The Function of Sentence Accents and Given/New Information in Speech Processing: Different Strategies for Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners?

Abstract

Two experiments were carried out to investigate how the correspondence between sentence accentuation and distribution of information is used in human word processing. A forced-choice task with target words embedded in sentences was employed for this purpose. Target words provided either ‘given’ or ‘new’ information, and were either accented or unaccented. The subjects had to choose between two words that differed in the last consonant by one phonetic feature (e.g., mouth/mouse). The first experiment involved both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. A fixed amount of noise was used to reduce the quality of speech for normal-hearing listeners, in order to enable a comparison between the two listener groups. The results of the first experiment showed different processing patterns for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The hearing-impaired listeners were more accurate with words that were properly accented for their information value, whereas the normal-hearing subjects were more accurate with accented than unaccented words regardless of their information value. A new group of normal-hearing subjects was tested in a second experiment with speech of more severely reduced quality. The results indicated that, under these circumstances, the normal-hearing listeners changed their strategy and also showed an interaction between information value and accent. It seems that, as speech becomes less intelligible, listeners depend increasingly on linguistic expectations stemming from the correlation between information value and accentuation.

Keywords

accentuation information value hearing impairment Dutch intonation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AMERICAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION (now United States of America Standards Institute) (1961). American Standard Specification for General-Purpose Sound Level Meters, Standard S1.4. New York.

BOCK, J.K. , and MAZZELLA, J.R. , (1983). Intonational marking of Given and New information: Some consequences for comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 11, 64–76.

CHAFE, W. , (1974). Language and consciousness. Language, 50, 111–133.

CLARK, H.H. , and HAVILAND, S.E. , (1977). Comprehension and the Given-New contract. In R.O. Freedle (Ed.), Discourse Production and Comprehension (pp. 1–40). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

CUTLER, A. , (1976). Phoneme-monitoring reaction time as a function of preceding intonation contour. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 55–60.

CUTLER, A. , and FODOR, J.A. , (1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition, 7, 49–59.

DONSELAAR, W. van,. (1991). The function of prosody in speech perception. In: Proceedings of the XIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Vol.3 (pp. 466–469). Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence.

DONSELAAR, W. van , (1992). The use of sentence accents and given/new information in speech perception. In M. Everaert , B. Schouten , and W. Zonneveld (Eds.), OTS Yearbook 1992 (pp. 17–34). Utrecht: LEd.

't HART, J. , COLLIER, R. , and COHEN, A. , (1990). A Perceptual Study of Intonation: An Experimental-Phonetic Approach to Speech Melody. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

10.

HORNBY, P.A. , (1974). Surface structure and presupposition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 530–538.

11.

JUST, M.A. , and CLARK, H.H. , (1973). Drawing inferences form the presuppositions and implications of affirmative and negative sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 21–31.

12.

KATWIJK, A. van , (1974). Accentuation in Dutch. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum.

13.

LEHISTE, I. , (1970). Suprasegmental. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

14.

LEVELT, W.J.M. , (1978). A survey of studies in sentence perception: 1970–1976. In W.J.M. Levelt and G.B. Flores d'Arcais (Eds.), Studies in the Perception of Language (pp. 1–74). New York: Wiley.

15.

MOST, R.B. , and SALTZ, E. , (1979). Information structure in sentences: New information. Language and Speech, 22, 89–95.

16.

NOOTEBOOM, S.G. , and KRUYT, J.G. , (1987). Accent, focus distribution and the perceived distribution of Given and New information: An experiment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 82, 1512–1524.

17.

NOOTEBOOM, S.G. , and TERKEN, J.M.B. , (1982). What makes speakers omit pitch accents? An experiment. Phonetica, 39, 317–336.

18.

STANOVICH, K.E. , and WEST, R.F. , (1983). On priming by a sentence context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 1–36.

19.

STANOVICH, K.E. , WEST, R.F. , and FEEMAN, D.J. , (1981) A longitudinal study of sentence context effects in second-grade children: Tests of an interactive-compensatory model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 32, 185–199.

20.

STUDEBAKER, G.A. , (1985). A “rationalized” arcsine transformation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 455–462.

21.

TERKEN, J.M.B. , and NOOTEBOOM, S.G. , (1987). Opposite effects of accentuation and deaccentuation on verification latencies for ‘given’ and ‘new’ information. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2, 145–163.

22.

VINGERLING, M. , (1983). The perception of sentence accent in the perspective of speech processing. In M.P.R. van den Broecke , V. van Heuven , and W. Zonneveld (Eds.), Sound Structures: Studies for Antonie Cohen (pp. 271–280). Dordrecht: Foris.

23.

VINGERLING, M,. (1987). The influence of prosodic cues on the perception of speech by normally hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: an exploratory study. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht.

24.

WINGFIELD, A. , (1975). The intonation-syntax interaction: Prosodic features in perceptual processing of sentences. In A. Cohen and S.G. Nooteboom (Eds.), Structure and Process in Speech Perception (pp. 146–160). Berlin: Springer.