Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Where phonology and phonetics intersect: the case of Hausa intonation
- 3 Metrical representation of pitch register
- 4 The status of register in intonation theory: comments on the papers by Ladd and by Inkelas and Leben
- 5 The timing of prenuclear high accents in English
- 6 Alignment and composition of tonal accents: comments on Silverman and Pierrehumberf's paper
- 7 Macro and micro F0 in the synthesis of intonation
- 8 The separation of prosodies: comments on Kohler's paper
- 9 Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency
- 10 On the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 11 Lengthenings and the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 12 From performance to phonology: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 13 The Delta programming language: an integrated approach to nonlinear phonology, phonetics, and speech synthesis
- 14 The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation
- 15 On the value of reductionism and formal explicitness in phonological models: comments on Ohala's paper
- 16 A response to Pierrehumbert's commentary
- 17 The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification
- 18 Demisyllables as sets of features: comments on Clements's paper
- 19 Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech
- 20 Toward a model of articulatory control: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 21 Gestures and autosegments: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 22 On dividing phonetics and phonology: comments on the papers by Clements and by Browman and Goldstein
- 23 Articulatory binding
- 24 The generality of articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 25 On articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 26 The window model of coarticulation: articulatory evidence
- 27 Some factors influencing the precision required for articulatory targets: comments on Keating's paper
- 28 Some regularities in speech are not consequences of formal rules: comments on Keating's paper
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
19 - Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 February 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Where phonology and phonetics intersect: the case of Hausa intonation
- 3 Metrical representation of pitch register
- 4 The status of register in intonation theory: comments on the papers by Ladd and by Inkelas and Leben
- 5 The timing of prenuclear high accents in English
- 6 Alignment and composition of tonal accents: comments on Silverman and Pierrehumberf's paper
- 7 Macro and micro F0 in the synthesis of intonation
- 8 The separation of prosodies: comments on Kohler's paper
- 9 Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency
- 10 On the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 11 Lengthenings and the nature of prosodic constituency: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 12 From performance to phonology: comments on Beckman and Edwards's paper
- 13 The Delta programming language: an integrated approach to nonlinear phonology, phonetics, and speech synthesis
- 14 The phonetics and phonology of aspects of assimilation
- 15 On the value of reductionism and formal explicitness in phonological models: comments on Ohala's paper
- 16 A response to Pierrehumbert's commentary
- 17 The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification
- 18 Demisyllables as sets of features: comments on Clements's paper
- 19 Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech
- 20 Toward a model of articulatory control: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 21 Gestures and autosegments: comments on Browman and Goldstein's paper
- 22 On dividing phonetics and phonology: comments on the papers by Clements and by Browman and Goldstein
- 23 Articulatory binding
- 24 The generality of articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 25 On articulatory binding: comments on Kingston's paper
- 26 The window model of coarticulation: articulatory evidence
- 27 Some factors influencing the precision required for articulatory targets: comments on Keating's paper
- 28 Some regularities in speech are not consequences of formal rules: comments on Keating's paper
- Index of names
- Index of subjects
Summary
Introduction
We have recently begun a research program with the goal of providing explicit, formal representations of articulatory organization appropriate for use as phonological representations (Browman and Goldstein 1986; Goldstein and Browman 1986). The basic assumption underlying this research program is that much phonological organization arises from constraints imposed by physical systems. This is of course a common assumption with respect to the elements – features – used in phonological description; it is not such a common assumption, at least in recent years, with respect to the organization of phonological structures. In our view, phonological structure is an interaction of acoustic, articulatory, and other (e.g. psychological and/or purely linguistic) organizations. We are focusing on articulatory organization because we believe that the inherently multidimensional nature of articulation can explain a number of phonological phenomena, particularly those that involve overlapping articulatory gestures. Thus, we represent linguistic structures in terms of coordinated articulatory movements, called gestures, that are themselves organized into a gestural score that resembles an autosegmental representation.
In order to provide an explicit and testable formulation of these structures, we are developing a computational model in conjunction with our colleagues Elliot Saltzman and Phil Rubin at Haskins Laboratories (Browman, Goldstein, Kelso, Rubin and Saltzman 1984; Browman, Goldstein, Saltzman, and Smith 1986). Figure 19.1 displays a schematic outline of this model, which generates speech from symbolic input.
As can be seen from the number of submodels in the figure, gestures are relatively abstract. Even articulatory trajectories are one step more abstract than the output speech signal – they serve as input to the vocal tract model (Rubin, Baer, and Mermelstein 1981), which generates an acoustic signal.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Papers in Laboratory Phonology , pp. 341 - 376Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1990
- 183
- Cited by