Phonological regularity, perceptual biases, and the role of phonotactics in speech error analysis.

Clicks: 337
ID: 32205
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #2 of 4 articles by views in wiley interdisciplinary reviews cognitive science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Speech errors involving manipulations of sounds tend to be phonologically regular in the sense that they obey the phonotactic rules of well-formed words. We review the empirical evidence for phonological regularity in prior research, including both categorical assessments of words and regularity at the granular level involving specific segments and contexts. Since the reporting of regularity is affected by human perceptual biases, we also document this regularity in a new data set of 2,228 sublexical errors that was collected using methods that are demonstrably less prone to bias. These facts validate the claim that sound errors are overwhelmingly regular, but the new evidence suggests speech errors admit more phonologically ill-formed words than previously thought. Detailed facts of the phonological structure of errors, including this revised standard, are then related to model assumptions in contemporary theories of phonological encoding. This article is categorized under: Linguistics > Linguistic Theory Linguistics > Computational Models of Language Psychology > Language.
Reference Key
alderete2018phonologicalwiley Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Alderete, John;Tupper, Paul;
Journal wiley interdisciplinary reviews cognitive science
Year 2018
DOI
10.1002/wcs.1466
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.