critiques of speech as nonphysical

[Dan Parvaz]

I agree with Karen. Articulatory phonology (also known as gestural phonology) does take seriously the notion that "the machine" can be shown to account for a lot of phenomena usually attributed to abstract representation. Here's a some more material along the same vein (in BibTeX format):

@incollection{Browmanandgoldstein:1990,
 author = {Catherine P. Browman and Louis Goldstein},
 editor = {J. Kingston and M. E. Beckman},
 title = {Tiers in Articulatory Phonology, with some Implications for Casual Speech},
 booktitle = {Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech},
 publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
 pages = {341--376},
 year = 1990,
}

@article{Saltzmanandmunhall:1989,
 author = {Elliot L. Saltzman and Kevin G. Munhall},
 title = {A Dynamical Approach to Gestural Patterning in Speech Production},
 journal = {Ecological Psychology},
 volume = {1.4},
 pages = {332--382},
 year = 1989,
}

@incollection{Saltzman:1986,
 author = {Elliot Saltzman},
 title = {Task dynamic coordination of the speech articulators: a preliminary report},
 editor = {H Heuer and C. Fromm},
 booktitle = {Experimental Brain Research},
 series = {Series 15},
 address = {New York},
 publisher = {Springer-Verlag},
 pages = {129--144},
 year = 1986},
}

@incollection{Browmanandgoldstein:1995,
 author = {Catherine P. Browman and Louis Goldstein},
 editor = {R. Port and T. van Gelder},
 title = {Dynamics and Articulatory Phonology},
 booktitle = {Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition},
 publisher = {MIT Press},
 address = {Cambridge, MA},
 pages = {175--193},
 year = 1995,
}

@article{Browmanandgoldstein:1998,
 author = {Catherine P. Browman and Louis Goldstein},
 title = {Competing constraints on intergestural coordination and self-organizat
ion of phonological structures},
 journal = {Bulletin de la Communication Parl\'{e}e},
 year = 1998,
}

The Saltzman material is fairly technical, and gives the "engineering" underpinnings of this kind of phonology. Linguists don't have to do the math (lots of linear algebra, differential equations, etc.) to do articulatory phonology, but it's nice to know that someone did do the heavy lifting.

The next couple of papers are samples of work by Bjorn Lindblom, who works in a completely different phonetic theory (Hyperspeech & Hypospeech theory). He wanted (in part) to show how phonetic inventories emerge, and he does so in part by appeal to the relative effort needed to produce and transition between various sounds. The going is still somewhat mathematical (although in my mind a great deal less so than Saltzman), but it does show that we learn an awful lot about language by an appeal to the physical system.

@incollection{Lindblom:1990,
 author = {Bj{\"o}rn Lindblom},
 editor = {W. J. Hardcastle and A. Marchal},
 title = {Explaining Phonetic Variation: A Sketch of the {H\&H} Theory},
 booktitle = {Speech Production and Speech Modelling},
 publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
 pages = {403--439},
 year = 1990,
}

@article{Lindblom:1990b,
 author = {Bj{\"o}rn Lindblom},
 title = {Models of phonetic variation and selection},
 journal = {Phonetic Experimental Research},
 volume = {IX},
 pages = {65--100},
 year = 1990,
}

Still don't think speech is physical? Talk to a speech/langauge pathologist. :-)

Cheers,

Dan.

On Monday, March 15, 2004, at 09:02AM, Karen Emmorey <emmorey at SALK.EDU> wrote:

>
><<Original Attached>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20040316/76abb4e2/attachment.htm>