Recognizing Speech in a Novel Accent: The Motor Theory of Speech Perception Reframed

The motor theory of speech perception holds that we perceive the speech of another in terms of a motor representation of that speech. However, when we have learned to recognize a foreign accent, it seems plausible that recognition of a word rarely involves reconstruction of the speech gestures of the speaker rather than the listener. To better assess the motor theory and this observation, we proceed in three stages. Part 1 places the motor theory of speech perception in a larger framework based on our earlier models of the adaptive formation of mirror neurons for grasping, and for viewing extensions of that mirror system as part of a larger system for neuro-linguistic processing, augmented by the present consideration of recognizing speech in a novel accent. Part 2 then offers a novel computational model of how a listener comes to understand the speech of someone speaking the listener's native language with a foreign accent. The core tenet of the model is that the listener uses hypotheses about the word the speaker is currently uttering to update probabilities linking the sound produced by the speaker to phonemes in the native language repertoire of the listener. This, on average, improves the recognition of later words. This model is neutral regarding the nature of the representations it uses (motor vs. auditory). It serve as a reference point for the discussion in Part 3, which proposes a dual-stream neuro-linguistic architecture to revisits claims for and against the motor theory of speech perception and the relevance of mirror neurons, and extracts some implications for the reframing of the motor theory

Foreign Subtitles Help but Native-Language Subtitles Harm Foreign Speech Perception

Understanding foreign speech is difficult, in part because of unusual mappings between sounds and words. It is known that listeners in their native language can use lexical knowledge (about how words ought to sound) to learn how to interpret unusual speech-sounds. We therefore investigated whether subtitles, which provide lexical information, support perceptual learning about foreign speech. Dutch participants, unfamiliar with Scottish and Australian regional accents of English, watched Scottish or Australian English videos with Dutch, English or no subtitles, and then repeated audio fragments of both accents. Repetition of novel fragments was worse after Dutch-subtitle exposure but better after English-subtitle exposure. Native-language subtitles appear to create lexical interference, but foreign-language subtitles assist speech learning by indicating which words (and hence sounds) are being spoken

A Survey of Bayesian Statistical Approaches for Big Data

The modern era is characterised as an era of information or Big Data. This has motivated a huge literature on new methods for extracting information and insights from these data. A natural question is how these approaches differ from those that were available prior to the advent of Big Data. We present a review of published studies that present Bayesian statistical approaches specifically for Big Data and discuss the reported and perceived benefits of these approaches. We conclude by addressing the question of whether focusing only on improving computational algorithms and infrastructure will be enough to face the challenges of Big Data

Intelligibility and Acoustic Characteristics of Clear and Conversational Speech in Telugu (A South Indian Dravidian Language)

The overall goal of this study is to examine the intelligibility differences of clear and conversational speech and also to objectively analyze the acoustic properties contributing to these differences. Seventeen post-lingual stable sensory-neural hearing impaired listeners with an age range of 17–40 years were recruited for the study. Forty Telugu sentences spoken by a female Telugu speaker in both clear and conversational speech styles were used as stimuli for the subjects. Results revealed that mean scores of clear speech were higher (mean = 84.5) when compared to conversational speech (mean = 61.4) with an advantage of 23.1% points. Acoustic properties revealed greater fundamental frequency (f0) and intensity, longer duration, higher consonant–vowel ratio (CVR) and greater temporal energy in clear speech