Abstract
Attempts to model speech production processes based on abstract static units, such as syllables, phonemes, or features, fail to account for a number of observations of natural speech. For example. a phonetic feature such as lip rounding has been described as being anticipated varying numbers of consonant segments before the vowel for which it is specified. Such data conform to predictions made with models assuming a CnV syllable structure. Such models, however, fail to predict nasality anticipated in vowels preceding nasal consonants. On the other hand, feature‐based models that apparently account for observations of anticipated nasality fail to predict other coarticulatory phenomena, such as the suppression of lip‐rounding or tongue‐fronting activity during the production of an intervening consonant presumably containing no conflicting articulatory gesture. A model assuming that speech is specified segmentally with fixed timing relationships between the end and beginning of successive segments (and variable durations of dynamic gestures) can eliminate these, and other, discrepancies between predicted and observed behavior. [Work supported by NINCDS and BRSG grants.]
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
