Phonetica was published by Karger Publishers up to and including 2020. If you or your institution subscribed to Phonetica during that period, you might still have access to the full text of this article on the Karger platform if you cannot access it here.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Creaky voice in American English plays both a prosodic role, as a phrase-final marker, and a sociolinguistic one, but it is unclear how accurately naïve listeners can identify creak, and what factors facilitate or hinder ist identification. Methods: In this study, American listeners are presented with 2 experiments containing stimuli from both high- and low-pitched male and female speakers. Other manipulations include whether the auditory stimulus is a full sentence or a sentence fragment, and whether it is completely modally voiced, completely creaky, or partially creaky (final 40-50% of the utterance). Results: Accuracy is lowest on partial creak, suggesting that creaky voice is least salient when it serves as an utterance-final marker. There are no strong gender effects aside from a weak tendency to identify creak more often in females than males in the whole creak condition in one experiment. In contrast, when no creak is present, listeners false alarm on the low-pitched males. Conclusion: Rates of identifying creak in male and female speakers are similar, suggesting that listeners have a comparable ability to hear creaky voice in all speakers.
verified
References
1 Abdelli-Beruh N, Drugman T, Red Owl RH (2016): Occurrence frequencies of acoustic patterns of vocal fry in American English speakers. J Voice 30:759.e11-e20.10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.09.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed
2 Abdelli-Beruh N, Wolk L, Slavin D (2014): Prevalence of vocal fry in young adult male American English speakers. J Voice 28:185-190.10.1016/j.jvoice.2013.08.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed
3 Anderson R, Klofstad C, Mayew W, Venkatachalam M (2014): Vocal fry may undermine the success of young women in the labor market. PLoS One 9:e97506.10.1371/journal.pone.0097506Search in Google Scholar PubMed
4 Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2014): lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.0-6.Search in Google Scholar
5 Batliner A, Burger S, Johne B, Kiessling A (1993): MÜSLI: a classification scheme for laryngealizations; in House D, Touati P (eds): Proceedings of the ESCA Workshop on Prosody. Lund, Department of Linguistics, pp 176-179.Search in Google Scholar
6 Becker M, Levine J (2013): Experigen - An Online Experiment Platform.Search in Google Scholar
7 Bergan CC, Titze IR (2001): Perception of pitch and roughness in vocal signals with subharmonics. J Voice 15:165-175.10.1016/S0892-1997(01)00018-2Search in Google Scholar PubMed
8 Blomgren M, Chen Y, Ng ML, Gilbert HR (1998): Acoustic, aerodynamic, physiologic, and perceptual properties of modal and vocal fry registers. J Acoust Soc Am 103(5 pt 1):2649-2658.10.1121/1.422785Search in Google Scholar PubMed
9 Blum H (2015): Totally Fried. The ASHA Leader 21, 50-56.10.1044/leader.FTR2.21022016.50Search in Google Scholar
10 Boersma P, Weenink D (2016): Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer, version 6.0.23.Search in Google Scholar
11 Boomershine A, Hall KC, Hume E, Johnson K (2008): The influence of allophony vs. contrast on perception: the case of Spanish and English; in Avery P, Dresher BE, Rice K (eds): Contrast in Phonology: Perception and Acquisition. Berlin, Mouton, pp 145-171.Search in Google Scholar
12 Catford JC (1977): Fundamental Problems in Phonetics, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.10.2307/412751Search in Google Scholar
13 Davidson L, Erker D (2014): Hiatus resolution in American English: the case against glide insertion. Linguist Soc Am 90:482-514.10.1353/lan.2014.0028Search in Google Scholar
14 Dilley L, Shattuck-Hufnagel S, Ostendorf M (1996): Glottalization of word-initial vowels as a function of prosodic structure. J Phon 24:423-444.10.1006/jpho.1996.0023Search in Google Scholar
15 Drugman T, Kane J, Gobl C (2014): Data-driven detection and analysis of the patterns of creaky voice. Comput Speech Lang 28:1233-1253.10.1016/j.csl.2014.03.002Search in Google Scholar
16 Eddington D, Channer C (2010): American English has Go? A Lo? of glottal stops: social diffusion and linguistic motivation. Am Speech 85:338-351.10.1215/00031283-2010-019Search in Google Scholar
17 Eddington D, Taylor M (2009): T-glottalization in American English. Am Speech 84:298-314.10.1215/00031283-2009-023Search in Google Scholar
18 Edmonson J, Esling J (2006): The valves of the throat and their functioning in tone, vocal register and stress: laryngoscopic case studies. Phonology 23:157-191.10.1017/S095267570600087XSearch in Google Scholar
19 Epstein M (2002): Voice Quality and Prosody in English PhD dissertation). Los Angeles, UCLA.Search in Google Scholar
20 Esling J (1978): Voice Quality in Edinburgh: A Sociolinguistic and Phonetic Study PhD Dissertation). University of Edinburgh.Search in Google Scholar
21 Esling J, Harris J (2005): States of the glottis: an articulatory phonetic model based on laryngoscopic observations; in Hardcastle W, Beck JM (eds): A Figure of Speech: A Festschrift for John Laver. Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 347-383.Search in Google Scholar
22 Garellek M (2014): Voice quality strengthening and glottalization. J Phon 45:106-113.10.1016/j.wocn.2014.04.001Search in Google Scholar
23 Garellek M (2015): Perception of glottalization and phrase-final creak. J Acoust Soc Am 137:822-831.10.1121/1.4906155Search in Google Scholar PubMed
24 Garellek M (to appear): The phonetics of voice; in Katz W, Assmann P (eds): Handbook of Phonetics. New York, Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
25 Garellek M, Samlan R, Gerratt B, Kreiman J (2016): Modeling the voice source in terms of spectral slopes. J Acoust Soc Am 139:1404-1410.10.1121/1.4944474Search in Google Scholar PubMed
26 Garellek M, Seyfarth S (2016): Acoustic differences between English /t/ glottalization and phrasal creak. Proc Interspeech 2016:1054-1058.10.21437/Interspeech.2016-1472Search in Google Scholar
27 Gerratt B, Kreiman J (2001): Toward a taxonomy of nonmodal phonation. J Phon 29:365-381.10.1006/jpho.2001.0149Search in Google Scholar
28 Glass I (2015): If You Don't Have Anything Nice to Say, SAY IT IN ALL CAPS, This American Life (podcast). New York.Search in Google Scholar
29 Gobl C, Bennett E, Ni Chasaide A (2002): Expressive Synthesis: How Crucial is Voice Quality? pp 91-94.10.1109/WSS.2002.1224380Search in Google Scholar
30 Gobl C, Ni Chasaide A (2003): The role of voice quality in communicating emotion, mood and attitude. Speech Comm 40:189-212.10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00082-1Search in Google Scholar
31 Gobl C, Ni Chasaide A (2010): Voice source variation and its communicative function; in Hardcastle W, Laver J, Gibbon F (eds): The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, 2 ed. Oxford, Blackwell.10.1002/9781444317251.ch11Search in Google Scholar
32 Gordon M, Ladefoged P (2001): Phonation types: a cross-linguistic overview. J Phon 29:383-406.10.1006/jpho.2001.0147Search in Google Scholar
33 Gross T (2015): From Upspeak To Vocal Fry: Are We ‘Policing' Young Women's Voices? Philadelphia, Fresh Air (podcast).Search in Google Scholar
34 Hanson H (2004): Glottal characteristics of female speakers: acoustic correlates. J Acoust Soc Am 101:466-481.10.1121/1.417991Search in Google Scholar
35 Harnsberger J (2001): The perception of Malayalam nasal consonants by Marathi, Punjabi, Tamil, Oriya, Bengali, and American English listeners: a multidimensional scaling analysis. J Phon 29:303-327.10.1006/jpho.2001.0140Search in Google Scholar
36 Henton C, Bladon A (1987): Creak as a sociophonetic marker; in Hyman L, Li C (eds): Language, Speech and Mind: Studies in Honor of Victoria A. Fromkin. London, Routledge, pp 3-29.Search in Google Scholar
37 Hollien H (1974): On vocal registers. J Phon 2:125-144.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31188-XSearch in Google Scholar
38 Hollien H, Michel JF (1968): Vocal fry as a phonational register. J Speech Hear Res 11:600-604.10.1044/jshr.1103.600Search in Google Scholar PubMed
39 Hollien H, Moore P, Wendahl R, Michel J (1966): On the nature of vocal fry. J Speech Hear Res 9:245-247.10.1044/jshr.0902.245Search in Google Scholar PubMed
40 Hollien H, Wendahl R (1968): Perceptual study of vocal fry. J Acoust Soc Am 43:506-509.10.1121/1.1910858Search in Google Scholar PubMed
41 Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008): Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom J 50:346-363.10.1002/bimj.200810425Search in Google Scholar PubMed
42 Huffman M (2005): Segmental and prosodic effects on coda glottalization. J Phon 33:335-362.10.1016/j.wocn.2005.02.004Search in Google Scholar
43 Irons ST, Alexander JE (2016): Vocal fry in realistic speech: acoustic characteristics and perceptions of vocal fry in spontaneously produced and read speech. J Acoust Soc Am 140:3397-3397.10.1121/1.4970891Search in Google Scholar
44 Iseli M, Shue YL, Alwan AA (2007): Age, sex, and vowel dependencies of acoustic measures related to the voice source. J Acoust Soc Am 121:2283-2295.10.1121/1.2697522Search in Google Scholar
45 Ishi C, Sakakibara KI, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2008): A method for automatic detection of vocal fry. IEEE Trans Audio Speech Lang Process 16:4 -56.10.1109/TASL.2007.910791Search in Google Scholar
46 Kane J, Drugman T, Gobl C (2013): Improved automatic detection of creak. Comput Speech Lang 27:1028-1047.10.1016/j.csl.2012.11.002Search in Google Scholar
47 Kawahara H, Masuda-Kasuse I, de Cheveigne A (1999): Restructuring speech representations using a pitch-adaptive time-frequency smoothing and an instantaneous-frequency-based F0 extraction: possible role of a repetitive structure in sounds. Speech Comm 27:187-207.10.1016/S0167-6393(98)00085-5Search in Google Scholar
48 Keating P, Garellek M, Kreiman J (2015): Acoustic Properties of Different Kinds of Creaky Voice; in Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (ed): Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow, Scotland.10.1017/S0025100315000286Search in Google Scholar
49 Keating P, Kuo G (2012): Comparison of speaking fundamental frequency in English and Mandarin. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1050-1060.10.1121/1.4730893Search in Google Scholar PubMed
50 Khan SuD, Becker K, Zimman L (2015): Acoustic correlates of creaky voice in English. J Acoust Soc Am 137:2267.10.1121/1.4920276Search in Google Scholar
51 Kreiman J (1982): Perception of sentence and paragraph boundaries in natural conversation. J Phon 10:163-175.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30955-6Search in Google Scholar
52 Kreiman J, Gerratt B, Khan SuD (2010): Effects of native language on perception of voice quality. J Phon 38:588-593.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.004Search in Google Scholar
53 Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Garellek M, Samlan R, Zhang Z (2014): Toward a unified theory of voice production and perception. Loquens 1:e009.10.3989/loquens.2014.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
54 Kreiman J, Sidtis D (2011): Foundations of Voice Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Voice Production and Perception, Malden, Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444395068Search in Google Scholar
55 Kuang J, Liberman M (2016): The effect of vocal fry on pitch perception; in Ding Z, Zhang W, Luo ZQ (eds): Proceedings of the 41st IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). Shanghai, IEEE.10.1109/ICASSP.2016.7472681Search in Google Scholar
56 Kuang J, Liberman M (2016): Pitch-range perception: the dynamic interaction between voice quality and fundamental frequency. Proc Interspeech 2016:1350-1354.10.21437/Interspeech.2016-1483Search in Google Scholar
57 Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen R (2013): lmerTest: Tests for Random and Fixed Effects for Linear Mixed Effect Models. Version 2.0-33.Search in Google Scholar
58 Laver J (1980): The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/S0025100300002292Search in Google Scholar
59 Laver J (1994): The Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1111/josl.12123Search in Google Scholar
60 Lee S (2015): Creaky voice as a phonational device marking parenthetical segments in talk. J Sociolinguist 19:275-302.10.1111/josl.12123Search in Google Scholar
61 Lehiste I (1975): The phonetic structure of paragraphs; in Cohen A, Nooteboom S (eds): Structure and Process in Speech Perception. New York, Springer-Verlag, pp 195-203.10.1007/978-3-642-81000-8_12Search in Google Scholar
62 McGlone R (1967): Air flow during vocal fry phonation. J Speech Hear Res 10:299-304.10.1044/jshr.1002.299Search in Google Scholar PubMed
63 McGlone R, Shipp T (1971): Some physiologic correlates of vocal fry phonation. J Speech Hear Res 14:769-775.10.1044/jshr.1404.769Search in Google Scholar PubMed
64 Melvin S, Clopper CG (2015): Gender variation in creaky voice and fundamental frequency; in Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (ed): Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Glasgow, Scotland.Search in Google Scholar
65 Mendoza-Denton N (2011): The semiotic hitchhiker's guide to creaky voice: circulation and gendered hardcore in a Chicana/o gang persona. J Linguist Anthropol 21:261-280.10.1111/j.1548-1395.2011.01110.xSearch in Google Scholar
66 Mompeán J, Gómez FA (2011): Hiatus Resolution Strategies in Non-Rhotic English: The Case of /r/-liaison; Proceedings from the 17th International Congress on Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS). Hong Kong.Search in Google Scholar
67 Murphy P (2006): On first rahmonic amplitude in the analysis of synthesized aperiodic voice signals. J Acoust Soc Am 120:2896-2907.10.1121/1.2355483Search in Google Scholar PubMed
68 Murry T (1971): Subglottal pressure and airflow measures during vocal fry phonation. J Speech Hear Res 14:544-551.10.1044/jshr.1403.544Search in Google Scholar
69 Oliveira G, Davidson A, Holczer R, Kaplan S, Paretzky A (2016): A comparison of the use of glottal fry in the spontaneousspeech of young and middle-aged American women. J Voice 30:684-687.10.1016/j.jvoice.2015.08.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed
70 Pepiot E (2014): Male and female speech: a study of mean f0, f0 range, phonation type and speech rate in Parisian French and American English speakers; in Campbell N, Gibbon D, Hirst D (eds): Proceedings of Speech Prosody 7. Dublin, Ireland.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2014-49Search in Google Scholar
71 Pierrehumbert J (1995): Prosodic effects on glottal allophones; in Fujimura O, Hirano M (eds). Vocal Fold Physiology: Voice Quality Control. San Diego, Singular Publishing Group, pp 39-60.Search in Google Scholar
72 Pierrehumbert J, Talkin D (1992): Lenition of /h/ and glottal stop; in Docherty G, Ladd DR (eds). Papers in Laboratory Phonology II: Gesture, Segment, Prosody. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 90-116.Search in Google Scholar
73 Podesva R (2013): Gender and the social meaning of non-modal phonation types; in Cathcart C, Chen IH, Finley G, Kang S, Sandy C, Stickles E (eds): Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp 427-448.Search in Google Scholar
74 R Development Core Team (2013) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Search in Google Scholar
75 Redi L, Shattuck-Hufnagel S (2001): Variation in the realization of glottalization in normal speakers. J Phon 29:407-429.10.1006/jpho.2001.0145Search in Google Scholar
76 Samlan R, Story B, Bunton K (2013): Relation of perceived breathiness to laryngeal kinematics and acoustic measures based on computational modeling. J Speech Lang Hear Res 56:1209-1223.10.1044/1092-4388(2012/12-0194)Search in Google Scholar PubMed
77 Seidl A, Cristià A, Bernard A, Onishi KH (2009): Allophonic and phonemic contrasts in infants' learning of sound patterns. Lang Learn Devel 5:191-202.10.1080/15475440902754326Search in Google Scholar
78 Shue YL, Keating P, Vicenik C, Yu K (2011): VoiceSauce: A Program for Voice Analysis; Proceedings of the XVII International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Hong Kong, International Phonetic Association, pp 1846-1849.10.1121/1.3248865Search in Google Scholar
79 Slifka J (2006): Some physiological correlates to regular and irregular phonation at the end of an utterance. J Voice 20:171-186.10.1016/j.jvoice.2005.04.002Search in Google Scholar PubMed
80 Stuart-Smith J (1999): Glasgow: accent and voice quality; in Foulkes P, Docherty G (eds): Urban Voices: Accent Studies in the British Isles. London, Arnold, pp 203-222.Search in Google Scholar
81 Sumner M, Samuel A (2005): Perception and representation of regular variation: the case of final /t/. J Memory Lang 52:322-338.10.1016/j.jml.2004.11.004Search in Google Scholar
82 Szakay A (2012): Voice quality as a marker of ethnicity in New Zealand: from acoustics to perception. J Sociolinguist 16:382-397.10.1111/j.1467-9841.2012.00537.xSearch in Google Scholar
83 Titze I (1994): Principles of Voice Production. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.10.1121/1.424266Search in Google Scholar
84 Tyler JC (2015): Expanding and mapping the indexical field. J Engl Linguist 43:284-310.10.1177/0075424215607061Search in Google Scholar
85 Vishnubhotla S, Espy-Wilson C (2006): Automatic Detection of Irregular Phonation in Continuous Speech. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICLSP). Pittsburgh, PA, pp 949-952.10.21437/Interspeech.2006-178Search in Google Scholar
86 Vuolo M, Garfield B (2013): Get Your Creak On, Lexicon Valley (podcast). New York.Search in Google Scholar
87 Ward N (2006): Non-lexical conversational sounds in American English. Pragmat Cognition 14:129-182.10.1075/pc.14.1.08warSearch in Google Scholar
88 Wells J (1982): Accents of English. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611759Search in Google Scholar
89 Whalen DH, Best CT, Irwin JR (1997): Lexical effects in the perception and production of American English /p/allophones. J Phon 25:501-528.10.1006/jpho.1997.0058Search in Google Scholar
90 Wolf N (2015): Young Women, Give up the Vocal Fry and Reclaim Your Strong Female Voice. July 24, 2015. The Guardian.Search in Google Scholar
91 Wolk L, Abdelli-Beruh N, Slavin D (2012): Habitual use of vocal fry in young adult female speakers. J Voice 26:111-116.10.1016/j.jvoice.2011.04.007Search in Google Scholar
92 Yuasa IP (2010): Creaky voice: a new feminine voice quality for young urban-oriented upwardly mobile American women? Am Speech 85:315-337.10.1215/00031283-2010-018Search in Google Scholar
93 Zhang Z (2016): Cause-effect relationship between vocal fold physiology and voice production in a three-dimensional phonation model. J Acoust Soc Am 139:1493-1507.10.1121/1.4944754Search in Google Scholar PubMed
94 Zue V, Laferriere M (1979): Acoustic study of medial /t, d/ in American English. J Acoust Soc Am 66:1039-1050.10.1121/1.383323Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
