Advanced

The temporal coordination of articulator movements: Are coarticulation and assimilation really synonymous?

Wood, Sidney A J LU (1994) In Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 95(5). p.2824-2824
Abstract
The transition model (i) of classical phonetics distinguished between inevitable transitions between momentary target configurations (called coarticulation by Menzerath and Lacerda in 1933) and assimilation extending over a larger domain than a transition, implying reorganization of the input. By the 1950s it was clear that coarticulation extended beyond target configurations and involved more than two phonemes, and sub-cortical tug-of-war models (ii) came to be preferred, based on competition between phonemes for muscles and articulator movement [e.g., Öhman, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] and seeing coarticulation and assimilation as synonymous. Finally (iii) gesture queuing models [e.g., Kozhevnikov and Chistovich, Speech... (More)
The transition model (i) of classical phonetics distinguished between inevitable transitions between momentary target configurations (called coarticulation by Menzerath and Lacerda in 1933) and assimilation extending over a larger domain than a transition, implying reorganization of the input. By the 1950s it was clear that coarticulation extended beyond target configurations and involved more than two phonemes, and sub-cortical tug-of-war models (ii) came to be preferred, based on competition between phonemes for muscles and articulator movement [e.g., Öhman, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] and seeing coarticulation and assimilation as synonymous. Finally (iii) gesture queuing models [e.g., Kozhevnikov and Chistovich, Speech Articulation and Perception (1965)] delay gestures that are antagonistic to on-going activity, implying a cortical scanning procedure to survey on-coming input. Examples of articulator timing, analyzed from x-ray motion films of speech, are presented that favor (iii) rather than (ii). It is argued that much current controversy over coarticulation can be avoided if a cortical level of motor control and the distinction between coarticulation and assimilation were accepted again. The procedures and some data are presented in Wood [J. Phon. 19, 281–292 (1991)]. Poster presentation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
publication status
published
subject
in
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
volume
95
issue
5
pages
2824 - 2824
publisher
The Acoustical Society of America
ISSN
0001-4966
DOI
10.1121/1.409646
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
70030501-0d7e-4ed9-b25e-a3cc03191ad5 (old id 529436)
date added to LUP
2007-09-25 14:11:35
date last changed
2016-04-16 03:12:12
@inproceedings{70030501-0d7e-4ed9-b25e-a3cc03191ad5,
  abstract     = {The transition model (i) of classical phonetics distinguished between inevitable transitions between momentary target configurations (called coarticulation by Menzerath and Lacerda in 1933) and assimilation extending over a larger domain than a transition, implying reorganization of the input. By the 1950s it was clear that coarticulation extended beyond target configurations and involved more than two phonemes, and sub-cortical tug-of-war models (ii) came to be preferred, based on competition between phonemes for muscles and articulator movement [e.g., Öhman, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] and seeing coarticulation and assimilation as synonymous. Finally (iii) gesture queuing models [e.g., Kozhevnikov and Chistovich, Speech Articulation and Perception (1965)] delay gestures that are antagonistic to on-going activity, implying a cortical scanning procedure to survey on-coming input. Examples of articulator timing, analyzed from x-ray motion films of speech, are presented that favor (iii) rather than (ii). It is argued that much current controversy over coarticulation can be avoided if a cortical level of motor control and the distinction between coarticulation and assimilation were accepted again. The procedures and some data are presented in Wood [J. Phon. 19, 281–292 (1991)]. Poster presentation.},
  author       = {Wood, Sidney A J},
  booktitle    = {Journal of the Acoustical Society of America},
  issn         = {0001-4966},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {2824--2824},
  publisher    = {The Acoustical Society of America},
  title        = {The temporal coordination of articulator movements: Are coarticulation and assimilation really synonymous?},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.409646},
  volume       = {95},
  year         = {1994},
}