ライフサイエンスコーパス: phoneme

1 ficulties in processing speech sounds (i.e., phonemes).

2 etters (graphemes) into these speech sounds (phonemes).

3 ormation about the likelihood of the missing phoneme.

4 r phoneme matched the content of the audible phoneme.

5 t frontal region only reacted to a change of phoneme.

6 ech is perceived by the robot as a stream of phonemes.

7 repeated presentation of 12 American English phonemes.

8 ween brain and perceptual representations of phonemes.

9 essfully recognize brain processing of these phonemes.

10 ive features in the neural representation of phonemes.

11 late laryngeal harmonics to create different phonemes.

12 jects listened to the lip- or tongue-related phonemes.

13 nd have difficulty converting graphemes into phonemes.

14 ness and the ability to convert graphemes to phonemes.

15 expense of the ability to process non-native phonemes.

16 SMS during perception of noise-impoverished phonemes.

17 it might also indicate preference for native phonemes.

18 iscrimination of important features, such as phonemes.

19 se in mouth opening and modification of some phonemes although lip closure was still possible allowin

20 n communication at timescales even below the phoneme and finding yet another link between complexity

21 kHz, although this varied with the specific phoneme and the width of the analysis bands.

22 nse in the boundary region between different phonemes and argue for a specific amplification mechanis

23 examined the perception of continua between phonemes and demonstrated sharp discontinuities consiste

24 on the pinyin input method, which associates phonemes and English letters with characters.

25 rhood frequencies, word lengths by number of phonemes and graphemes, and spoken-word frequencies.

26 words and sentences, and the development of phonemes and morphemes-and to mammalian behavior.

27 ions during speech perception between native phonemes and talker's voice.

28 Phonemes and the distinctive features that they comprise

29 any languages there are associations between phonemes and the expression of size (e.g. large /a, o/,

30 h incongruent lip-voice pairs evoke illusory phonemes), and also identification of degraded speech, w

31 both how speech sounds are categorized into phonemes, and how different versions of phonemes are pro

32 xplicitly encodes the acoustic similarity of phonemes, and linguistic and nonlinguistic information a

33 These results reveal that vSMC activity for phonemes are not invariant and provide insight into the

34 ns lose genetic diversity via genetic drift, phonemes are not subject to drift in the same way: withi

35 into phonemes, and how different versions of phonemes are produced.

36 se the womb is a high-frequency filter, many phonemes are strongly degraded in utero.

37 that speakers of these languages do not use phonemes as fundamental processing units.

38 ns who are unable to convert graph-emes into phonemes, as well as positron emission tomographic studi

39 ment by studying the response to a change of phoneme at a native and nonnative phonetic boundary in f

40 Participants produced an inner phoneme at a precisely specified time, at which an audib

41 e mismatch response to a nonnative change of phoneme at the end of the first year of life was depende

42 hographic coding, phonological decoding, and phoneme awareness were individually subjected to QTL ana

43 d orthographic skills and is not specific to phoneme awareness, as has been previously suggested.

44 in which the strongest evidence came from a phoneme-awareness measure (most significant P value=0.00

45 ond, discrimination responses to a change of phoneme (ba vs. ga) and a change of human voice (male vs

46 ticularly strong positive correlation with a phoneme blending test.

47 es performance on novel words using the same phonemes but with different acoustic patterns, demonstra

48 esentation of individual segmental units, or phonemes, but the bulk of evidence comes from speakers o

49 Multiple productions of the same phoneme can exhibit substantial variability, some of whi

50 We showed that responses to different phoneme categories are organized by phonetic features.

51 ds is transformed into perceptually distinct phoneme categories.

52 cortex and Broca's area exhibited effective phoneme categorization when SNR >/= -6 dB.

53 nt, language experience alters speech sound (phoneme) categorization.

54 ty in left PMC that correlated with explicit phoneme-categorization performance measured after scanni

55 C recruitment can account for performance on phoneme-categorization tasks.

56 tance from a target, or is error enhanced by phoneme category changes?

57 continuum but diverted their attention from phoneme category using a challenging dichotic listening

58 to changes in talker, but not to changes in phoneme category.

59 l representation of speakers is dependent on phoneme category.

60 Conversely, we observed phoneme-category selectivity in left PMC that correlated

61 also observed in languages where a specific phoneme changes to the same other phoneme in many words

62 flects the contextual effects of surrounding phonemes ("coarticulation").

63 normally when the task required attending to phonemes compared with other speech features.

64 s to areas respectively involved in grapheme-phoneme conversion and lexical access.

65 iding an efficient circuit for both grapheme-phoneme conversion and lexical access.

66 ft inferior frontal lobe because grapheme-to-phoneme conversion requires activation of these motor-ar

67 icating over-reliance on sublexical grapheme-phoneme correspondences.

68 Fifteen healthy human subjects performed a phoneme detection task in pseudo-words and a semantic ca

69 This is in sharp contrast with phoneme discriminability in bilateral auditory cortices

70 days after surgery, patients showed improved phoneme discrimination compared with their performance s

71 re, formant frequencies that are crucial for phoneme discrimination.

72 Language testing included speech sound (phoneme) discrimination, single word and phrasal compreh

73 significantly more likely to contain smaller phonemes (e.g. "Emily").

74 antly more likely to contain larger sounding phonemes (e.g. "Thomas"), while female names are signifi

75 Within a language family, phoneme evolution along genetic, geographic, or cognate-

76 s of vertical and horizontal transmission in phoneme evolution.

77 bout the articulatory features of individual phonemes has an important role in their perception and i

78 easures had the highest correlation with the phoneme identification measures for CI listeners.

79 The study presents psychoacoustic and phoneme identification measures in CI and normal-hearing

80 The superior NH performance on measures of phoneme identification, especially in the presence of ba

81 We found that each instance of a phoneme in continuous speech produces multiple distingui

82 We show that each instance of a phoneme in continuous speech produces several observable

83 multiple sequential contexts (e.g., a single phoneme in different words).

84 a specific phoneme changes to the same other phoneme in many words in the lexicon-a phenomenon known

85 Newborn infants distinguish the phonemes in all languages but by 10 months show adult-li

86 ioral measurement to investigate the role of phonemes in Mandarin production.

87 coughs replacing high versus low probability phonemes in sentential words differed from each other as

88 formed an incidental task while listening to phonemes in the MRI scanner.

89 itive appearance of acoustic distinctions of phonemes in the neural data.

90 a 5 d training regimen on a consonant-vowel phoneme-in-noise discrimination task.

91 ch by obtaining the time-locked responses to phoneme instances (phoneme-related potential).

92 the properties of evoked neural responses to phoneme instances in continuous speech.

93 ctivation associated with the integration of phonemes into temporally complex patterns (i.e., words)

94 We analyze, jointly and in parallel, phoneme inventories from 2,082 worldwide languages and m

95 However, the geographic distribution of phoneme inventory sizes does not follow the predictions

96 usly variable acoustic signals into discrete phonemes is a fundamental feature of speech communicatio

97 elopment from infants' earliest responses to phonemes is reflected in infants' language abilities in

98 to retain and repeat unfamiliar sequences of phonemes is usually impaired in children with specific l

99 rocessing of short-timescale patterns (i.e., phonemes) is consistently localized to left mid-superior

100 syllabic rhythm and temporally organize the phoneme-level response of gamma neurons into a code that

101 tic element at a single position generates a phoneme-like contrast that is sufficient to distinguish

102 Grapheme-to-phoneme mapping regularity is thought to determine the g

103 ession, but only if the content of the inner phoneme matched the content of the audible phoneme.

104 stimuli preceded by text that made critical phonemes more or less probable.

105 higher-level patterns (e.g., words) in which phonemes normally occur.

106 In speech, the same phoneme often has different acoustic patterns depending

107 rly as 50 ms and as late as 400 ms after the phoneme onset.

108 rly as 50 ms and as late as 400 ms after the phoneme onset.

109 ake place at the level of single grapheme or phoneme or syllable, but rather, at the lexical level.

110 or and object name either shared the initial phoneme or were phonologically unrelated.

111 dent of whether the stimuli were composed of phonemes or hummed notes.

112 SiN measures varied by target (phonemes or syllables, words, and sentences) and masker

113 Phoneme perception measures included vowel and consonant

114 ly capable of supporting multiple aspects of phoneme processing.

115 omenon of coarticulation (differentiation of phoneme production depending on the preceding or followi

116 e combination with natural categories (e.g., phonemes), providing qualitative evidence that human obs

117 ing children, hemispheric specialization for phoneme rate modulation processing may still be developi

118 c specialization for processing syllable and phoneme rate modulations in preliterate children may rev

119 n cortical evoked potentials to syllable and phoneme rate modulations were measured in 5-year-old chi

120 rate modulations and a symmetric pattern for phoneme rate modulations, regardless of hereditary risk

121 ft hemispheric specialization is assumed for phoneme rate modulations.

122 re that (a) focused stimulation will improve phoneme recognition and (b) speech perception will impro

123 ase; and (c) speech tests including filtered phoneme recognition and speech-in-noise recognition.

124 time-locked responses to phoneme instances (phoneme-related potential).

125 between left-biased cortical oscillations in phoneme-relevant frequencies and speech-in-noise percept

126 chanisms used by the human brain to identify phonemes remain unclear.

127 infant preference for native over non-native phonemes remain unclear.

128 Whereas naming latencies were unaffected by phoneme repetition, ERP responses were modulated from 20

129 to the tendency for people to hallucinate a phoneme replaced by a non-speech sound (e.g., a tone) in

130 An example of this capacity is phoneme restoration, in which part of a word is complete

131 The production of the inner phoneme resulted in electrophysiological suppression, bu

132 rtion of Broca's area performs operations on phoneme segments specifically or implements processes ge

133 rus was somewhat more specific to sequencing phoneme segments.

134 Nonsense words contained phoneme sequence onsets (i.e., /pt/, /pt/, /st/ and /st/

135 Despite not being consciously aware of phoneme sequence statistics, listeners use this informat

136 significantly influenced by exposure to the phoneme sequences of the native-language.

137 nth-olds, 12-month-olds' responses to native phonemes showed smaller and faster phase synchronization

138 Comparing the patterns of phoneme similarity in the neural responses and the acous

139 aphic history has left similar signatures on phonemes-sound units that distinguish meaning between wo

140 linguistic trees predicts similar ancestral phoneme states to those predicted from ancient sources.

141 ic contrasts represent a rudimentary form of phoneme structure and a potential early step towards the

142 tion depending on the preceding or following phonemes) suggests an organization of movement sequences

143 me, duration of the formant transitions, and phoneme, syllable, and word boundaries.

144 lose language pairs share significantly more phonemes than distant language pairs, whether or not the

145 isolated exhibit more variance in number of phonemes than languages with many neighbors.

146 effects on vSMC representations of produced phonemes that suggest active control of coarticulation:

147 he context of categories such as objects and phonemes, thereby requiring a solution to the cue combin

148 e scales, ranging from short-duration (e.g., phonemes) to long-duration cues (e.g., syllables, prosod

149 g study, participants identified one of four phoneme tokens (/ba/, /ma/, /da/, or /ta/) under one of

150 recisely specified time, at which an audible phoneme was concurrently presented.

151 ements to generate individual speech sounds (phonemes) which, in turn, are rapidly organized into com

152 thus efficient processing of the distinctive phonemes within the sound environment.

153 d however observe a left posterior effect of phoneme/word probability around 192-224 ms-clear evidenc

154 We too found the robust N400 effect of phoneme/word probability, but did not observe the early