The temporal coordination of articulator movements: Are coarticulation and assimilation really synonymous?
(1994) 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:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/529436
- author
- Wood, Sidney A J LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 1994
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- host publication
- Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
- volume
- 95
- issue
- 5
- pages
- 2824 - 2824
- publisher
- 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
- 2016-04-01 15:39:45
- date last changed
- 2019-06-10 12:14:40
@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 = {{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}},
doi = {{10.1121/1.409646}},
volume = {{95}},
year = {{1994}},
}