Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 18, Issue 5, pp 331–340 | Cite as

An effect of linguistic experience: The discrimination of [r] and [l] by native speakers of Japanese and English

  • Kuniko Miyawaki
  • James J. Jenkins
  • Winifred Strange
  • Alvin M. Liberman
  • Robert Verbrugge
  • Osamu Fujimura
Article

Abstract

To test the effect of linguistic experience on the perception of a cue that is known to be effective in distinguishing between [r] and [l] in English, 21 Japanese and 39 American adults were tested on discrimination of a set of synthetic speech-like stimuli. The 13 “speech” stimuli in this set varied in the initial stationary frequency of the third formant (F3) and its subsequent transition into the vowel over a range sufficient to produce the perception of [r a] and [l a] for American subjects and to produce [r a] (which is not in phonemic contrast to [l a ]) for Japanese subjects. Discrimination tests of a comparable set of stimuli consisting of the isolated F3 components provided a “nonspeech” control. For Americans, the discrimination of the speech stimuli was nearly categorical, i.e., comparison pairs which were identified as different phonemes were discriminated with high accuracy, while pairs which were identified as the same phoneme were discriminated relatively poorly. In comparison, discrimination of speech stimuli by Japanese subjects was only slightly better than chance for all comparison pairs. Performance on nonspeech stimuli, however, was virtually identical for Japanese and American subjects; both groups showed highly accurate discrimination of all comparison pairs. These results suggest that the effect of linguistic experience is specific to perception in the “speech mode.”

Reference Notes

  1. Fujisaki. H., & Kawashima, T.On the modes and mechanisms of speech perception. Research on Information Processing, Annual Report No. 2, University of Tokyo, Division of Electrical Engineering, Engineering Research Institute, 1969, 67–73.Google Scholar
  2. Miyawaki, K.A preliminary study of American English /r/ by use of dynamic palatography. Annual Bulletin, Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 1972, 6, 19-24.Google Scholar

References

  1. Abramson, A. S., &Lisker, L. Discriminability along the voicing continuum: Cross-language tests. InProceedings of the 6th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Prague, 1967). Prague: Academia, 1970. Pp. 569–573.Google Scholar
  2. DeLattre, P. C, Liberman, A. M., &Cooper, F. S. Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1955,27, 769–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eimas, P. D. Developmental aspects of speech perception. In R. Held, H. Leibowitz, & H. L. Teuber (Eds.),Handbook of sensory physiology. New York: Springer-Verlag, in press.Google Scholar
  4. Fry, D. B., Abramson, A. S., Eimas, P. D., &Liberman, A. M. The identification and discrimination of synthetic vowels.Language and Speech, 1962,5, 171–189.Google Scholar
  5. Fujimura, O. Syllable as a unit of speech recognition.IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 1975,23, 82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goto, H. Auditory perception by normal Japanese adults of the sounds “L” and “R.”Neuropsychologia, 1971,9, 317–323.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Heffner, R.-M. S.General phonetics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1952.Google Scholar
  8. Jones, D.An outline of English phonetics. Cambridge Mass: Hefter, 1956.Google Scholar
  9. Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., &Studdert-Kennedy, M. Perception of the speech code.Psychological Review, 1967,74, 431–461.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Liberman, A. M., Harris, K. S., Hoffman, H. S., &Griffith, B. C. The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,54, 358–368.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mattingly, I. G., Liberman, A. M., Syrdal, A. K., &Halwes, T. Discrimination in speech and nonspeech modes.Cognitive Psychology, 1971,2, 131–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Miyawaki, K.A study of lingual articulation by use of dynamic palatography. Masters thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of Tokyo, March 1973.Google Scholar
  13. O’Connor, J. D., Gerstman, L. J., Liberman, A. M., Delattre, P. C, &Cooper, F. S. Acoustic cues for the perception of initial /w, j, r, l/ in English.Word, 1957,13, 25–43.Google Scholar
  14. Pisoni, D. B. Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,13, 253–260.Google Scholar
  15. Pisoni, D. B. Auditory short-term memory and vowel perception.Memory & Cognition, 1975,3, 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Shankweiler, D. P., &Studdert-Kennedy, M. Identification of consonants and vowels presented to left and right ears.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967,19, 59–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Stevens, K. N., Liberman, A. M., Studdert-Kennedy, M., &Ohman, S. E. G. Cross-language study of vowel perception.Language and Speech, 1969,12, 1–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Vinegrad, M. D. A direct magnitude scaling method to investigate categorical versus continuous modes of speech perception.Language and Speech, 1972,15, 114–121.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kuniko Miyawaki
    • 1
  • James J. Jenkins
    • 2
  • Winifred Strange
    • 2
  • Alvin M. Liberman
    • 3
  • Robert Verbrugge
    • 2
  • Osamu Fujimura
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Center for Research in Human LearningUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis
  3. 3.Haskins LaboratoriesNew Haven

Personalised recommendations