Implications for speech production of a general theory of action.
| Number | 295 |
|---|---|
| Year | 1980 |
| Drawer | 5 |
| Entry Date | 06/03/1999 |
| Authors | Fowler, C. A., Rubin, P., Remez, R. E., & Turvey, M. T. |
| Contact | |
| Publication | In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (pp. 373-420). New York: Academic Press. |
| url | http://www.haskins.yale.edu/Reprints/HL0295.pdf |
| Abstract | [Introduction] Phonetic and phonological segments have substantial linguistic/theoretical support as real and universal units of language systems. Quite naturally, investigators of speech production have taken these units to be constituents of a speaker/hearer’s linguistics competence and have focused investigation on discovering their correlates in the articulatory and acoustic records of utterances. These searches have met with little success, however, and the recent literature betrays some disenchantment with this as an investigatory strategy. Several investigators have proposed as an alternative that production records as interpreted from the perspective of theories of coordinated movement perhaps, but would be unbiased by a priori notions borrowed from linguistic theory as to what the units ought to be like. Our theoretical approach is related to this, but is somewhat less radical. We agree that concepts general to the control of coordinated movement are relevant to understanding the control of the articulators and need incorporation into production theory (cf. Abss and Eilenberg, 1976; Moll et al. , 1976). In addition, we agree that correlates of linguistic segmental units, as production theorists have described them, are absent in articulation. But we are not yet ready to agree, therefore, that investigations of speech production ought to be conducted without reference to linguistic segmental units. |
| Notes | Book article, abstract not available |
Search Publications