» Articles » PMID: 21451736

Some Acoustic Cues for the Perceptual Categorization of American English Regional Dialects

Overview
Journal J Phon
Date 2011 Apr 1
PMID 21451736
Citations 35
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The perception of phonological differences between regional dialects of American English by naïve listeners has received little attention in the speech perception literature and is still a poorly understood problem. Two experiments were carried out using the TIMIT corpus of spoken sentences produced by talkers from a number of distinct dialect regions in the United States. In Experiment 1, acoustic analysis techniques identified several phonetic features that can be used to distinguish different dialects. In Experiment 2, recordings of the sentences were played back to naïve listeners who were asked to categorize talkers into one of six geographical dialect regions. Results showed that listeners are able to reliably categorize talkers using three broad dialect clusters (New England, South, North/West), but that they have more difficulty categorizing talkers into six smaller regions. Multiple regression analyses on the acoustic measures, the actual dialect affiliation of the talkers, and the categorization responses revealed that the listeners in this study made use of several reliable acoustic-phonetic properties of the dialects in categorizing the talkers. Taken together, the results of these two experiments confirm that naïve listeners have knowledge of phonological differences between dialects and can use this knowledge to categorize talkers by dialect.

Citing Articles

Gender stereotypes and social perception of vocal confidence is mitigated by salience of socio-indexical cues to gender.

Roche J, Asaro K, Morris B, Morgan S Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1125164.

PMID: 38155698 PMC: 10753021. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1125164.


Assessing the Specificity and Accuracy of Accent Judgments by Lay Listeners.

Braber N, Smith H, Wright D, Hardy A, Robson J Lang Speech. 2022; 66(2):267-290.

PMID: 35723130 PMC: 10230595. DOI: 10.1177/00238309221101560.


Dysarthria Subgroups in Talkers with Huntington's Disease: Comparison of Two Data-Driven Classification Approaches.

Kim D, Diehl S, de Riesthal M, Tjaden K, Wilson S, Claassen D Brain Sci. 2022; 12(4).

PMID: 35448023 PMC: 9025673. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12040492.


Does race impact speech perception? An account of accented speech in two different multilingual locales.

Kutlu E, Tiv M, Wulff S, Titone D Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022; 7(1):7.

PMID: 35089448 PMC: 8799814. DOI: 10.1186/s41235-022-00354-0.


Social Inference May Guide Early Lexical Learning.

Tripp A, Feldman N, Idsardi W Front Psychol. 2021; 12:645247.

PMID: 34093326 PMC: 8175981. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645247.


References
1.
Hillenbrand J, Getty L, Clark M, Wheeler K . Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995; 97(5 Pt 1):3099-111. DOI: 10.1121/1.411872. View

2.
Clopper C, Pisoni D . Homebodies and army brats: Some effects of early linguistic experience and residential history on dialect categorization. Lang Var Change. 2011; 16(1):31-48. PMC: 3083069. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394504161036. View

3.
Lambert W, HODGSON R, Gardner R, FILLENBAUM S . Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1960; 60:44-51. DOI: 10.1037/h0044430. View

4.
Bradlow A, Torretta G, Pisoni D . Intelligibility of normal speech I: Global and fine-grained acoustic-phonetic talker characteristics. Speech Commun. 2011; 20(3):255-272. PMC: 3066472. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(96)00063-5. View

5.
Nosofsky R . Overall similarity and the identification of separable-dimension stimuli: a choice model analysis. Percept Psychophys. 1985; 38(5):415-32. DOI: 10.3758/bf03207172. View