Phonetic Interpretation Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI: Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation

By R. Wright. 2004

240 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d762e7241b4971980eb4ac0546f5ada44445cc5d

How researchers see this paper

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

In Artificial Intelligence

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Cascading activation from phonological planning to articulatory processes: Evidence from tongue twisters (2006, background): “A number of recent studies (Munson, in press; Munson & Solomon, 2004; Wright, 2004) have found that lexical items phonologically similar to a large number of other lexical items (i.e., in high density neighbourhoods) had significantly less centralised vowels compared to lexical items with little…”
Production and perception of a sound change in progress: Tone merging in Hong Kong Cantonese (2013, background): “High-frequency words are shown to be more susceptible to surface variations and are often more reduced in speech (Bybee, 2007; Jurafsky, Bell, Gregory, & Raymond, 2000; Wright, 2004).”
Phonological Neighborhood Effects in Spoken Word Perception and Production (2016, background): “For example, Munson & Solomon (2004; also see Wright 2004) found that neighborhood density influences the formant frequencies of vowels in real words produced by adults.”
Time and Thyme Are not Homophones: The Effect of Lemma Frequency on Word Durations in Spontaneous Speech (2008, background): “…1991), predictability within an utterance (Gregory et al. 1999, Hunnicutt 1985, Jurafsky et al. 2001a,b, Lieberman 1963), and neighborhood density (Wright 2004).3 In all of these cases, high-probability forms tend to reduce, and low-probability forms tend to lengthen or otherwise be…”
Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech (2012, background): “Whereas the greater dispersion of vowels in ‘‘hard’’ words in Wright (1997, 2004) was only observed in the ‘‘point’’ vowels /i,A,u/, we found an across-the-board effect of neighborhood density on vowel dispersion, for all vowel types.”
Gestural overlap and C-center in selected French consonant clusters (2006, background): “Both have been shown to affect production latency as well as production accuracy (Wright, 2004; Vitevitch et al., 2004).”
Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation (2011, background): “…known to influence word recognition and/or production, such as phonological neighborhood density (Luce, 1986; Scarborough, 2004; Vitevitch & Luce, 1999; Wright, 1997, 2004), word familiarity (Wright, 1997), syllable length, and stress pattern, were counterbalanced between the two frequency groups.”