Search Results
Abstract
Human speech shows an unparalleled richness in geographic variation. However, few attempts have been made to understand this linguistic diversity from an evolutionary and comparative framework. Here, we a) review extensively what is known about geographic variation of acoustic signals in terrestrial mammals, using common terminology adopted from linguistics to define different forms of variation (i.e. accents and dialects), and b) examine which factors may determine this variation (i.e. genetic, environmental and/or social). Heretofore, terminology has been used inconsistently within and across taxa, and geographic variation among terrestrial mammals has never been defined as in human speech. Our results show that accents, phonologically different varieties, occur widely in terrestrial mammals. Conversely, dialects, lexically and phonologically different varieties, have only been documented thus far in great white-lined bats, red deer, chimpanzees and orangutans. Although relatively rare among terrestrial mammals, dialects are thus not unique to humans. This finding also implies that such species possess the capacity for acoustic learning. Within primates, the two great apes showing dialects are those who also show extensive cultures in the wild, suggesting that, in hominoids, intricacy of acoustic geographic variation is potentially associated with cultural complexity; namely, both have derived from selection increasingly favoring social learning across varied contexts, including the acoustic domain.
This paper presents a proposal for the implementation of auditory specification within structures inspired by GP 2.0 (Kaye-Pöchtrager 2009). In the theory, constituent structure itself is a phonetic object built down from Onset structure. This strategy allows for a faithful representation of the acoustic signal and an insightful model of consonant strength and coda formation. Perceptual considerations suggest that a privative approach to auditory representation can account for phonological behavior, as well as enable us to form testable hypotheses for experimental phonetic study.
Abstract
When communicating with infants, caregivers often modulate their speech in an effort to make their communicative and informative intentions more clear. Infant-directed (ID) speech differs acoustically from adult-directed (AD) speech, and systematically varies according to different kinds of intentions. This way of speaking to infants is thought to be a species-specific adaptation, as research has documented highly similar patterns in ID speech across a variety of cultures. A recent study has also shown that people from an indigenous non-Western culture (Shuar of Amazonian Ecuador) can reliably discriminate ID speech from AD speech in a language they do not speak, and distinguish between four different intention categories (prohibition, attention, comfort, and approval). The current research attempted to replicate this finding in a traditional African population, the Turkana of northwestern Kenya. In three experiments, we found that Turkana adults were able to discriminate between ID and AD speech produced in English by American mothers, and they could also distinguish between several intention categories in both ID and AD speech. Signal detection analysis revealed that ID speech was marginally more discriminable than AD speech, but overall rate of intention recognition was similar across speech types. These results partially support the hypothesis that ID speech is universally recognizable due to the formfunction relationship between acoustic signals and their communicative purpose, but there were differences in performance between Turkana and Shuar that merit further investigation.
Making sense of the world
A review of Sensory Ecology, Behaviour and Evolution by Martin Stevens. Oxford University Press (2013), 264 pages. ISBN: 978-0-199-60178-3
Pollack 2000 Who, what, where? Recognition and localization of acoustic signals by insects Current opinion in neurobiology 10 763 7
. [5] Černý M. , Mazal P. , Filípek J. ( 2008 ), Sensing of the acoustic signal by waveguides . Acta Univ. Agric. et Silvic. Mendel. Brun. , LVI ( 1 ), 43 – 54
sounds better than any technique alone in the case of different crispy food materials. Two main approaches are used to test the fracture's sound, either the amplitude-time curve of the acoustic signal ( Jakubczyk et al., 2017, Gondek et al., 2013
Hammersmidt, K. and Todt, D. (1995): Individual differences in vocalizations of young barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus): A multi-parametric analysis to identify critical cues in acoustic signalling. Behaviour 132 :381
“honesty”: Vertebrate vocal production and the evolution of acoustic signals A. M. Simmons R. R. Fay A. N. Popper
well as the confidentiality of meetings are at stake. For example, in InterpretBank's workflow “the acoustic signal that the interpreter receives in the headset is sent to the sound card of the computer equipped with the ASR-CAI tool. The audio signal
standard setup values recommended by the manufacturer. Sealing time ST, the end of which is indicated by an acoustic signal, was measured with a digital stopwatch and recorded (n sum = 139, detailed later). Thermal mapping A NEC Thermo Tracer TH7700
