8/31 Vowel acoustic cues. Click here Vowel Intro lecture slides. (DKP)

1. Hillenbrand, J., Getty, L.J., Clark, M.J., & Wheeler, K. (1995). Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 97, 3099-3111.

   [Recommended: Hillenbrand, J., Clark, M.J., & Nearey, T. (2001). Effects of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 109, 748-763.
   Moon, S., & Lindblom, B. (1994) Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 96, 40-55.]

9/7 Vowel acoustic cues, formants and global spectral shape. (Eric)

1. Nearey, T.M. (1989). Static, dynamic, and relational properties in vowel perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 85, 2088-2113.
2. Zahorian, S. and Jagharghi, A. (1993). Spectral-shape features versus formants as acoustic correlates for vowels, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 94, 1966-1982

   [Recommended: ]

9/14 Vowel discrimination and psychophysics (Susie)

1. Kewley-Port, D. (2001). Vowel formant discrimination II: Effects of stimulus uncertainty, consonantal context and training. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 2141-2155.
2. Hawks, J.W. (1994). Difference limens for formant patterns of vowel sounds. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 95, 1074-1084.
3. Perkell, J.S., Guenther, F.H., Lane, H., Matthies, M.L., Stockmann, E., Tiede, M., and Zandipour, M. (2004.)
   The distinctness of speakers' productions of vowel contrasts is related to their discrimination of the contrasts. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 23382344.

   [Recommended: Liu, C. and Kewley-Port (2004). Vowel formant discrimination for high-fidelity speech. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 1224-1233.]

9/21 Vowel discrimination, including perceptual magnet theory (Jungsun)

1. *Kuhl, PK (1991). "Human adults and human infants show a "perceptual magnet effect" for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not". Perception & Psychophysics 50 (2), 93 - 107.*
2. Lotto, A.J., Kluender, K.R., & Holt, L.L. (1998). Depolarizing the perceptual magnet effect. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 103, 3648-3655.
3. Iverson, P. & Kuhl, P.K. (1995). Mapping the perceptual magnet effect for speech using signal detection theory and multidimensional scaling. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 97, 553-562.

   [Recommended: Lively, SE & Pisoni, DB (1997). "On prototypes and phonetic categories: A critical assessment of the perceptual magnet effect in speech perception". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 23 (6), 1665 - 1679. ]

9/28 Vowel perception and production by hearing impaired persons. (Becca)

1. Moore, B.C.J. (2003) Speech processing for the hearing-impaired: successes, failures, and implications for speech mechanisms, Speech Communication 41, 81-91.
2. Pickett, J.M. and Martony (1970). Low-frequency vowel formant discrimination in hearing-impaired listeners. J. Speech Hear. Res., 31, 347-359.
3. Summers, W.V. & Leek, M.R. (1992). The role of spectral and temporal cues in vowel identification by listeners with impaired hearing, J. Speech Hear. Res., 35, 1189-1199.

   [Recommended: This is a short paper that was the first reporting on vowel perception in HI: Owens, E., Talbott, C. and Schubert, E. (1968). Vowel discrimination of hearing-impaired listeners. J. Speech Hear. Res., 11, 648-655.]

10/5 Vowel perception and production by hearing impaired persons. (Dongmyung)

1. Nabelek, A.K. (1988). Identification of vowels in quiet, noise, and reverberation: Relationships with age and hearing loss. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 84, 476-484.
2. Richie, C., Kewley-Port, D., and Coughlin, M. (2003). Discrimination and identification of vowels by young, hearing-impaired adults. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 114, 2923-2933.
3. Liu, C. and Kewley-Port, D. (2005). Vowel formant discrimination of high-fidelity speech by hearing-impaired listeners. Submitted to .J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (reading available for download from Oncourse, Resources).

10/7, Friday. Attend practice talks of posters for ASA in C108, 9am-10am.

10/12 Aging and Speech Communication Conference, IU.

Attend at least two lectures: http://www.indiana.edu/~ascpost/index.htm

10/19 Attend practice talks of posters for ASA on 10/7, 9-10am, C108. Encouraged to attend ASA meeting in Minneapolis (especially vowel perception presentations).

10/26 Cross-language vowel perception (Becca)
[Note: Stevens & Willerman on Oncourse, Resources]

1. Stevens, Liberman, Studdert-Kennedy, and Ohman (1969) Cross-language study of vowel perception. Lang. Speech, 12, 1-23.
2. Bradlow, A.R. (1995). A comparative acoustic study of English and Spanish vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 97, 1916-1924.
3. Willerman, Raquel & Patricia K. Kuhl (1996) Cross-language speech perception: Swedish, English, and Spanish speakers’ perception of front rounded vowels. In H. Timothy Bunnell & William Idsardi (eds) Proceedings of ICSLP 96.1: 442~445.

11/2 Cross-language vowel perception (Dongmyung)

1. * Flege, J. (1995). Second Language Speech Learning Theory, Findings, and Problems. In Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in Cross-Language Research, ed.W. Strange, Timonium, MD: York Press, 233-273. Selected Pages (pp. 233-254) * (on Oncourse->Resources)
2. Polka, L. (1995). Linguistic influences in adult perception of non-native vowel contrasts. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 97, 1286-1296.
3. Bent, T., Bradlow, Bradlow, A. and Smith, B. (2005). Segmental errors in different word positions and their effects on intelligibility of non-native speech: All's well that begins well. To appear in a festschrift in honor of the retirement of James Flege. (on Oncourse->Resources)

11/9 Dynamic theories of vowel perception (Eric)

1. Jenkins, J.J., Strange, W., & Trent, S.A. (1999). Context-independent dynamic information for the perception of coarticulated vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am 106(1), 438-448.
2. Pols, L.C.W. & van Son, R.J.J.H. (1993). Acoustics and perception of dynamic vowel segments. Speech Comm., 13, 135-147.
3. Burkle, T. Z. (2004) Contribution of consonant versus vowel information to sentence intelligibility by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. Unpublished masters thesis, Indiana University. http://www.indiana.edu/~spl/burklethesis.pdf

11/16 Clear Speech (Adam Buchwald)

1. Ferguson, S. H. and Kewley-Port, D. (2002). Vowel intelligibility in clear and conversational speech for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 259-271.
2. Smiljanic, R. and Bradlow, A. (2005). Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 118, 1677-1688.
3. Picheny, Durlach, & Braida (1986). Speaking clearly for the hard of hearing II: Acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 434-446.

   [Recommended: READ THIS-> Burnham, D., Kitamura, C. and Vollmer-conna, U. (2002). What's new, pussycat? On talking to babies and animals. Science 296, 24 May 2002, 1435.]

11/23 Thanksgiving Break

11/30 Vowel perception by people with simulated or real cochlear implants (Jungsun)

1. Fu, Q-J. and Shannon, R. (1999). Recognition of spectrally degraded and frequency-shifted vowels in acoustic and electric hearing," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 105, 1889–1900.
2. Harnsberger, J., Svirsky, M, Kaiser, A., Pisoni, D., Wright, R. and Meyer, T (2001). Perceptual "vowel spaces" of cochlear implant users: Implications for the study of auditory adaptation to spectral shift. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 109, 2135-2145.
3. Perkell, J., Numa, W., Vick, J., Lane, H., Balkany, T., & Gould, J. (2001). Language-Specific, Hearing-Related Changes in Vowel Spaces: A Preliminary Study of English- and Spanish-Speaking Cochlear Implant Users. Ear & Hearing. 22(6):461-470. (article available online, IU Lib, Ovid?)

   [Recommended. These two on-line resources are very informative about cochlear implants: Dorman and Wilson, 2004, Design and Function of Cochlear Implants, Am. Scientist. 92, 436. Loizou, P.(1998). Tutorial article on cochlear implants, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, pages 101-130. http://www.utdallas.edu/~loizou/cimplants/tutorial/]

12/7 Excitation pattern models and auditory processing of vowels (Jeremy)

1. Moore, B., & Glasberg, B. (1987). Formulae describing frequency selectivity as a function of frequency and level, and their use in calculating excitation patterns. Hear. Res., 28, 209-225. (on Oncourse)
2. Conley, R.A. & Keilson, S.E. (1995). Rate representation and discriminability of second formant frequencies for /eh/-like steady-state vowels in cat auditory nerve. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 98, 3223-3234.
3. May, B.J. (2003). Physiological and psychophysical assessments of the dynamic range of vowel representations in the auditory periphery. Speech Communication 41, 49-57. (on Oncourse)