{
    "paper_id": "J76-4003",
    "header": {
        "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
        "date_generated": "2023-01-19T02:51:16.969442Z"
    },
    "title": "EDITED BY JAMES F . KAVANAGH ( G R O W T H AND DEVELOPMENT BRANCH, NATIONAL INSTITUTE O F CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT) AND JAMES E . CUTTING (DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY, WESLEYAN",
    "authors": [],
    "year": "",
    "venue": null,
    "identifiers": {},
    "abstract": "The book under review contains the proceedings of a small conference (2 2 p a r t i c i p a n t s) w i t h t h e same t i t l e , h e l d i n October 1973 at t h e Urban Life Center, Columbia, Maryland. T h e conference was one i n a s e r i e s c a l l e d \"Communicating by Language\", sponsored by t h e National. ~n s t i i u t e of Child Health and Human Development (N I C H D) .",
    "pdf_parse": {
        "paper_id": "J76-4003",
        "_pdf_hash": "",
        "abstract": [
            {
                "text": "The book under review contains the proceedings of a small conference (2 2 p a r t i c i p a n t s) w i t h t h e same t i t l e , h e l d i n October 1973 at t h e Urban Life Center, Columbia, Maryland. T h e conference was one i n a s e r i e s c a l l e d \"Communicating by Language\", sponsored by t h e National. ~n s t i i u t e of Child Health and Human Development (N I C H D) .",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Abstract",
                "sec_num": null
            }
        ],
        "body_text": [
            {
                "text": "Stockholm, who s y s t e m a t i c a l l y explores t h e explanatory value of q u a n t i t a t i v e models of speech production and perception i n phonology, e . g . Lindblom 1 9 7 2 , 1 9 7 5 ) . The o r g a n i z e r s of the conference, Kavanagh and Liberman, have taken c a r e t o s e l e c t well-known r e s e a r c h e r s with d i f f e r e n t backgrounds and d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s t o d i s c u s s t h e v a r i o u s problems which may be derived from t h e c e n t r a l q u e s t i o n : \"do we i n c r e a s e our understanding of language when w e t a k e i n t o account t h a t i t i s spoken?\"",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "T h e r e s u l t i n g t e x t s make i n t e r e s t i n g r e a d i n g , although one w i l l look i n v a i n f o r a convincing answer t o the i n i t i a l q u e s t i o n . D i f f e r e n t i n v e s t i g a t o r s have d i f f e r e n t opinions and the p r e s e n t s t a t e of knowledge does n o t seem t o make i t",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "The R o J~I of Speech in Language p o s s i b l e t o settle the m a t t e r . In most papers specialist knowledge i s freely intermixed w i t h s p e c u l a t i o n , and i t i s not always e a s y t o t e l l the one f r o m the o t h e r . The discussions g e n e r a l l y serve more to con-tinrle speculation than t o criticize i n d e t a i l each other's t h i n k i n g . These remarks a r e not meant a s a criticism of the conference and i t s proceedings. They (Cutting, Rosner and Foard 1976) . Furthermore, to my knowledge, nobody has yet seriously discussed the. difficulties for a theory of \"wired-in\" feature detectors stemming from perceptual normalization experiments in which it is shown that response distributions in phoneme identification tasks may shift systematically due to the immediate environm e n t of the test segment (e .g . Fourcin 1972 ) .",
                "cite_spans": [
                    {
                        "start": 473,
                        "end": 505,
                        "text": "(Cutting, Rosner and Foard 1976)",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF0"
                    },
                    {
                        "start": 857,
                        "end": 869,
                        "text": "Fourcin 1972",
                        "ref_id": "BIBREF1"
                    }
                ],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "",
                "sec_num": null
            },
            {
                "text": "T h e volume under review is not only remarkable for the many interesting and stimulating papers it contains but also for -what it does not con&ain. In a collection of papers with the title \"The r o l e of speech in language\" one w o~l d have expected to find at least one contribution seriously discussing the relation between speech prosody and linguistic structure. It is ironical that the only paper in which intonational contrast is given more ateention than obligatory lip service is Stokoe's contribution \"The shape of soundles~ language\", dealing with Stokoe's treatment of intonation and its kinesic correlate in sign language seems to make explicit why so many speech researchers do not pay attention to speech prosody. He suggests that intonational contrasts \"are not necessarily linguistic and have more affinity with other systems that signal affect than with phonemic contrasts. There remain then only phonemic contrasts between consonant and consonant, vowel and vowel, and tone and tone (when so used) as the ihdisputably linguistic, basic features of language\". One may fear that this undue overemphasis on phonemic contrast in speech perception research will persist until speech scientists turn away from the study of isolated CV-syllables and start wondering about the perception of normal spontaneous connected speech.",
                "cite_spans": [],
                "ref_spans": [],
                "eq_spans": [],
                "section": "Dm THE ABSENCE O F PROSODY",
                "sec_num": null
            }
        ],
        "back_matter": [],
        "bib_entries": {
            "BIBREF0": {
                "ref_id": "b0",
                "title": "Perceptual categories for musiclike sounds: implications for theories of speech perception",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "J",
                        "middle": [
                            "E"
                        ],
                        "last": "Cutting",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "B",
                        "middle": [
                            "S"
                        ],
                        "last": "Rosner",
                        "suffix": ""
                    },
                    {
                        "first": "C",
                        "middle": [
                            "F"
                        ],
                        "last": "Foard",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1976,
                "venue": "Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psycholoqy",
                "volume": "28",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "361--378",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Cutting, J. E., Rosner, B. S., Foard, C. F. (1976) Perceptual categories for musiclike sounds: implications for theories of speech perception. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psycholoqy, 28 : 361-378.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF1": {
                "ref_id": "b1",
                "title": "Perceptual mechanisms at the first level.of speech processing",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": ";",
                        "middle": [
                            "A J"
                        ],
                        "last": "Fourcin",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1971,
                "venue": "Proceedings of the V I I t h International Congress",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Fourcin; A. J . (1972) Perceptual mechanisms at the first level.of speech processing. In: A. Rigault and R . Charbon- n e a~ , eds . Proceedings of the V I I t h International Congress o f ~h o n e t -i c Sciences, Montreal 1971..",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF3": {
                "ref_id": "b3",
                "title": "Phonetics and the description of language",
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "first": "B",
                        "middle": [
                            "E F"
                        ],
                        "last": "Lindblom",
                        "suffix": ""
                    }
                ],
                "year": 1971,
                "venue": "Proceedings of t h e VVTIth Intcrnat ional Congress of Phonetic Sciences",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "Lindblom, B. E. F. (1972) Phonetics and the description of language. In: A. Rigault and R. Charbonneau, eds . Proceedings of t h e VVTIth Intcrnat ional Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Montreal, 1971.",
                "links": null
            },
            "BIBREF6": {
                "ref_id": "b6",
                "title": "V I I I t h International Congress of Phonetic Sciences",
                "authors": [],
                "year": 1975,
                "venue": "",
                "volume": "",
                "issue": "",
                "pages": "",
                "other_ids": {},
                "num": null,
                "urls": [],
                "raw_text": "P l e n a r y p a p e r , p r e s e n t e d a t the V I I I t h International Con- gress of Phonetic Sciences, Leeds 1 9 7 5 .",
                "links": null
            }
        },
        "ref_entries": {
            "FIGREF0": {
                "num": null,
                "type_str": "figure",
                "text": "These are 1 9 papers, divided into 3 major sections, viz. I The development of speech i n man and child I1 Language without speech (dealing with s i g n language) I11 Phonology and language Some papers are followed by comments of one of the p a r t i c i p a n t s each p a p e r o r c o h e r e n t group of papers i s followed by a summary of fhe open discussion. A separate IVth section of the book contains r e f l e c t i o n s on the conference by Ira J . Hirsh. Refe-The R o l e of Speech in Language rences a r e presented a t t h e end of each p a p e r . The e d i t o r s have provided a name index and a s u b j e c t index a t the end of t h e book. Many l i n g u i s t s and p s y c h o l i n g u i s t s take i t f o r granted t h a t language can be s t u d i e d without studying speech. Likewise many speech r e s e a r c h e r s seem t o work from rhe view t h a t the p~o d u c t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n of speech can be s t u d i e d without s~u d y i n g language. This s i t u a t i o n l e a d s Alvin Liberman t o I I s t a t e i n h i s \" I n t r o d u c t i o n t o the conference\" t h a t our t o p f c --t h e r o l e of speech i n language--is not an e s t a b l i s h e d one; no one has made i t t h e d i r e c t and primary o b j e c t of h i s r e s e a r c h . 1 1 Although t h i s statement i s perhaps too c a t e g o r i c a l , i t c e r t a i n l y i s v a l i d f o r most of t h e f i e l d . (An obvious exception, t o my mind, i s among o t h e r s Professor Lindblom of the University of",
                "uris": null
            },
            "FIGREF1": {
                "num": null,
                "type_str": "figure",
                "text": "i n t e n d t o g i v e an i n d i c a t i o n , however, of the s t y l e of this book, and a warhing t h a t one w i l l n o t find here a thorough d i s c u s s i o n of empirical d a t a o r e x p l i c i t , t e s t a b l e theories, t h a t could be of use in more p r a c t i c a l l y o r i e n t e d work. I n s t e a d one f i n d s a number of i n s p i r i n g e x p o s i t i o n s of such d i v e r s e topics a s similarities and dissimilarities between human and a n i m a l communication systems, t h e evolutionary connections between language, speech, and tool-making, t h e primacy of production o r perception i n the phylogenesis and the ontogenesis of speech, the primacy of signs or speech i n t h e e v o l u t i o n of language, t h e a r t i c u l a t e s t r u c t u r e of signs in those who have s i g n language as t h e i r first language, t h e origins of phonological change, and the p a r a l l e l s i n phonological and other l i ng u i s t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of language. Below I w i l l make a few remarks on a few selected topics: a) The evolutiorl of speech and language b ) Spoken language and sign language c) Innate f e a t u r e d e t e c t o r s d ) The absence of prosody I w i l l not attempt t o cover i n t h i s review all p a p e r s i n t h e book. A * THE EVOLUTION OF SPEECH AND LANGUAGE In a number of places in this volume attempts are made to relate r e s u l t s of r e c e n t empirical studies of several kinds to theoretical ideas on the evolution of speech and language in early man. So Peter Pfarler gives an interesting description of communication systems in nonhuman primates and birds. His data on monkeys show a difference between discrete signal systems, consisting of a limited number of acoustically welldistinguished sound signals, used by monkeys living in dense forests and having little visual contact, and graded signal systems displaying continuous variation of sound signals, used by terrestrial monkeys. The bird data on the white-crowned sparrow lead him to the concept of an innate auditory template for bird song, modifiable by a suitable external model and serving for the developmefit of vocal behavior. In his speculations on the origin of speech Marler emphasizes the importnace of the evolution of innate but modifiable auditory templates for speech sounds, serving to distinguish between acceptable and nonacceptable models for vocal development, for classifying acceptable sounds into.subcategories and for developing speech. He also assumes that, while categorical processing was developed as an aid in identifying sounds from memory, continuous sensory processing of sounds was retained, thus leading to an intermingling of categorical and noncategorical (discrete and graded) processing. He finally suggests that \"The substitution of categorical for continuous processing ~h t . Role of Speech in Lanquaqe 3 0 of speech sounds may have directly facilitated the introduction of syntax as a radical innovation in primate communication\". There appear to be two basic assumptions underlying Marler's reasoning. One is that comparative studies of sensory and vocal behavi~r in animals and man maxr lead to interesting theories about specific properties of the human brain underlying man's capacity for speech and language. The other is that such studies may clarify the order in which postulated changes in vocal perception and development might have occurred in the evolution of early man. There is an important difference between these two assumptions. Whereas the former may lead to theories or hypotheses which in ~rinciple might become testable, the latter does not, at least not within the limits of this reviewer's imagination. Obviously this lack of testability is common to many speculations about the evolution of humari behavior. This has in the past not kept scientists from making reasonable guesses particularly about the evolution of language and speech, and probably will not do so in the f a t u r e In this volume both Hewes in his comments on Mattingly's paper and Liberman in his own contribution relate the genesis of language to toolmaking. Hewes observes similarities between syntactic structures and the prescribed order of the various steps necessary for the manufacture of flakes from a prepared Levallois core. Liberman, taking the same Line of thought, states that the Levallois toolmaking technique cannot reasonably be described by means of a phrase-structure grammar. A T h e Ro-E-' of S p e e c h in Lanyuayc transformational grammar which f o r m a l l y incorporates a memory is n e c e s s a r y . A s far a s I u n d e r s t a n d h i s r e a s o n i n g t h i s i s s o because in making a p a r t i c u l a r c h i p one h a s t o keep two t h i n g s in mind, b o t h t h e l a s t c h i p t h a t has been made and t h e f i n a l form of t h e t o o l . It seems t o me, b w e v e r , that i n order t o ~i v e h i s argument i t s f o r c e i t s t i l l has t o be shown t h a t 3 t h e r e i s a fundamental d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e n e c e s s a r y complexity of u n d e r l y i n g m e n t a l s t r u c t u r e s between L e v a l l o i s toolmaking and many forms of g o a l -o r i e n t e d b e h a v i o r we f i n d in higher a n i m a l s . Liberman a l s o s u g g e s t s that t h e final c r u c i a l s t a g e i n t h e e v o l u t i o n of human language would a p p e a r t o be t h e development of the b e n t two-tube s u p r a l a r y n g e~l v o c a l t r a c t o f modern man, w h i c h a l l o w s i t s p o s s e s s o r s t o generate a c o u s t i c s i g n a l s ehat (1) have very d i s t i n c t a c o u s t i c p r o p e r t i e s and ( 2 ) a r e e a s y t o produce, being a c o u s t i c a l l y s t a b l e . R e c o n s t r u c t i o n s from f o s s i l s t e l l him t h a t t h e Neanderthal hominids had t o do without t h i s a s s e t , and t h e r e f o r e p r o b a b l y r e t a i n e d a cormunication s y s t e m w i t h a mixed p h o n e t i c l e v e l that r e l i e d on both g e s t u r a l and k o c a l components. A t t h i s p o i n t t h e reader p a r t ic u l a r l y f e e l s t h e need f o r a n e x p e r t c r i t i c i s m of t h e v a l i d i t y of %uch r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s . Bn SPOKEN LANGUAGE AND S I G N LANGUAGE T h e question whether speech o r g e s t u r a l c o m u n i c a t i o n has been more i m p o r t a n t i n the e v o l u t i o n of human language came up several times during t h e c o n f e r e n c e . I n r e a c t i o n to M a t t i n g l y ' s The \u00ff ole of Speech i n Lanryudye i d e a t h a t \"speech exemplifies a thoroughly and p e c u l i a r l y human kind of knowing\" Hewes commented that the depigmentation of the v o l a r s k i n would i n d i c a t e the antiquity of nonvocal cormn~nication. I n d i r e c t support f o r t h i s supposed a n t i q u i t y of g e s t u r a l communication comes from some f a s c i n a t i n g s t u d i e s of American S i g n Lansuage (ASL), a c c o r d i n g t o B e l l u g i and Klima a f u l l -f l e d g e d language of i t s own, and n o t a d e r i v a t i v e o r degenerate form of w r i t t e n o r spoken E n g l i s h . Stokoeargues f o r t h e a n t i q u i t y o f sign language from a p o s s i b l e p a r a l l e l between ontogeny and phylogeny. I t appeatrs t o be t h e . case t h a t t h e i n f a n t w i t h deaf p a r e n t s , l e a r n i n g ASL a s its first language, begins p u t t i n g wordlike signs i n t o s e n t e n c e l i k e s t r u k t u r e s a t an e a r l i e r age than t h e c h i l d making two-word o r three-word sentences i n speech.",
                "uris": null
            },
            "FIGREF2": {
                "num": null,
                "type_str": "figure",
                "text": "and Klima have s t u d i e d sign language from histor i c a l changes i n t h e form of s i g n s , i n s h o r t term memory experiments, by analyzing a c o l l e c t i o n of \" s l i p s of t h e hand1', sad by comparing A m e r i c a n Sign Language w i t h Chinese S i g n s , i n a l l c a s e s w i t h profoundly deaf p e a p l e who use s i g n language as their primary f o r m of communication. They show t h a t s i g n si n ASL a r e n o t s i m p l y s i g n a l s which d i f f e r uniquely and h l i st i c a l l y from one another b u t a r e , rather, h i g h l y coded units.They a l s o provide evidence that grammatical processes bear t h e marks of t h e p a r t i c u l a r transmission system i n w h i c h t h e lan-guage developed. This seems t o b e donfirmed i n ~u t t e n l o c h e r ' s Thc R o l c of Speech in Lany uaqe c o n t r i b u t i o n , comparing t h e encoding of s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s i n ASL and n a t u r a l language (= spoken American English) I t i s too e a r l y t o draw any d e f i n i t e conclusions from t h e s e s t u d i e s of sign language on t h e interdependence of n a t u r a l language and speech, as the s t r u c t u r e of s i g n language i s only beginning t o be understood. But i t i s c e r t a i n l y o f much i n t e r e s t t o students of language behavior t h a t t h e human p e r c e p t u a l and c o g n i t i v e systems appear t o b e so f l e x i b l e t h a t profoundly deaf people may develop v i s u a l communication systems among themselves which, i f n o t equal i n e x p r e s s i v e power and speed of communication t o n a t u r a l spoken languages, a t l e a s t come c l o s e t o them. Further comparisons between t h e syntax of n a t u r a l spoken languages and s i g n languages may l e a d t o more c a u t i o n in i n t e r p r e t h g c u r r e n t i d e a s about what i s and what is n o t i n n a t e i n our l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t i e s . S i m i l a r l y comparisons between the e f f i c i e n c y of speech p e r c e p t i o n and t h e e f f iciency of v i s u a l s i g n p e r c e p t i o n might w e l l make us wonder whether speech p e r c e p t i o n i s as s p e c i a l a s some t h e o r i s t s l i k e t o make us b e l i e v e . e a t h a t speech p e r c e p t i o n i s mediated b y , p o s s i b l y i n n a t e , speech s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e d e t e c t o r s w a s given c o n s i d e r a b l e a t r e pt i o n i n t h e conference. This idea supported M a r l e r ' s extrapol a t i o n from i n n a t e a u d i t o r y templates i n b i r d s to. i n n a t e a u d i t o r y templates i n humans. Studdert-Kennedy provides a The Role of Speech in Lilnyuayc careful s u r v e y of t h e current e m p i r i c a l evidence concerning the p e r c e p t u a l processing of consonants and vowels, from which he concludes that t h e \"human c o r t e x i s supplied with sets of a c o u s t i c d e t e c t o r s tuned t o speech, each i n h i b i t e d from output t o t h e phonetic system i n t h e absence of c o l l a t e r a l r e s p o n s e i n o t h e r detectors\". Cutting and Eimas p r e s e n t evidence t h a t such f e a t u r e d e t e c t o r s a r e i n n a t e . Eimas has shown that v e r y young i n f a n t s , one month bnd four months of a g e , can d i s c r i m i n a t e much better between d i f f e r e n t speech sounds t h a t belong t o d i f f e r e n t phonemic c a t e g o r i e s than between d i f f e r e n t speech sounds belonging t o the same phonemic category i n a d u l t speech. One m a 7 concur, however, w i t h t h e doubt expressed by Hirsh i n h i s r e f l e c t i o n s on the conference whether E i m a s ' s data a r e about speech o r about g e n e r a l a u d i t o r y p e r c e p t i o n . One may f e e l s i m i l a r doubts about t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n Eimas and Cutting g i v e t o t h e d a t a s t e m m i n g f r o m t h e s e l e c t i v e a d a p t a t i o n p a r a d i g m , introduced i n speech perception s t u d i e s by Eimas and Corbit i n 1 9 7 3 and s i n c e then used by a n i n c r e a s i n g number of i n v e s t i g a t o r s . I n select i v e a d a p t a t i o n s t u d i e s i t i s shown t h a t repeated s t i m u l a t i o n w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r a c o u s t i c c o n f i g u r a t i o n , f o r i n s t a n c e a s y ll a b l eb a , may change t h e response d i s t r i b u t i o n i n a phoneme i d e n t i f i c a t i o n task, f o r i n s t a n c e t h e binary f o r c e d choice between baand measured w i t h s t i m u l i . taken f r o m t h e a c o u s t i c continuum betweenba and . In this case the number o f Eresponses would i n c r e a s e a t t h e c o s t of t h eba-responses. T h e Tho Role of Spcoch in Ldnguaye interpretation is that there are feature detectors which can be fatigued by repeated stimulation. By carefully studying which acoustic configurations lead to shifts in particular response distributions, it would be possible to find out what information is extracted by particular feature detectors. Cutting and Eimas argue for the existence of phonetic, speech s p e c i i i c , feature detectors. More recent studies show that categorical perception and selective adaptation are not unique to speech perception",
                "uris": null
            }
        }
    }
}