2004
Volume 77, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0039-8691
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1214

Abstract

Abstract

The way sociolinguistic research tends to conceptualize how social meaning is perceived is seemingly at odds with how it is conceptualized in the main cognitive speech processing theory used in sociolinguistic processing research: exemplar theory. The sociolinguistic research more broadly often focuses on how sub-lexical, often segmental variants are perceived and used to convey social meanings, while exemplar theory posits that social meaning is processed as a part of the detail in the highly detailed episodic memory traces of words, called ‘exemplars’. More recent iterations of exemplar theory, however, have opened up the possibility that representations of different sizes and levels of detail may also be used in speech processing – but it is still unclear which of these are in fact used to process social meaning. This paper presents findings from two matched accent recognition experiments, which show that listeners are able to recognize three accents (General American English, Standard Southern British English, and Yorkshire English) even in non-words, but that they perform significantly better in real words, especially if they have extensive experience with the accent they hear. This provides evidence that both sub-lexical and lexical representations play a role in sociolinguistic processing, but that lexical representations are dominant.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TET2025.1.005.VRIE
2025-03-01
2025-04-09
The full text of this item is not currently available.

References

  1. Anwyl-Irvine, Alexander L., JessicaMassonnié, AdamFlitton, NatashaKirkham, and Jo K.Evershed. 2019. “Gorilla in Our Midst: An Online Behavioral Experiment Builder.”Behavior Research Methods.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Austen, Martha. 2020. “The Role of Listener Experience in Perception of Conditioned Dialect Variation.” PhD Thesis, The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bates, Douglas, MartinMächler, BenBolker, and SteveWalker. 2015. “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using Lme4.”arXiv.Org.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bjelaković, Andrej. 2017. “The Vowels of Contemporary RP: Vowel Formant Measurements for BBC Newsreaders.”English Language & Linguistics21 (3): 501–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bradlow, Ann R., Lynne C.Nygaard, and David B.Pisoni. 1999. “Effects of Talker, Rate, and Amplitude Variation on Recognition Memory for Spoken Words.”Perception & Psychophysics61 (2): 206–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, Joan. 2002. “Phonological Evidence for Exemplar Storage of Multiword Sequences.”Studies in Second Language Acquisition24 (2): 215–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cai, Zhenguang G., Rebecca A.Gilbert, Matthew H.Davis, M.Gareth Gaskell, LaurenFarrar, SarahAdler, and Jennifer M.Rodd. 2017. “Accent Modulates Access to Word Meaning: Evidence for a Speaker-Model Account of Spoken Word Recognition.”Cognitive Psychology98:73–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. 2005. “Listener Perceptions of Sociolinguistic Variables: The Case of (ING).” PhD Thesis, Stanford University.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. 2021. “The Cognitive Structure Behind Indexicality: Correlations in Tasks Linking /s/ Variation and Masculinity.” In Social Meaning and Linguistic Variation, edited by LaurenHall-Lew, EmmaMoore, and RobertPodesva. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Clopper, Cynthia G.2004. “Linguistic Experience and the Perceptual Classification of Dialect Variation.” PhD Thesis, Indiana University.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cooper, Paul. 2017. “‘Turtely Amazing’. The Enregistrement of ‘Yorkshire’ Dialect and the Possibility of GOAT Fronting as a Newly Enregistred Feature.” In Language and a Sense of Place: Studies in Language and Region, edited by ChrisMontgomery and EmmaMoore, 348–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Coupland, Nikolas, and HywelBishop. 2007. “Ideologised Values for British Accents.”Journal of Sociolinguistics11 (1): 74–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cutler, Anne. 2008. “The Abstract Representations in Speech Processing.”The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology61 (11): 1601–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Docherty, Gerard J., and PaulFoulkes. 2014. “An Evaluation of Usage-Based Approaches to the Modelling of Sociophonetic Variability.”Lingua142:42–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. D’Onofrio, Annette. 2015. “Perceiving Personae: Effects of Social Information on Perceptions of TRAP-Backing.”University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics21 (2).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Drager, Katie. 2010. “Sociophonetic Variation in Speech Perception.”Language and Linguistics Compass4 (7): 473–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Eckert, Penelope. 2008. “Variation and the Indexical Field.”Journal of Sociolinguistics12 (4): 453–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Eckert, Penelope. 2012. “Three Waves of Variation Study: The Emergence of Meaning in the Study of Sociolinguistic Variation.”Annual Review of Anthropology41:87–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Eisner, Frank, and James M.McQueen. 2006. “Perceptual Learning in Speech: Stability over Time.”The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America119 (4): 1950–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Ernestus, Mirjam. 2014. “Acoustic Reduction and the Roles of Abstractions and Exemplars in Speech Processing.”Lingua142:27–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Finnegan, Katie. 2015. “Sheffield.” In Researching Northern English, edited by RaymondHickey, 227–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Foulkes, Paul, and GerardDocherty. 2006. “The Social Life of Phonetics and Phonology.”Journal of Phonetics34 (4): 409–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. German, James S., KatyCarlson, and Janet B.Pierrehumbert. 2013. “Reassignment of Consonant Allophones in Rapid Dialect Acquisition.”Journal of Phonetics41 (3): 228–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Goldinger, Stephen D.1996. “Words and Voices: Episodic Traces in Spoken Word Identification and Recognition Memory.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition22 (5): 1166–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Goldinger, Stephen D.1998. “Echoes of Echoes? An Episodic Theory of Lexical Access.”Psychological Review105 (2): 251–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Goldinger, Stephen D.2007. “A Complementary-Systems Approach to Abstract and Episodic Speech Perception.” In Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 49–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Goldinger, Stephen D., David B.Pisoni, and John S.Logan. 1991. “On the Nature of Talker Variability Effects on Recall of Spoken Word Lists.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition17 (1): 152–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Grossberg, Stephen, and GregoryStone. 1986. “Neural Dynamics of Attention Switching and Temporal-Order Information in Short-Term Memory.”Memory & Cognition14 (6): 451–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gupta, Anthea Fraser. 2005. “Baths and Becks.”English Today21 (1): 21–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hall-Lew, Lauren, EmmaMoore, and RobertPodesva. 2021. Social Meaning and Linguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Hay, Jennifer. 2018. “Sociophonetics: The Role of Words, the Role of Context, and the Role of Words in Context.”Topics in Cognitive Science10 (4): 696–706.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Hay, Jennifer, AaronNolan, and KatieDrager. 2006. “From Fush to Feesh: Exemplar Priming in Speech Perception.”The Linguistic Review23 (3): 351–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Holcomb, Phillip J., and Helen J.Neville. 1990. “Auditory and Visual Semantic Priming in Lexical Decision: A Comparison Using Event-Related Brain Potentials.”Language and Cognitive Processes5 (4): 281–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Hughes, Arthur, PeterTrudgill, and DominicWatt. 2012. English Accents and Dialects: An Introduction to Social and Regional Varieties of English in the British Isles. 5th ed. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Johnson, Keith. 2006. “Resonance in an Exemplar-Based Lexicon: The Emergence of Social Identity and Phonology.”Journal of Phonetics34 (4): 485–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Khattab, Ghada. 2007. “Variation in Vowel Production by English-Arabic Bilinguals.”Laboratory Phonology9:383–410.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kim, Jonny. 2016. “Perceptual Associations between Words and Speaker Age.”Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology7 (1).
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Kraljic, Tanya, and Arthur G.Samuel. 2006. “Generalization in Perceptual Learning for Speech.”Psychonomic Bulletin & Review13 (2): 262–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lavan, Nadine, SarahKnight, and CarolynMcGettigan. 2019. “Listeners Form Average-Based Representations of Individual Voice Identities.”Nature Communications10 (1): 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lawrence, D.2014. “Phonetic Variation as a Cue to Regional Identity: An Experimental Approach.” In Proceedings of the Second Postgraduate and Academic Researchers in Linguistics at York (PARLAY 2014) Conference, 42–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Leemann, Adrian, Marie-JoséKolly, and DavidBritain. 2018. “The English Dialects App: The Creation of a Crowdsourced Dialect Corpus.”Ampersand5:1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. McLennan, Conor T., and Paul A.Luce. 2005. “Examining the Time Course of Indexical Specificity Effects in Spoken Word Recognition.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition31 (2): 306–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. McLennan, Conor T., Paul A.Luce, and JanCharles-Luce. 2003. “Representation of Lexical Form.”Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory & Cognition29 (4): 539–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Moore, Emma, and RobertPodesva. 2009. “Style, Indexicality, and the Social Meaning of Tag Questions.”Language in Society38 (4): 447–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Mugglestone, Lynda. 2003. Talking Proper: The Rise of Accent as Social Symbol. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Norris, Dennis, James M.McQueen, and AnneCutler. 2003. “Perceptual Learning in Speech.”Cognitive Psychology47 (2): 204–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Nygaard, Lynne C., Mitchell S.Sommers, and David B.Pisoni. 1994. “Speech Perception as a Talker-Contignent Process.”Psychological Science5 (1): 42–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Pierrehumbert, Janet B.2001. “Exemplar Dynamics: Word Frequency, Lenition and Contrast.”Typological Studies in Language45:137–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Pierrehumbert, Janet B.2002. “Word-Specific Phonetics.” In Laboratory Phonology7, edited by CarlosGussenhoven and NatashaWarner, 101–40. De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Pierrehumbert, Janet B.2016. “Phonological Representation: Beyond Abstract versus Episodic.”Annual Review of Linguistics2:33–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Pinget, Anne-France, MarjoleinRotteveel, and HansVan de Velde. 2014. “Standaardnederlands Met Een Accent. Herkenning En Evaluatie van Regionaal Gekleurd Standaardnederlands in Nederland.”Nederlandse Taalkunde19 (1): 3–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Plichta, Bartlomiej, and Dennis R.Preston. 2005. “The/Ay/s Have It. The Perception of/Ay/as a North-South Stereotype in United States English.”Acta Linguistica Hafniensia37 (1): 107–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Podesva, Robert. 2007. “Phonation Type as a Stylistic Variable: The Use of Falsetto in Constructing a Persona.”Journal of Sociolinguistics11 (4): 478–504.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. R Core Team. 2013. “R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.”
  55. Starr, Rebecca Lurie. 2021. “Changing Language, Changing Character Types.” In Social Meaning and Linguistic Variation, edited by LaurenHall-Lew, EmmaMoore, and RobertPodesva. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Staum Casasanto, Laura. 2008. “Does Social Information Influence Sentence Processing?” In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Vol. 30.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Stoddart, Jana, CliveUpton, and JohnDA Widdowson. 1999. “Sheffield Dialect in the 1990s: Revisiting the Concept of NORMs.” In Urban Voices: Accent Studies in the British Isles, edited by PaulFoulkes and GerardDocherty, 72–89. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Sumner, Meghan, and Arthur G.Samuel. 2009. “The Effect of Experience on the Perception and Representation of Dialect Variants.”Journal of Memory and Language60 (4): 487–501.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Svartvik, Jan, and GeoffreyLeech. 2006. “Linguistic Change in Progress: Back to the Inner Circle.” In English, 206–21. Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Trudgill, Peter. 1990. The Dialects of England. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Trudgill, Peter, and JeanHannah. 2002. International English. A Guide to the Varieties of Standard English. 4th ed. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Vitevitch, Michael S., and Paul A.Luce. 1998. “When Words Compete: Levels of Processing in Perception of Spoken Words.”Psychological Science9 (4): 325–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Voeten, Cesko C.2019. “Using ‘Buildmer’ to Automatically Find & Compare Maximal (Mixed) Models.”R package, version 2.11.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Walker, Abby, and JenHay. 2011. “Congruence between ‘Word Age’ and ‘Voice Age’ Facilitates Lexical Access.”Laboratory Phonology2 (1): 219–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Walsh, Michael, BerndMöbius, TravisWade, and HinrichSchütze. 2010. “Multilevel Exemplar Theory.”Cognitive Science34 (4): 537–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Watt, Dominic, and JenniferSmith. 2005. “Language Change.” In Clinical Sociolinguistics, edited by M.J.Ball, 36:101–19. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Watt, Dominic, and JenniferTillotson. 2001. “A Spectrographic Analysis of Vowel Fronting in Bradford English.”English World-Wide22 (2): 269–303.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Wells, John C.1982. Accents of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Williams, Daniel, and PaolaEscudero. 2014. “A Cross-Dialectal Acoustic Comparison of Vowels in Northern and Southern British English.”The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America136 (5): 2751–61.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/TET2025.1.005.VRIE
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TET2025.1.005.VRIE
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error