturalistic corpus examine top_down phonetic_phonological factor bottom_up lexical factor contribution naturalistic setting feature level voicing place manner confusion best_explain use underspecification markedness vowel height confusion use perceived similarity chain shift segment level find confusion explain acoustic distance extreme signal noise ratio narrow less valid furthermore well_known sound_change fronting velar nasal front back vowel front consistently find naturalistic experimental_data syllable level likely nuclei onset likely error occur