Evolving theories of vowel perception.

Research on the perception of vowels in the last several years has given rise to new conceptions of vowels as articulatory, acoustic, and perceptual events. Starting from a "simple" target model in which vowels were characterized articulatorily as static vocal tract shapes and acoustically as points in a first and second formant (F1/F2) vowel space, this paper briefly traces the evolution of vowel theory in the 1970s and 1980s in two directions. (1) Elaborated target models represent vowels as target zones in perceptual spaces whose dimensions are specified as formant ratios. These models have been developed primarily to account for perceivers' solution of the "speaker normalization" problem. (2) Dynamic specification models emphasize the importance of formant trajectory patterns in specifying vowel identity. These models deal primarily with the problem of "target undershoot" associated with the coarticulation of vowels with consonants in natural speech and with the issue of "vowel-inherent spectral change" or diphthongization of English vowels. Perceptual studies are summarized that motivate these theoretical developments.

[1]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  The Information‐Bearing Elements of Speech , 1952 .

[2]  A. Liberman,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Acoustic Determinants of Vowel Color; Observations on One- and Two-Formant Vowels Synthesized from Spectrographic Patterns , 1952 .

[3]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Information Conveyed by Vowels , 1957 .

[4]  G. E. Peterson.  Parameters of vowel quality. , 1961, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[5]  B. Lindblom.  Spectrographic Study of Vowel Reduction , 1963 .

[6]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  On the role of formant transitions in vowel recognition. , 1967, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  L. Gerstman.  Classification of self-normalized vowels , 1968 .

[8]  P. MacNeilage.  Motor control of serial ordering of speech. , 1970, Psychological review.

[9]  D. Klatt,et al.  Phonetic Ability and Related Anatomy of the Newborn and Adult Human, Neanderthal Man, and the Chimpanzee , 1972 .

[10]  W. A. Ainsworth,et al.  Duration as a Cue in the Recognition of Synthetic Vowels , 1972 .

[11]  D. Shankweiler,et al.  What information enables a listener to map a talker's vowel space? , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  Winifred Strange,et al.  Consonant environment specifies vowel identity. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  F. Cooper,et al.  Effect of speaking rate on labial consonant-vowel articulation , 1974 .

[14]  K. Moll,et al.  A cineradiographic study of VC and CV articulatory velocities , 1976 .

[15]  Toby E Skinner.  Speaker invariant characterizations of vowels, liquids, and glides using relative formant frequencies , 1977 .

[16]  Acoustic and phonological factors in vowel identification. , 1979 .

[17]  W. Strange,et al.  Identification of coarticulated vowels. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  M. Macchi,et al.  Identification of vowels spoken in isolation versus vowels spoken in consonantal context. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  W. Strange,et al.  Task variables in the study of vowel perception. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[20]  Pickett,et al.  The Sounds of Speech Communication , 1980 .

[21]  R. Diehl,et al.  Perceiving vowels in isolation and in consonantal context. , 1981, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  J. T. Hogan,et al.  Vowel identification: orthographic, perceptual, and acoustic aspects. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[23]  Advantage of speaker as listener in a vowel identification task. , 1983, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[24]  James J. Jenkins,et al.  Dynamic specification of coarticulated vowels , 1983 .

[25]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Identification of vowels in “vowelless” syllables , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  B Rakerd,et al.  Monitoring for vowels in isolation and in a consonantal context. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[27]  H. S. Gopal,et al.  Some effects of speaking rate on spectral and temporal characteristics of American English vowels , 1984 .

[28]  Ann K. Syrdal,et al.  Aspects of a model of the auditory representation of american english vowels , 1985, Speech Commun..

[29]  C. B. Huang.  Perceptual correlates of the tense/lax distinction in general American English , 1985 .

[30]  Terrance M. Nearey,et al.  Modeling the role of inherent spectral change in vowel identification , 1986 .

[31]  Chao-Tsung Huang,et al.  The effect of formant trajectory and spectral shape on the tense/Lax distinction in American vowels , 1986, ICASSP '86. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[32]  B Rakerd,et al.  Evidence of Talker-Independent Information for Vowels , 1986, Language and speech.

[33]  Terrance M. Nearey.  Static, dynamic, and relational factors in vowel perception , 1987 .

[34]  James D. Miller.  Auditory‐perceptual interpretation of the vowel , 1987 .

[35]  Identification of “hybrid” vowels in sentence context , 1987 .

[36]  Judgments of coarticulated vowels are based on dynamic information , 1987 .

[37]  R. Verbrugge,et al.  Evidence that the dynamic information for vowels is talker independent in form , 1987 .