Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 137–144 | Cite as

The effect of syllabic stress and syllabic organization on the identification of speech sounds

  • Laura L. Hall
  • Sheila E. Blumstein


The present study was undertaken to investigate the effects of syllabic stress and segment structure on selective adaptation in speech. To this end, a CV place of articulation test continuum was selectively adapted by seven different adapting stimuli; the monosyllables [ba] and [ga], two disyllabic stimuli containing equal stress on both syllables, [baga] and [gabal, and three disyllabic stimuli ([baga]) in which stress placement varied and was cued by the acoustic parameters of fundamental frequency and duration. Results for the two adapting stimuli demonstrated significant [b] adaptation for the stimulus [ba] and significant [g] adaptation for [gal. Of the five other adapting stimuli, only [g] adaptation for the stimulus [bagá] was found to be significant. These findings indicate that the operation of detector mechanisms susceptible to fatigue by an adapting stimulus are even more constrained than has heretofore been suggested. It appears that the adapting and test stimuli must not only have the same phonetic and syllable structure, but also the same syllabic organization.


Test Stimulus Adaptation Effect Voice Onset Time Selective Adaptation Stop Consonant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Reference Note

  1. 1.
    Blumstein, S. E. Personal communication, April 10, 1977.Google Scholar


  1. Apes, A. E. How phonetic is selective adaptation? Experiments on syllable position and vowel environment.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,16, 61–67.Google Scholar
  2. Blumstein, S. E., Stevens, K. N., &Nigro, G. N. Property detectors for bursts and transitions in speech perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1977,61, 1301–1313.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Cooper, W. E. Adaptation of phonetic feature analyzers for place of articulation.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1974,56, 617–627. (a)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper, W. E. Contingent feature analysis in speech perception.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,16, 201–204. (b)Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, W. E., &Blumstein, S. E. A ‘labial’ feature analyzer in speech perception.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,15, 591–600.Google Scholar
  6. Diehl, R. H. The effect of selective adaptation on the identification of speech sounds.Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,17, 48–52.Google Scholar
  7. Eimas, P. D., &Corbit, J. D. Selective adaptation of linguistic feature detectors.Cognitive Psychology, 1973,4, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans, E. F., &Whitfield, I. C. Classification of unit responses in the auditory cortex of the unanesthetized and unrestrained cat.Journal of Phystology, 1964,171. 476–493.Google Scholar
  9. Fry, D. B. Experiments in the perception ot stress.Language and Speech, 1958,1, 126–152.Google Scholar
  10. Greenberg, J. J., &Jenkins, J. J. Studies in the psychological correlates to the sound system ol EnglishWord, 1964,20, 157–177.Google Scholar
  11. Klatt, D. Acoustical theory of terminal analog speech synthests. InProceedmgs of the 1972 International Conference of Communtcatton and Processtng, 1972, Boston.Google Scholar
  12. Lehiste, I., &Peterson, G. E. Vowel amplitude and phonemic stress in American Engltsh.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1959,31. 428–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller, G., &Nicely, P. E. An analysis of perceptual confustons among Enghsh consonants.Journal ot the Acoustical Soctety of America, 1955,27. 338–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pisoni D. B., &Tash, J. Auditory property detectors and processing place features in stop consonants.Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,18, 401–408.Google Scholar
  15. Rudnicky, A., &Cole, R. A. Adaptation produced by connected speech.Journal of Expertmental Psychology Human Perceptton and Peqormance, 1977,3, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Singh, S. Cross-language study of perceptual confusions of plosive phonemes in two conditions of distortion.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1966,40, 635–656.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Tartter, V. C., &Eimas, P. D. The role of auditory feature detectors in the perception of speech.Perception & Psychophysics, 1975,18, 293–298.Google Scholar
  18. Wickelgren, W. Acoustic similarity and intrusion errors in shortterm memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965,70, 102–108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wickelgren, W. Distinctive features and error in short-term memory for Enghsh consonants.Journal of the Acoustical Soctety of America, 1966,39, 388–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura L. Hall
    • 1
  • Sheila E. Blumstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Brown UniversityProvidence

Personalised recommendations