Perceptual integration of acoustic cues for stop, fricative, and affricate manner.
Introducing a short interval of silence between the words SAY and SHOP causes listeners to hear SAY CHOP. Another cue for the fricative-affricate distinction is the duration of the fricative noise in SHOP (CHOP). Now, varying both these temporal cues orthogonally in a sentence context, we find that, within limits, they are perceived in relation to each other: The shorter the duration of the noise, the shorter the silence necessary to convert the fricative into an affricate. On the other hand, when the rate of articulation of the sentence frame is increased while holding noise duration constant, a longer silent interval is needed to hear an affricate, as if the noise duration, but not the silence duration, were effectively longer in the faster sentence. In a second experiment, varying noise and silence durations in GRAY SHIP, we find that given sufficient silence, listeners report GRAY CHIP when the noise is short but GREAT SHIP when it is long. Thus, the long noise in the second syllable disposes listeners to displace the stop to the first syllable, so that they hear not a syllable-initial affricate (i.e., stop-initiated fricative) but a syllable-final stop (followed by a syllable-initial fricative). Repeating the experiment with GREAT SHIP as the original utterance, we obtain the same pattern of results, together with only a moderate increase in GREAT responses. In all such cases, the listeners integrate a numerous, diverse, and temporally distributed set of acoustic cues into a unitary phonetic percept. These several cues have in common only that they are the products of a unitary articulatory act. In effect, then, it is the articulatory act that is perceived.
D003463:Cues; D006801:Humans; D010700:Phonetics; D013067:Speech Perception; D013997:Time Factors