Assimilation violation and spoken-language processing: A supplementary report

Previous studies have shown that spoken-language processing is inhibited by violation of obligatory regressive assimilation. Weber (2001) replicated this inhibitory effect in a phoneme-monitoring study examining regressive place assimilation of nasals, but found facilitation for violation of progressive assimilation. German listeners detected the velar fricative [x] more quickly when fricative assimilation was violated (e.g., *[bIxt] or *[blInx@n]) than when no violation occurred (e.g., [baxt] or [blu:x@n]). It was argued that a combination of two factors caused facilitation:(1) progressive assimilation creates different restrictions for the monitoring target than regressive assimilation does, and (2) the sequences violating assimilation (e.g., *[Ix]) are novel for German listeners and therefore facilitate fricative detection (novel popout). The present study tested progressive assimilation violation in non-novel sequences using the palatal fricative [C]. Stimuli either violated fricative assimilation (e.g., *[ba:C@l ]) or did not (e.g., [bi: C@l ]). This manipulation does not create novel sequences: sequences like *[a:C] can occur across word boundaries, while *[Ix] cannot. No facilitation was found. However, violation also did not significantly inhibit processing. The results confirm that facilitation depends on the combination of progressive assimilation with novelty of the sequence

Perceptual effects of assimilation-induced violation of final devoicing in Dutch

Item does not contain fulltex

Perceptual effects of assimilation-induced violation of final devoicing in Dutch

Voice assimilation in Dutch is an optional phonological rule which changes the surface forms of words and in doing so may 'violate the otherwise obligatory phonological rule of syllable-final devoicing. We report two experiments examining the influence of voice assimilation on phoneme processing in lexical compound words and in noun-verb phrases. Processing was not irnpaired in appropriate assimilation contexts across rnorpheme boundaries, but was impaired when devoicing was violated (a) in an inappropriate (non-assimlilatory) context, or (b) across a syntactic boundary