References
Abramson, Arthur. S
2004 “The Plausibility of Phonetic Explanations of Tonogenesis”. From Traditional Phonology to Modern Speech Processing: Festschrift for Professor Wu Zongji’s 95th birthday ed. by Gunnar Fant, Hiroya Fujisaki, Jianfen Cao & Yi Xu, 17-29. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar
Best, Catherine T
1994 “The Emergence of Native-Language Phonological Influences in Infants: A perceptual assimilation model”. The Development of Speech Perception ed. by Judith C. Goodman & Howard C. Nusbaum, 167-224. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bohn, Ocke-Schwen & Catherine T. Best
2012 “Native-Language Phonetic and Phonological Influences on Perception of American English Approximants by Danish and German Listeners”. Journal of Phonetics 40:1.109-128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Browman, Catherine & Louis Goldstein
1989 “Articulatory Gestures as Phonological Units”. Phonology 6:2.201-251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990 “Gestural Specification Using Dynamically-Defined Articulatory Structures”. Journal of Phonetics 18:3.299-320.Google Scholar
1992 “Articulatory Phonology: An overview”. Phonetica 49:3.155-180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrd, Dani, Abigail Kaun, Shrikanth Narayanan & Elliot Saltzman
2000 “Phrasal Signatures in Articulation”. Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the lexicon ed. by Michael B. Broe & Janet B. Pierrehumbert, 70-87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Byrd, Dani & Elliot Saltzman
2003 “The Elastic Phrase: Modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening”. Journal of Phonetics 31:2.149-180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, Albert & Núria Sebastián-Gallés
2014 “How Does the Bilingual Experience Sculpt the Brain?”. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 15:5.336-345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durand, Jacques, Bernard Laks & Chantal Lyche
eds. 2009Phonologie, variation et accents du français. Paris: Hermès.Google Scholar
Flege, James E
1995 “Second Language Speech Learning: Theory, findings, and problems”. Speech Perception and Linguistic Experience: Issues in cross-language research ed. by Winifred Strange, 233-277. Baltimore, Md.: York Press.Google Scholar
2007 “Language Contact in Bilingualism: Phonetic system interactions”. Laboratory Phonology 9 ed. by Jennifer Cole & José Ignacio Hualde, 353-382. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. & Zenon W. Pylyshyn
1981 “How Direct Is Visual Perception?: Some reflections on Gibson’s ‘ecological approach’”. Cognition 9:2.139-196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gafos, Adamantios I
2002 “A Grammar of Gestural Coordination”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20:2.269-337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 “Dynamics in Grammar: Comment on Ladd and Ernestus & Baayen”. Laboratory Phonology 8: Varieties of phonological competence ed. by Louis Goldstein, Douglas H. Wahlen & Catherine T. Best, 51-79. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gafos, Adamantios I. & Stefan Benus
2006 “Dynamics of Phonological Cognition”. Cognitive Science: A multidisciplinary journal 30:5.1-39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hallé, Pierre A., Catherine T. Best & Andrea Levitt
1999 “Phonetic vs. Phonological Influences on French Listeners’ Perception of American English Approximants”. Journal of Phonetics 27:3.281-306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah & Cécile Fougeron
2002 “Realizations of Accentual Phrase in French Intonation”. Probus 14:1.147-172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keating, Patricia A
1988 “The Phonology-Phonetics Interface”. Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey I: Linguistic theory: Foundations ed. by Frederick J. Newmeyer, 281-301. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1990 “The Window Model of Coarticulation: Articulatory evidence”. Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the grammar and physics of speech ed. by John Kingston & Mary E. Beckman, 451-470. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kohler, Klaus. J
ed. 2012 “Bridging the Segment-Prosody Divide in Speech Production and Perception: Special topic issue”. Phonetica 69:1-2.5-6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, Patricia K
1979 “Speech Perception in Early Infancy: Perceptual constancy for spectrally dissimilar vowel classes”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66:6.1668-1679. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1983 “Perception of Auditory Equivalence Classes for Speech in Early Infancy”. Infant Behavior and Development 6:2-3.263-285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, Patricia K., Jean E. Andruski, Inna A. Chistovich, Ludmilla A. Chistovich, Elena V. Kozhevnikova, Viktoria L. Ryskina, Elvira I. Stolyarova, Ulla Sundberg & Francisco Lacerda
1997 “Cross-Language Analysis of Phonetic Units in Language Addressed to Infants”. Science 277.684-686. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladd, Robert D
2006 “Distinctive Phones in Surface Representation”. Laboratory Phonology 8: Varieties of phonological competence ed. by Louis Goldstein, Douglas H. Wahlen & Catherine T. Best, 1-26. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mehler, Jacques, Emmanuel Dupoux, Thierry Nazzi & Ghislaine Dehaene-Lambertz
1996 “Coping with Linguistic Diversity: The infant’s viewpoint”. Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition ed. by James L. Morgan & Katherine Demuth, 101-116. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pfitzinger, Hartmurt R
2001 “Phonetische Analyse der Sprechgeschwindigkeit”. Forschungsberichte des Instituts für Phonetik und sprachliche Kommunikation der Universität München 38.117-264.Google Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, Núria & Salvador Soto-Faraco
1999 “Online Processing of Native and Non-native Phonemic Contrasts in Early Bilinguals”. Cognition 72:2.111-123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Mary, John Hajek & Matthew Absalom
2002 “Raddoppiamento Sintattico and Glottalization Phenomena in Italian: A first phonetic excursus”. Proceedings of the 9th Australian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, Melbourne , 3-5 December 2002, 154-159. Melbourne: Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.
van Heuven, Vincent & Judith Haan
2000 “Phonetic Correlates of Statement versus Question Intonation in Dutch”. Intonation: Analysis, modelling and technology ed. by Antonis Botinis, 119-144. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
2002 “Temporal development of interrogativity cues in Dutch”. Laboratory Phonology 7 ed. by Carlos Gussenhoven & Natasha Warner, 61-86. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vayra, Mario
1994 “Phonetic Explanations in Phonology: Laryngealization as the case for glottal stops in Italian word-final stressed syllables”. Phonologica 1992: Proceedings of the 7th International Phonology Meeting, Krems an der Donau, 4-9 July 1992 ed. by Wolfgang U. Dressler, Martin Prinzhorn & John R. Rennison, 275-293. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Werker, Janet F. & R. C. Tees
1984 “Cross-Language Speech Perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life”. Infant Behavior and Development 7:1.49-63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werker, Janet F., Henny H. Yeung & Katherine A. Yoshida
2012 “How Do Infants Become Experts at Native-Speech Perception?Current Directions in Psychological Science 21:4.221-226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar