Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:33:45.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Temporal-based acoustic-phonetic patterns in read speech: some evidence for speaker sex differences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2009

Sandra P. Whiteside
Sandra P. Whiteside
Affiliation:
Department of Human Communication Sciences, University of Sheffield, 18 Claremont Crescent, Sheffield S10 2TA, UK e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The perception of speaker sex depends on the listener's integration of a complex range of factors. These may relate, for example, to the style of delivery, the use of particular language, pronunciation (Trudgill, 1983; Smith, 1979), the use of particular intonation patterns (McConnell-Ginet, 1983) and the perceived pitch of the speaker (Aronovitch, 1976, Elyan, 1978; Lass et al., 1976). Some acoustic-phonetic investigations have explored through instrumental analysis how speaker sex differences are perceived. These have shown that acoustic phonetic differences exist between the read speech of men and women speakers. It has been demonstrated that fundamental frequency differences exist between men and women, with men having on average, lower fundamental frequencies (Aronovitch, 1976; Coleman, 1973a). This can be explained in part by their larger larynges. However it is also acknowledged that it is not a low overall average fundamental frequency alone that contributes to the perception of an adult male voice. Some evidence shows for example that use of a wider pitch range will contribute to the perception of femininity, even where the overall pitch is low (Terrango, 1966). In addition women have been found to have on average higher formant frequencies (Coleman, 1976; Henton, 1986; Peterson & Barney, 1952; Childers & Wu, 1991; Wu & Childers, 1991) as a result of the smaller vocal tract. Women have different glottal source characteristics (Karlsson, 1989) which are reflected in the filter characteristics of the speech signal (Klatt & Klatt, 1990). There is also some evidence to suggest that other speaker sex differences exist in the temporal domain. Byrd (1992) found differences between men and women speakers in speaking rate in read speech in American English in the TIMIT database. Byrd states that under the recording conditions used for the TIMIT database, women spoke appreciably more slowly than the men and that men tended to reduce vowels to schwa ([ə]) more often than the women. Byrd also found that female speakers in the TIMIT database released stops in sentence-final position more frequently and produced more glottal stops than male speakers. All these findings were statistically significant.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , June 1996 , pp. 23 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Journal of the International Phonetic Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aronovitch, C. D. (1976). The voice of personality: stereotyped judgements and their relation to voice quality and sex of speaker. Journal of Social Psychology, 99, 207–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Byrd, D. (1992). Preliminary results on speaker-dependent variation in the TIMIT database. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92(1), 593–596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Childers, D. G. & Wu, K. (1991). Gender recognition from speech. Part II: Fine analysis, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 90(4), 1841–1856.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coleman, R. O. (1971). Male and female voice quality and its relationship to vowel formant frequencies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 14, 565–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coleman, R. O. (1973a). Speaker identification in the absence of intersubject differences in glottal source characteristics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 53, 1741–1743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coleman, R. O. (1973b). A comparison of the contributions of two vocal characteristics to the perception of maleness and femaleness in the voice. Speech Transmission Laboratory-Quarterly Progress and Status Report, Royal Technical Institute, Stockholm, 2–3, 13–22.Google Scholar
Coleman, R. O. (1976). A comparison of two voice quality characteristics to the perception of maleness and femaleness in the voice, Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 19, 168–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elyan, O. (1978). Sex differences in speech style. Women Speaking, 4, 4–8.Google Scholar
Fant, G., Kruckenberg, A. & Nord, L. (1991). Prosodic and segmental speaker variations, Speech Communication, 10, 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henton, C. G. (1986). A comparative study of phonetic sex-specific differences across languages, DPhil Thesis, University of Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Karlsson, I. (1989). Dynamic voice source parameters in a female voice. Speech Transmission Laboratory-Quarterly Progress and Status Report, Royal Technical Institute, Stockholm, 1, 75–77.Google Scholar
Keller, E. (1992). Signal Analysis for Speech and Sound. InfoSignalTM Inc.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D. & Read, C. (1992) The Acoustic Analysis of Speech. London: Whurr.Google Scholar
Klatt, D. H. (1976). Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: acoustic and perceptual evidence, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 59, 1208–1221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klatt, D. H. & Klatt, L. C. (1990). Analysis, synthesis and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87(2), 820–857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lass, N. J., Hughes, K. R., Bowyer, M. D., Waters, L. T. & Bourne, V. T. (1976). Speaker Identification from voiced, whispered and isolated vowels, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 59, 675–678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindsey, G., Breen, A & Nevard, S. (1987). Spar's Archivable Actual-Word Databases, UCL Report on SPAR Project. University College, London, UK.Google Scholar
McConnel-Ginet, S. (1983). Intonation in a man's world, In Language, Gender and Society, edited by Thorne, B., Kramarae, C. & Henley, N.. London: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Mattingly, I. G. (1966). Speaker Variation and Vocal Tract Size, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 39, S1219A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, J. D., Gerstman, L. J., Liberman, A. M., Delattre, P. C. & Cooper, F. S. (1957). Acoustic cues for the perception of initial /w. j, r, l/ in English, Word, 13, 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, G. E. & Barney, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in the study of vowels, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24, 175–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, P. J. (1978). An experiment study of some articulatory characteristics of glottalized English consonants, PhD Thesis. University of Reading, UK.Google Scholar
Slis, I.H. (1981b). The influence of the position of a stressed syllable on assimilation of voice, The Proceedings of The Institute of Phonetics of The Catholic University at Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 5, 160–176.Google Scholar
Slis, I. H. (1981c). Half a dozen influences on assimilation of voice in Dutch, The Proceedings of The Institute of Phonetics of The Catholic University at Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 5, 188–203.Google Scholar
Slis, I. H. (1981d). Reflections on a theoretical frame for the assimilation of voice._The Proceedings of The Institute of Phonetics of The Catholic University at Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 5, 204–215.Google Scholar
Smith, P. M. (1979). Sex markers in speech, In Social markers in speech, edited by Scherer, K. R. & Giles, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. (1992). You Just Don't Understand. London: Virago.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (1983). Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, K. AND Childers, D. G. (1991). Gender recognition from speech. Part I: Coarse analysis, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 90(4), 1828–1840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed