Abstract
This work presents a perceptual study on how acoustic details and knowledge of the lexicon influence discrimination decisions. English-speaking listeners were less likely to identify phonologically matching items as the same when they differed in vowel duration, but differences in mean F0 did not have an effect. Although both are components of English contrasts, the results only provide evidence for attention to vowel duration as a potentially contrastive cue. Lexical ambiguity was a predictor of response time. Pairs with matching duration were identified more quickly than pairs with distinct duration, but only among lexically ambiguous items, indicating that lexical ambiguity mediates attention to acoustic detail. Lexical ambiguity also interacted with neighborhood density: Among lexically unambiguous words, the proportion of 'same' responses decreased with neighborhood density, but there was no effect among lexically ambiguous words. This interaction suggests that evaluating phonological similarity depends more on lexical information when the items are lexically unambiguous.
Highlights
IntroductionListeners can be sensitive to acoustic distance within phonological categories (Liberman et al 1957; Pisoni & Tash 1974), though much of the work on acoustic distance in discrimination in just a few characteristics, VOT
In perceptual tasks, how does acoustic distance in different characteristics influence discrimination and how might that interact with lexical ambiguity? Listeners can be sensitive to acoustic distance within phonological categories (Liberman et al 1957; Pisoni & Tash 1974), though much of the work on acoustic distance in discrimination in just a few characteristics, VOT
They suggest that lexical ambiguity influences processing in discrimination tasks, producing effects of neighborhood density and acoustic distance that are distinct from the effects with lexically unambiguous items
Summary
Listeners can be sensitive to acoustic distance within phonological categories (Liberman et al 1957; Pisoni & Tash 1974), though much of the work on acoustic distance in discrimination in just a few characteristics, VOT. How does acoustic distance in different characteristics influence discrimination and how might that interact with lexical ambiguity? It is unclear whether acoustic distance would have similar effects across different characteristics. Distance in duration had an effect on response time, but only among lexically ambiguous items, suggesting that lexical ambiguity mediates attention to acoustic detail
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
