Wednesday, 12 March 2014

Born with an ear for accents


Are expert phoneticians born with particular predispositions, or are they made through experience? 

"wi ɪɡzæmɪn breɪn strʌkʧər ɪn ekspɜːʔ fəʊnətɪʃn̩z | ɪndɪvɪdʒuəlz | hu ə haɪli treɪn tu ænəlaɪz ən trænskraɪb spiːʧ || wi faʊnd ə pɒzətɪv kɒrəleɪʃn̩ bətwiːn ðə saɪz əv left pɑːz əʊpɜːkjəlɛːrɪs | ən jɪəz əv fənetɪk trænskrɪpʃn̩ treɪnɪŋ ɪkspɪːriənʦ | ɪləstreɪtɪŋ haʊ lɜːnɪŋ meɪ əfekt breɪn strʌkʧə || fəʊnətɪʃn̩z wər ɔːsəʊ mɔː laɪkli tə hæv mʌltɪpl̩ | ɔː splɪt left trænzvɜːs ʤaɪraɪ ɪn ði ɔːdətri kɔːteks ðn̩ kəntrɒʊlz | ən ði əmaʊnt əv fənetɪk trænskrɪpʃn̩ treɪnɪŋ dɪd nɒʔ prɪdɪkt ɔːdətri kɔːteks mɔːfɒləʤi || ðə trænzvɜːs ʤaɪraɪ ə θɔːʔ tə bi ɪstæblɪʃt ɪn juːtərəʊ || ɑː rəzʌlʦ ðʌs səʤest ðəʔ ðɪs ɡrəʊs mɔːfəlɒʤɪkl̩ dɪfrənʦ meɪ əv ɪɡzɪstɪd bɪfɔː ði ɒnset əv fənetɪk treɪnɪŋ | ən ðət ɪʦ prezn̩ʦ kənfɜːz ən ədvɑːntɪʤ əv səfɪʃn̩ mæɡnəʧuːd tu əfekt kərɪː ʧɔɪsɪz || ðiːz rəzʌlʦ səʤest kɒmpləmentri ɪnflʊənʦɪz əv dəmeɪn spəsɪfɪk priːdɪspəzɪʃn̩z ən ɪkspɪːriənʦ dɪpendənt breɪn mæliəbɪləti | ɪnflʊənʦɪz ðəʔ laɪkli ɪntərækt ɪn dɪtɜːmɪnɪŋ nɒʔ əʊni haʊ ɪkspɪːriənʦ ʃeɪps ðə hjuːmən breɪn | bət ɔːsəʊ | waɪ sʌm ɪndɪvɪdʒuəlz bəkʌm ɪŋɡeɪʤ baɪ sɜːʔn̩ fiːlʣ əv ekspətiːz ||"

(For the full text in orthography see Golestani, Price, & Scott, The Journal of Neuroscience, 16 March 2011)
Posted by at

7 comments:

  1. Anonymous14 March 2014 at 21:27

    What's the point in merely reporting a broad phonemic transcription from a text published elsewhere?
    You could have at least transcribed the whole text in an accurate phonetic transcription by indicating corrects allophones of every phoneme which undoubtedly occur in connected speech.
    Last but not least, this transcription clearly lacks of a proper suprasegmental analysis.
    Finally, I've never happen to hear bizarre pronunciations such as /əʊni/ and /ɔːsəʊ/ in a neutral (alleged) southern british accent; I need giving answers !

    Best Regards

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alex Rotatori15 March 2014 at 09:54

      You're so arrogant and cocky that you deserve no explanations at all!

      \/ɔːsəʊ, I'd like to know who I'm talking to!

      Delete
    2. john maidment15 March 2014 at 12:41

      Exactly, Alex.

      To the "arrogant" and "cocky" you might well have added "wrong".

      Delete
  2. Anonymous16 March 2014 at 00:17

    Ok, let us suppose I am cocky, arrogant and wrong but your reply still lacks of a sensible (phonetically speaking) answer.
    However, I am afraid I will not be given any satisfactory one, maybe the only answer I can infer is that you are not simply able to give me (and people who are really committed to phonetics) a proper one.


    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown16 March 2014 at 03:54

    “Answering Anonymous” (80-90 words):

    1) As far as transcriptions go, the broader the clearer. And in any case, the advanced student will be perfectly able to recognize any hidden allophones in the text. (Also, there are some people who regard excessive accuracy as pedantic).
    2) A text published elsewhere will probably be more “natural” than a synthesized one.
    3) The text includes IP marking; it’s up to the reader to sing it as she/he thinks fit (we don’t want to annoy broadcasters, do we?).
    4) As to [əʊni] and [ɔːsəʊ], please consult a dictionary.

    Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous21 March 2014 at 18:24

    Who uses the L-less pronunciations of `only' and `also', anyway? I've never heard them (just curious).

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)