Hi Bruno,
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Did your participants rate the 
slower rate stimuli as more regular, or the faster ones?
The faster ones were rated more regular.
In any case, the problem with your stimuli may be that they were 
all fairly irregular,
Correct, but this, I find, is exactly what happens in speech. My 
primary interest is not to investigate how subjects perceive 
irregularity of intervals in general but how they perceive the 
irregularity differences of c and v intervals typically occurring in 
different languages.
so participants may have relied on rate because it was a much more 
salient property.
Correct as well, and, again, I assume that this may be the case in speech too.
You may have to prevent this by giving more precise instructions 
and/or controlling the rate of your stimuli.
Well, it has been shown already that when subjects are trained on 
the stimuli and when rate is controlled for they can use variability 
cues without a problem. I deliberately left the interpretation of 
'regularity' to my subjects and claim that when they have the choice 
they choose rate rather than interval variability (or rather: the 
degree of interval variability occurring in speech) to decide 
whether a sequence of variable intervals is more or less regular. 
Again, if listeners should use these cues in real situations to 
distinguish between languages nobody will tell them which cues to 
listen for and speech rate will not be normalized.
It seems unlikely to me that linguists' classification of languages 
as stress- or syllable-timed merely reflects a difference in the 
average speaking rate for those languages.
Well, generally this is my idea. I would not go as far as saying 
that it 'merely' reflects speech rate, but I do claim that speech 
rate, amongst other factors, plays a major role in there which has 
so far been entirely neglected. I am currently running experiments 
with delexicalised stimuli that are closer to real speech (low pass 
filtered speech at 300 Hz) and I am manipulating the rates of 
stimuli in order to test whether I can make listeners rate German 
stimuli as French based on rate only.
Best wishes,
Volker
Best,
Bruno
Hi Bruno,
I don't think there are any data suggesting that people cannot 
distinguish interval durations at fast rates. The question is how 
large the differences must be to be detected, and how the 
magnitude of that difference depends on rate. There is no 
"breakdown" of discrimination at any rate.
Yes, thanks for pointing that out so clearly. After reading through the
literature this morning I realized that I got something wrong there...
It is unclear what your listeners had to do. You are talking about "a
 big effect of rate on listeners' perception of speech rhythm", 
but what does this have to do with interval discrimination? What 
exactly
 was the effect of rate on perceived speech rhythm, and how did 
interval durations vary?
Well, sorry, it was indeed vague. I was not sure to what level of
detail readers on this list would be interested in this. I was 
referring to recent theories of speech rhythm claiming that rhythm 
classes (e.g. stress- and syllable-timed languages) can be 
distinguished by the listener based on the durational variability 
of consonantal (c) and vocalic (v) intervals (e.g. work by Frank 
Ramus or Esther Grabe). It was
demonstrated that syllable-timed languages for example have 
proportionally less c- and v-interval variability than 
stress-timed languages and that this information is processed by 
the listener to group languages into traditional rhythmic classes. 
For two syllable-timed (French & Italian; F & I) and two 
stress-timed languages (English & German; E & G) my own  data 
replicates the objective differences nicely. However, I found that 
because of their less complex syllable structure, speakers of 
syllable-timed languages also produce cv-intervals at a far higher 
rate than stress-timed languages.
In a perception experiment I took sentences from French and German 
and turned v-intervals into tones and c-intervals into white noise 
and asked listeners to rate the stimuli according to the 
'regularity of beep sequences' on a scale form 1 to 10. I left the 
interpretation of 'regularity' to the listener and expected that 
listeners would pick up on the proportionally higher c- and 
v-interval variability in German and thus rate these stimuli as 
the more irregular beep sequences. However, results showed very 
poor correlation between the regularity rating and any of a number 
of c- and v-variability measures but I found a strong correlation 
with cv-rate. So it seems that in my experiment listeners 
interpreted 'regularity' as rate only and did not listen for any 
durational variability within the stimuli.
In order to interpret the results I thought it may help to consult work
that looked at the influence of rate on interval variability 
perception. However, I find my data and method are pretty 
difficult to compare with Friberg & Sundberg and the type of 
studies mentioned in there. If I had pointed out to my listeners 
to listen out for certain types of durational variability I am 
sure they could have done it (Ramus showed that in a way by not 
allowing rate variability). However, the fact that they do not 
make use of durational variability cues when given the choice 
between rate and variability tells me that this may be something 
they do in speech too when they distinguish between languages 
based on rhythmic cues.
Hope that makes it clearer,
Volker
Best, Bruno
Bruno and Pierre,
thank you so much for your helpful suggestions!
The work on rhythm is more what I am looking for. I found a big 
effect of rate on listeners' perception of speech rhythm. I 
assume
 that it may have something to do with listeners not being able to
 detect interval variability in speech any more when the intervals
 under investigation are shorter (typically the case in so 
called 'syllable-timed languages' because they posses simpler 
phonotactic
 structures). So I am looking for evidence showing at what rate 
interval distinction ability breaks down in rhythmic contexts.
However, all interval durations I am looking at (syllables, c- 
or v-intervals) are well below 200 ms in any language I have 
collected
 data on, which, judged by the rhythm findings, would mean that 
listeners should not be able to detect durational variability at 
all between any of the speech intervals (when judging duration 
only!) and that can hardly be true. It probably has to do with 
the
 fact that interval variability in my speech stimuli is much 
more complex and do not fulfill the criterion of isochrony in 
the way they do it in the Friberg & Sundberg study. I am working 
on an explanation...
Best wishes & thanks again, Volker
-- -------------------------------------------- Volker Dellwo 
Department of Phonetics & Linguistics University College London
phone: +44 (0)20 7679 5003 (internal: 25003)
www.phon.ucl.ac.uk www.phonetiklabor.de 
--------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------
Volker Dellwo
Department of Phonetics & Linguistics
University College London
phone: +44 (0)20 7679 5003 (internal: 25003)
www.phon.ucl.ac.uk
www.phonetiklabor.de
--------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------
Volker Dellwo
Department of Phonetics & Linguistics
University College London
phone: +44 (0)20 7679 5003 (internal: 25003)
www.phon.ucl.ac.uk
www.phonetiklabor.de
--------------------------------------------