JSLHR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.43 1301-1321 December 2000.
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sanders, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Neville, H. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sanders, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Neville, H. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Lexical, Syntactic, and Stress-Pattern Cues for Speech Segmentation

Lisa D. Sanders 1
Helen J. Neville 1

1 University of Oregon Eugene

lsanders{at}darkwing.uoregon.edu

Many sources of segmentation information are available in speech. Previous research has shown that one or another segmentation cue is used by listeners under certain circumstances. However, it has also been shown that none of the cues are absolutely reliable. Therefore, it is likely that people use a combination of segmentation cues when listening to normal speech. This study addresses the issue of how young adults use multiple segmentation cues (lexical, syntactic, and stress-pattern) in combination to break up continuous speech. Evidence that people use more than one cue at a time was found. Furthermore, the results suggest that people can use segmentation cues flexibly such that remaining cues are relied upon more heavily when other information is missing.

KEY WORDS: auditory, language, segmentation, phoneme detection

Submitted on April 28, 2000
Accepted on July 17, 2000


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Second Language ResearchHome page
E. P. Altenberg
The perception of word boundaries in a second language
Second Language Research, October 1, 2005; 21(4): 325 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
All ASHA Journals AJA AJSLP JSLHR LSHSS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.