Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:13:01.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of region of origin and geographic mobility on perceptual dialect categorization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2006

Cynthia G. Clopper  and
David B. Pisoni
Cynthia G. Clopper
Affiliation:
Indiana University
David B. Pisoni
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent findings have shown that listeners' region of origin and geographic mobility affect their perception of dialect-specific properties of speech in vowel identification and dialect categorization tasks. The present study examined the perceptual dialect classification performance of four groups of listeners using a six-alternative forced-choice categorization task. The residential history of the listeners was manipulated so that the four groups of listeners differed in terms of region of origin (Northern or Midland United States) and geographic mobility (Mobile or Non-Mobile). Although residential history did not significantly affect accuracy in the categorization task, both region of origin and geographic mobility were found to affect the underlying perceptual similarity structure of the different regional varieties. Geographically local dialects tended to be confused more often than nonlocal dialects, although this effect was attenuated by geographic mobility.This work was supported by NIH NIDCD T32 Training Grant DC00012 and NIH NIDCD R01 Research Grant DC0111 to Indiana University. The authors would like to thank Robert Nosofsky for his assistance with the statistical analyses. The first author (C. G. Clopper) is now at the Department of Linguistics, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , July 2006 , pp. 193 - 221
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

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

REFERENCES

Barsalou, Lawrence W. (1985). Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11:629–654.Google Scholar
Boberg, Charles. (2001). The phonological status of Western New England. American Speech 76:3–29.Google Scholar
Carver, Craig M. (1987). American regional dialects: A word geography. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Clopper, Cynthia G. (2004). Linguistic experience and the perceptual classification of dialect variation. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
Clopper, Cynthia G., Conrey, Brianna L., & Pisoni, David B. (2005). Effects of talker gender on dialect categorization. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 24:182–206.Google Scholar
Clopper, Cynthia G., & Pisoni, David B. (2004a). Homebodies and army brats: Some effects of early linguistic experience and residential history on dialect categorization. Language Variation and Change 16:31–48.Google Scholar
Clopper, Cynthia G., & Pisoni, David B. (2004b). Some acoustic cues for the perceptual categorization of American English regional dialects. Journal of Phonetics 32:111–140.Google Scholar
Clopper, Cynthia G., Pisoni, David B., & de Jong, Kenneth. (2005). Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118:1661–1676.Google Scholar
Corter, James E. (1982). ADDTREE/P: A PASCAL program for fitting additive trees based on Sattath and Tversky's ADDTREE algorithm. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation 14:353–354.Google Scholar
Evans, Bronwen G., & Iverson, Paul. (2004). Vowel normalization for accent: An investigation of best exemplar locations in northern and southern British English sentences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 115:352–361.Google Scholar
Fisher, William M., Doddington, George R., & Goudie-Marshall, Kathleen M. (1986). The DARPA speech recognition research database: Specification and status. In Proceedings of the DARPA speech recognition workshop. 93–99.
Kalikow, D. N., Stevens, K. N., & Elliott, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61:1337–1351.Google Scholar
Krapp, George P. (1925). The English language in America. New York: Frederick Ungar.
Labov, William. (1994). Principles of linguistic change: Internal factors. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Labov, William. (1998). The three dialects of English. In M. D. Linn (ed.), Handbook of dialects and language variation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 39–81.
Labov, William, & Ash, Sharon. (1997). Understanding Birmingham. In C. Bernstein, T. Nunnally, & R. Sabino (eds.), Language variety in the South revisited. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. 508–573.
Labov, William, Ash, Sharon, & Boberg, Charles. (2005). Atlas of North American English. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Luce, R. Duncan. (1963). Detection and recognition. In R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, & E. Galanter (eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology. New York: Wiley. 103–189.
Mason, H. M. (1946). Understandability of speech in noise as affected by region of origin of speaker and listener. Speech Monographs 13(2):54–58.Google Scholar
McDavid, Raven I., Jr. (1958). The dialects of American English. In W. N. Francis (ed.), The structure of American English. New York: Ronald Press. 480–543.
Niedzielski, Nancy. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18:62–85.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, Robert M. (1985). Overall similarity and the identification of separable-dimension stimuli: A choice-model analysis. Perception and Psychophysics 38:415–432.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, Robert M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115:39–57.Google Scholar
Preston, Dennis R. (1993). Folk dialectology. In D. R. Preston (ed.), American dialect research. Philadelphia: Benjamins. 333–378.
Preston, Dennis R. (2002). The social interface in the perception and production of Japanese vowel devoicing: It's not just your brain that's connected to your ear. Paper presented at the 9th Biennial Rice University Symposium on Linguistics: Speech Perception in Context, Houston, TX.
Rakerd, Brad, & Plichta, Bartek. (2003). More on perceptions of /[Cursive A]/ fronting. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation 32, Philadelphia, PA.
Ryan, Ellen B., & Giles, Howard. (1982). Attitudes towards language variation. London: Edward Arnold.
Sattath, Shmuel, & Tversky, Amos. (1977). Additive similarity trees. Psychometrika 42:319–345.Google Scholar
Shepard, Roger N. (1957). Stimulus and response generalization: A stochastic model relating generalization to distance in psychological space. Psychometrika 22:325–345.Google Scholar
Smith, J. E. K. (1980). Models of identification. In R. Nickerson (ed.), Attention and performance VIII. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 129–158.
Thomas, Erik R. (2001). An acoustic analysis of vowel variation in New World English. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Thomas, Erik R. (2002). Sociophonetic applications of speech perception experiments. American Speech 77:115–147.Google Scholar
Tice, R., & Carrell, T. (1998). Level16 (Version 2.0.3) [Computer Software]. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska.
Tversky, Amos. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84:327–352.Google Scholar
Williams, Angie, Garrett, Peter, & Coupland, Nikolas. (1999). Dialect recognition. In D. R. Preston (ed.), Handbook of perceptual dialectology. Philadelphia: Benjamins. 345–358.
Willis, Clodius. (1972). Perception of vowel phonemes in Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada, and Buffalo, New York: An application of synthetic vowel categorization tests to dialectology. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 15:246–255.Google Scholar