ASHAWire
Advanced search
Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
No AccessLanguage, Speech, and Hearing Services in SchoolsResearch Article1 Oct 2002

From Ear to Cortex

A Perspective on What Clinicians Need to Understand About Speech Perception and Language Processing
    https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2002/020)

    Phoneme-sized phonetic segments are often defined as the most basic unit of language organization. Two common inferences made from this description are that there are clear correlates to phonetic segments in the acoustic speech stream, and that humans have access to these segments from birth. In fact, well-replicated studies have shown that the acoustic signal of speech lacks invariant physical correlates to phonetic segments, and that the ability to recognize segmental structure is not present from the start of language learning. Instead, the young child must learn how to process the complex, generally continuous acoustic speech signal so that phonetic structure can be derived.

    This paper describes and reviews experiments that have revealed developmental changes in speech perception that accompany improvements in access to phonetic structure. In addition, this paper explains how these perceptual changes appear to be related to other aspects of language development, such as syntactic abilities and reading. Finally, evidence is provided that these critical developmental changes result from adequate language experience in naturalistic contexts, and accordingly suggests that intervention strategies for children with language learning problems should focus on enhancing language experience in natural contexts.

    REFERENCES

    • Baddeley, A. D. (1966). Short-term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic, and formal similarity.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 362–365.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Baddeley, A. D., Thomson, N., & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575–589.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Bar-Shalom, E. G., Crain, S., & Shankweiler, D. P. (1993). A comparison of comprehension and production abilities of good and poor readers.Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 197–227.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Bishop, D. V. M., Carlyon, R. P., Deeks, J. M., & Bishop, S. J. (1999). Auditory temporal processing impairment: Neither necessary nor sufficient for causing language impairment in children.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1295–1310.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Blumstein, S. E., & Stevens, K. N. (1980). Perceptual invariance and onset spectra for stop consonants in different vowel environments.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 648–662.
      Google Scholar
    • S. A. Brady, & D. P. Shankweiler (Eds.). (1991). Phonological processes in literacy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
      Google Scholar
    • Brady, S., Shankweiler, D., & Mann, V. (1983). Speech perception and memory coding in relation to reading ability.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 35, 345–367.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Byrne, B. (1981). Deficient syntactic control in poor readers: Is a weak phonetic memory code responsible?.Applied Psycholinguistics, 2, 201–212.
      Google Scholar
    • Campbell, R., & Dodd, B. (1980). Hearing by eye.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 85–99.
      Google Scholar
    • Charles-Luce, J., & Luce, P. A. (1990). Similarity neighborhoods of words in young children’s lexicons.Journal of Child Language, 17, 205–215.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Chen, M. (1970). Vowel length variation as a function of the voicing of the consonant environment.Phonetica, 22, 129–159.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Chermak, G. D., & Musiek, F. (1997). Central auditory processing disorders. San Diego, CA: Singular.
      Google Scholar
    • Cornelissen, P. L., Hansen, P. C., Bradley, L., & Stein, J. F. (1996). Analysis of perceptual confusions between nine sets of consonant-vowel sounds in normal and dyslexic adults.Cognition, 59, 275–306.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Crowther, C. S., & Mann, V. A. (1994). Use of vocalic cues to consonant voicing and native language background: The influence of experimental design.Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 513–525.
      Google Scholar
    • Cunningham, J., Nicol, T., Zecker, S. G., Bradlow, A., & Kraus, N. (2001). Neurobiologic responses to speech in noise in children with learning problems: Deficits and strategies for improvement.Clinical Neurophysiology, 112, 758–767.
      Google Scholar
    • Damian, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (1999). Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 345–361.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Denkla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Naming of object-drawings by dyslexic and other learning disabled children.Brain and Language, 3, 1–15.
      Google Scholar
    • Eilers, R. E., Gavin, W., & Oller, D. K. (1982). Cross-linguistic perception in infancy: Early effects of linguistic experience.Journal of Child Language, 9, 289–302.
      Google Scholar
    • Eimas, P. D., & Miller, J. L. (1980). Discrimination of information for manner of articulation.Infant Behavior and Development, 3, 367–375.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Eimas, P. D., Siqueland, E. R., Jusczyk, P. W., & Vigorito, J. (1971). Speech perception in early infancy.Science, 171, 304–306.
      Google Scholar
    • Flege, J., & Port, R. (1981). Cross-language phonetic interference: Arabic to English.Language and Speech, 24, 125–146.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Fox, B., & Routh, D. K. (1975). Analyzing spoken language into words, syllables, and phonemes: A developmental study.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4, 331–342.
      Google Scholar
    • Friel-Patti, S. (1999). Clinical decision-making in the assessment and intervention of central auditory processing disorders.Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, 345–352.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Hall, J. W., Wilson, K. P., Humphreys, M. S., Tinzmann, M. B., & Bowyer, P. M. (1983). Phonemic-similarity effects in good vs. poor readers.Memory & Cognition, 11, 520–527.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Harris, K. S. (1958). Cues for the discrimination of American English fricatives in spoken syllables.Language and Speech, 1, 1–7.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Hess, R. D., & Shipman, V. (1965). Early experience and the socialization of cognitive modes in children.Child Development, 36, 86–99.
      Google Scholar
    • Jastak, S., & Wilkinson, G. S. (1984). The Wide Range Achievement Test–Revised. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates.
      Google Scholar
    • Jerger, J., & Musiek, F. (2000). Report of the consensus conference on the diagnosis of auditory processing disorders in school-aged children.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 467–474.
      MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Katz, R. B. (1986). Phonological deficiencies in children with reading disability: Evidence from an object-naming task.Cognition, 22, 225–257.
      Google Scholar
    • Kewley-Port, D. (1983). Time-varying features as correlates of place of articulation in stop consonants.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 73, 322–335.
      Google Scholar
    • Kohn, S. E., Wingfield, A., Menn, L., Goodglass, H., Berko Gleason, J., & Hyde, M. (1987). Lexical retrieval: The tip of the tongue phenomenon.Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 245–266.
      Google Scholar
    • Kuhl, P. K. (1979). Speech perception in early infancy: Perceptual constancy for spectrally dissimilar vowel categories.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66, 1668–1679.
      Google Scholar
    • Laosa, L. M. (1980). Maternal teaching strategies in Chicano and Anglo-American families: The influence of culture and education on maternal behavior.Child Development, 51, 759–765.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Lasky, R. E., Syrdal-Lasky, A., & Klein, R. E. (1975). VOT discrimination by four- to six-and-a-half-month-old infants from Spanish environments.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 20, 215–225.
      Google Scholar
    • Liberman, A. M. (1957). Some results of research on speech perception.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 29, 117–123.
      Google Scholar
    • Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967). Perception of the speech code.Psychological Review, 74, 431–461.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Liberman, I. Y., Shankweiler, D. P., Fischer, F. W., & Carter, B. (1974). Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 201–212.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mann, V. A., & Liberman, I. Y. (1984). Phonological awareness and verbal short-term memory.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 592–599.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Mann, V. A., & Repp, B. H. (1980). Influence of vocalic context on perception of the [S]-[s] distinction.Perception & Psycho-physics, 28, 213–228.
      Google Scholar
    • Marslen-Wilson, W. (1990). Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access.In G. Altman (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech perception: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 148–172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Merzenich, M. M., Jenkins, W. M., Johnston, P., Schreiner, C., Miller, S. L., & Tallal, P. (1996). Temporal processing deficits of language-learning impaired children ameliorated by training.Science, 271, 77–81.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Mody, M., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Brady, S. (1997). Speech perception deficits in poor readers: Auditory processing or phonological coding?.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 199–231.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Moffitt, A. R. (1971). Consonant cue perception by twenty- to twenty-four-week-old infants.Child Development, 42, 717–731.
      Google Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S. (1992). Age-related differences in perceptual effects of formant transitions within syllables and across syllable boundaries.Journal of Phonetics, 20, 351–382.
      Google Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S. (1996). The relation between speech perception and phonemic awareness: Evidence from low-SES children and children with chronic OM.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, 1059–1070.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S. (1999). Do temporal processing deficits cause phonological processing problems?.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 925–942.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S. (2001). Challenging the notion of innate phonetic boundaries.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1598–1605.
      Google Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S. (2002). Learning to perceive speech: How fricative perception changes, and how it stays the same.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 711–719.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S., & Miller, M. E. (1997). Predicting developmental shifts in perceptual weighting schemes.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 2253–2266.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S., & Miller, M. E. (1999). The development of phonemic coding strategies for serial recall.Applied Psycho-linguistics, 20, 563–588.
      Google Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S., Miller, M. E., Crowther, C. S., & Manhart, M. J. (2000). The effect of segmental order on fricative labeling by children and adults.Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 266–284.
      Google Scholar
    • Nittrouer, S., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1987). The role of coarticulatory effects on the perception of fricatives by children and adults.Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 319–329.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Peter, M., & Turvey, M. T. (1994). Phonological codes are early sources of constraint in visual semantic categorization.Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 497–504.
      Google Scholar
    • Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Berns, S. M., Pardo, J. S., & Lang, J. M. (1994). On the perceptual organization of speech.Psychological Review, 101, 129–156.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Rosen, S., & Manganari, E. (2001). Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing in children with dyslexia?.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 720–736.
      ASHAWireGoogle Scholar
    • Schachter, F. F. (1979). Everyday mother talk to toddlers: Early intervention. New York: Academic Press.
      Google Scholar
    • Schachter, F. F., & Strage, A. A. (1982). Adults’ talk and children’s language development.In S. G. Moore & C. R. Cooper (Eds.), The young child: Reviews of research (Vol. 3, pp. 79–96). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
      Google Scholar
    • Shannon, R. V., Zeng, F. G., Kamath, V., Wygonski, J., & Ekelid, M. (1995). Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues.Science, 270, 303–304.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Smith, S. T., Mann, V. A., & Shankweiler, D. (1986). Spoken language comprehension by good and poor readers: A study with the Token Test.Cortex, 22, 627–632.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Spoehr, K. T., & Corin, W. J. (1978). The stimulus suffix effect as a memory coding phenomenon.Memory & Cognition, 6, 583–589.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Spring, C., & Perry, L. (1983). Naming speed and serial recall in poor and adequate readers.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 141–145.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Stevens, K. N., & Blumstein, S. E. (1978). Invariant cues for place of articulation in stop consonants.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 64, 1358–1368.
      Google Scholar
    • Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1983). Limits on alternative auditory representations of speech.In C. W. Parkins & S. W. Anderson (Eds.), Cochlear prostheses: An international symposium (Vol. 405, pp. 33–38). New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.
      Google Scholar
    • Tallal, P., & Piercy, M. (1973). Defects of non-verbal auditory perception in children with developmental aphasia.Nature, 241, 468–469.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Tallal, P., & Piercy, M. (1974). Developmental aphasia: Rate of auditory processing and selective impairment of consonant perception.Neuropsychologia, 12, 83–93.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Treiman, R. (1995). Errors in short-term memory for speech: A developmental study.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1197–1206.
      Google Scholar
    • Treiman, R., & Zukowski, A. (1991). Levels of phonological awareness.In S. A. Brady & D. P. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes in literacy (pp. 67–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
      Google Scholar
    • van Orden, G. C. (1987). A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading.Memory & Cognition, 15, 181–198.
      Google Scholar
    • van Orden, G. C., Johnston, J. C., & Hale, B. L. (1988). Word identification in reading proceeds from spelling to sound to meaning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 371–385.
      Google Scholar
    • Wagner, R. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills.Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.
      CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Walley, A. C., Smith, L. B., & Jusczyk, P. W. (1986). The role of phonemes and syllables in the perceived similarity of speech sounds for children.Memory & Cognition, 14, 220–229.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • Wright, B. A., Lombardino, L. J., King, W. M., Puranik, C. S., Leonard, C. M., & Merzenich, M. M. (1997). Deficits in auditory temporal and spectral resolution in language-impaired children.Nature, 387, 176–178.
      CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar

    Additional Resources