Browsing by Person "McMillan, Corey"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Articulatory evidence for feedback and competition in speech production
(2009-01) McMillan, Corey; Corley, Martin; Lickley, Robin
We report an experimental investigation of slips of the tongue using a Word Order Competition (WOC) paradigm in which context (entirely non-lexical, mixed) and competitor (whether a possible phoneme substitution would result in a word or not) were crossed. Our primary analysis uses electropalatographic (EPG) records to measure articulatory variation, and reveals that the articulation of onset phonemes is affected by two factors. First, onsets with real word competitors are articulated more similarly to the competitor onset than when the competitor would result in a non-word. Second, onsets produced in a non-lexical context vary more from the intended onset than when the context contains real words. We propose an account for these findings that incorporates feedback between phonological and lexical representations in a cascading model of speech production, and argue that measuring articulatory variation can improve our understanding of the cognitive processes involved in speech production
Relative contributions of feedback and editing in language production: Behavioral & articulatory evidence(A).
(Acoustical Society of America, 2005-04) McMillan, Corey; Corley, Martin; Lickley, Robin; Hartsuiker, R. J.
Psychologists normally attribute the surfacing of phonological speech errors to one of two factors: editing of the speech plan [Levelt (1989)] or feedback between word and phoneme levels [Dell (1986)]. This paper assesses the relative contributions of each factor, focusing on the perception and articulation of elicited speech errors. Experiments one and two measure the likelihood of phonological exchange errors as a function of phonetic similarity [Frisch (1996)], using the SLIP paradigm and a tongue-twister task. Both experiments show that error likelihood increases with phonetic similarity between intended and actual utterance, an effect easy to account for in terms of feedback but not in terms of editing. Experiment three uses EPG to analyze the tongue-twister utterances: many errors occur at the articulatory level but are not easily perceived in the speech signal. Preliminary analysis suggests three patterns of error: (1) substitution of segments, which may be the result of editing; (2) simultaneous double articulation, hypothesized to be the result of residual activation due to feedback; and (3) overlapping double articulation, representing partial execution of one articulation before substitution with another. Taking these findings together, we hope to evaluate the relative contributions of editing and feedback to phonological speech errors.