Volume 75, Issue 1

Background/Aims: Previous research found that individual talkers have consistent differences in the production of segments impacting the perception of their speech by others. Speakers also produce multiple acoustic-phonetic cues to phonological contrasts. Less is known about how multiple cues covary within a phonetic category and across talkers. We examined differences in individual talkers across cues and whether token-by-token variability is a result of intrinsic factors or speaking style by examining within-category correlations. Methods: We examined correlations for 3 cues (voice onset time, VOT, talker-relative onset fundamental frequency, f0, and talker-relative following vowel duration) to word-initial labial stop voicing in English. Results: VOT for /b/ and /p/ productions and onset f0 for /b/ productions varied significantly by talker. Token-by-token within-category variation was largely limited to speaking rate effects. VOT and f0 were negatively correlated within category for /b/ productions after controlling for speaking rate and talker mean f0, but in the opposite direction expected for an intrinsic effect. Within-category talker means were correlated across VOT and vowel duration for /p/ productions. Some talkers produced more prototypical values than others, indicating systematic talker differences. Conclusion: Relationships between cues are mediated more by categories and talkers than by intrinsic physiological relationships.Talker differences reflect systematic speaking style differences.

The current study investigates whether and how focus, phrase boundary and newness can be simultaneously marked in speech prosody in Mandarin Chinese. Homophones were used to construct three syntactic structures that differed only in boundary condition, focus was elicited by preceding questions, while newness of postboundary words was manipulated as whether they had occurred in the previous text. Systematic analysis of F0 and duration showed that (1) duration was a reliable correlate of boundary strength regardless of focus location, while involvement of F0 was only in terms of lowering of phrase-final F0 minima and raising of phrase-initial F0 minima at a relatively strong boundary, (2) postfocus compression (PFC) of F0 was applied across all boundaries, including those with long silent pauses (over 200 ms), and postfocus F0 was lowered to almost the same degree in all boundary conditions, and (3) newness of postfocus words had no systematic effect on F0 or duration. These results indicate that not only functionally focus is independent of prosodic structure and newness, but also phonetically its realization is separate from boundary marking. Focus is signaled mainly through pitch range adjustments, which can occur even across phrase breaks, whereas boundaries are mostly signaled by duration adjustments.

This paper aims to refine our understanding of the speech mechanism and laryngeal features involved in the Korean lenis (/p t k/), aspirated (/ph th kh/), and fortis (/p' t' k'/) plosives. For this purpose we made measurements using a new noninvasive technique called external lighting and sensing photoglottography (ePGG) as well as intra-oral air pressure (Pio) above the glottis, airflow, and acoustic data. From simultaneous recordings of the experimental data, we were ableto quantify the laryngeal-oral coordination of glottal opening and a consonant release, and the covariance of airflow peak and duration of aspiration with glottal opening. The phasing of glottal opening and the 3-way phonation contrast occurs in the order, from early to late, fortis, lenis < aspirated plosives, and the glottal opening peak ranges from low to high in the same order. We also found that a Pio peak, the durations of a high Pio plateau and an oral closure, and F0 are independent of the glottal opening mechanism, varying in the order lenis < aspirated and fortis plosives. From these findings, we propose that the 2 independent patterns are accounted for by the articulator-based features [±spread glottis] and [±tense], respectively.