Word-specific phonetics

By Janet B. Pierrehumbert. 2001

634 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b34cc25cd4e52c042b3a623e01ff7d7ee706f4f2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

The social life of phonetics and phonology (2006, background): “…of phonological divergence and convergence between participants within a conversation, with the polarity and extent of the bias being driven by the individual participant’s evaluation of the social context of the interaction (Bell, 1984; Coupland, 1980; Local, 2003; Pierrehumbert, 2002).”
From Usage to Grammar: The Mind's Response to Repetition (2007, methodology): “(For experiments that model category formation from exemplars, see Pierrehumbert 2001, 2002, Wedel 2004.)”
Time and Thyme Are not Homophones: The Effect of Lemma Frequency on Word Durations in Spontaneous Speech (2008, background): “It may be possible to account for these results in models in which lexical representations include subphonemic detail (e.g. Johnson 1997, Pierrehumbert 2001, 2002).”
Against Formal Phonology (2005, background): “Some (and maybe all) linguistic categories, like words, morphemes, and sound types, appear to have properties like these (see Pisoni 1997, Bybee 2001, Pierrehumbert 2001, 2003).”
Rich memory and distributed phonology (2010, background): “The story presented here has been anticipated in other papers of mine in the past few years (Port, 2006, 2009) and has also been anticipated in some other recent work on phonetics (e.g., Faber, 1992; Pisoni, 1997; Hawkins, 2003; Linell, 2005; Johnson, 2006; Pierrehumbert, 2001, 2002, etc.).”
Communicative efficiency in language production: Optional case-marking in Japanese (2015, background): “This suggests that speakers can adapt their productions based on non-verbal feedback even in the absence of the production-perception loop between interlocutors (of the type assumed in Guy, 1996; Pierrehumbert, 2002).”
Syntactic probabilities affect pronunciation variation in spontaneous speech (2009, background): “The linguistic units in question include structures at all levels of linguistic representation and varying degrees of abstraction (see e.g. Borensztajn et al. 2009; Pierrehumbert 2001, 2002; Bybee 2002, 2006; Johnson 1997).”
Predictability Effects on Durations of Content and Function Words in Conversational English (2009, background): “ences found by Pluymaekers et al. (2005a) for seven Dutch adjective/adverbs.”
Robust speech perception: Recognize the familiar, generalize to the similar, and adapt to the novel (2015, background): “At the other extreme, episodic models posit that speech perception is a direct mapping of detailed acoustic traces to linguistic units (often lexical items), preserving all of the fine-grained acoustic information (Goldinger, 1998; Johnson, 1997b, 2006; Pierrehumbert, 2002).”
Homophony and morphology: The acoustics of word-final S in English 1 (2015, background): “For example, Pierrehumbert (2002) demonstrates how such a model can deal with the phonetic variability of lexemes.”
Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress (2006, background): “There was an overall effect of the perceived age of the voice, such that most errors were in response to younger voices.”
Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation (2011, background): “Other lessextreme, and linguistically more informed, exemplar-based models include Johnson (1997), Pierrehumbert (2001, 2002, 2006), and Coleman (2002).”
How are words stored in memory? Beyond phones and phonemes (2007, background): “If we insist on locating the precise form of ''linguistic knowledge'' in some single speaker, then probably the best that could be done is to point to a large set of centroids in clouds of data points in a highdimensional space of utterances (see Pierrehumbert, 2001, 2002).”