English speakers' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns

By Rebecca Treiman, Brett Kessler, Stephanie Knewasser, R. Tincoff, Margo Bowman. 2000

126 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

The phonetic grounding of phonology (2000, background): “Such probabilities are also reflected in well-formedness judgments of nonsense words (Coleman and Pierrehumbert, 1997; Pierrehumbert et al, 1998; Treiman et al, 2000) and in other experimental paradigms tapping implicit phonological awareness.”
Phonological development: toward a “radical” templatic phonology (2007, background): “…sensitive to the phonotactic regularities implicit in the lexicon Toward a ''radical'' templatic phonology 715 (Vitevich et al. 1997; Vitevich and Luce 1998, 1999; Frisch 2000; Frisch et al. 2000; Frisch and Zawaydeh 2001; Treiman et al. 2000; Bailey and Hahn 2001; see also Pierrehumbert 2003b).”
Grammaticality and Ungrammaticality in Phonology (2008, background): “There is ample evidence from the literature that nonwords with high values for their frequency statistics usually receive higher word-likeness ratings than non-words with lower values (Bailey and Hahn 1998, 2001; Coleman and Pierrehumbert 1997; Frisch et al. 2001; Pierrehumbert et al. 2004; Treiman ”
A Maximum Entropy Model of Phonotactics and Phonotactic Learning (2008, methodology): “Our own inductive baseline is a purely linear, feature-bundle approach modeled on Chomsky and Halle 1968 (henceforth SPE).”