Subject: JASA templates From: Tarun Pruthi <tpruthi(at)GLUE.UMD.EDU> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 15:16:30 -0400Hi, I am writing a paper for JASA and I am unable to find a template for writing articles for JASA in latex. Can anyone point me to the relevant links? Any other tips/suggestions I should keep in mind are welcome. Thanks and Regards Tarun On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Robert Port wrote: > I can't resist responding to this issue. I have spent my career trying > to figure out what words are made of. I have finally come to the > conclusion that: > > BOTH PHONEMES AND PHONES ARE INTUITIVELY PERSUASIVE PRIMARILY > BECAUSE OF OUR LIFELONG EXPERIENCE WITH ALPHABETS. > > Speech sounds are very short (15-20 per second), and the relevant > motor gestures are mostly invisible (tongue, glottis, velum, etc). And > those of us in the European cultural tradition learn to use letters > beginning as young as 2. Letters are a great engineering solution to > preserving language in graphic form and our education system assures > that we all become proficient at thinking about speech in letter-like > terms from an early age. But phones and phonemes inherit many > graphic properties from letters: > * SERIAL ORDER (no temporal patterns allowed), > * NONOVERLAPPING (hence the artificial `coarticulation problem'), > * PERFECTLY CONTRASTIVE FROM ONE ANOTHER (no near contrasts or > partial contrasts) > * STATIC (diphthongs, glides and affricates present awkward > inconsistencies). > > In the late 19th C, de Courtenay proposed the notion of the `phoneme' > which was very quickly adopted by phoneticians and linguists and > treated as a great discovery about human language. In fact, all that > happened is that scientists began to think seriously about the > psychological representation of language (which had been largely > ignored earlier) and thought `Maybe we have something in our heads > that represents words the way letters do. There must be something > analogous to letters to keep words distinct from each other. There > must be PHONEMES!' The phoneme was not discovered, it was just > postulated by analogy with alphabetical written language. > > So how ARE words `represented' in the head?: By gestures and gesture > components of various sizes - from feature size to syllable size to > the size of whole phrases - WHATEVER STATISTICAL REGULARITIES SPEAKERS > HAPPEN TO PICK UP as they learn how TO talk. Each language has its > own conventional solution to keeping utterances distinct. Of course, > languages have a phonological system, something a little like an > `inventory' of possible sound contrasts in various positions. This > system should be thought of as a social institution that children > learn to adapt their speech habits to. But these inventories are very > different from a cognitive spelling system. Eg, they always have many > uncertainties, places where you cannot tell which phonemes (letters) > to employ: what is the V in `beer'? (same as bead or same as bid?), > what is the stop in `stow'? Same as tow or same as doe? What is the > pstop butter? Same a butt or same as Bud? Or neither? (But the data > show two slightly different flaps are used in ladder and latter!) If > language were REALLY spelled with a phonological alphabet, then these > uncertainties could not happen. > > I have a couple mspts on my website addressing these > issues. Obviously there are a great many empirical implications of > this iconoclastic hypothesis: implications about how speech can be > recognized (by humans or machine), for how languages are learned, how > they change over time, differences between the linguistic intuitions > of alphabet-literates vs. nonalphabet-literates, constraints on > phonological language games (like pig-latin), etc etc. Basically ALL > the data come out just as this hypothesis predicts. I claim, in fact: > > NO DATA WHATEVER, (aside from the powerful intuitions of lay > people and linguists educated in the alphabetic tradition) SUPPORT A > SEGMENTAL (that is, C and V) DESCRIPTION OF LANGUAGE! > > I would like to hear the evidence if anyone wishes to challenge this > claim. > > I have a couple papers on my website presenting these > arguments in more detail. > http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~port/pubs.html > > Bob Port > > ( ( ( O ) ) ) ( ( ( O ) ) ) ( ( ( O ) ) ) > Lingstcs/Comp Sci/Cogntv Sci > ROBERT F. PORT 330 Memorial Hall, Indiana University > Bloomington, Indiana 47405 > 812-855-9217 Fx 812-855-5363 > http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~port > > ----------------------------------------- Tarun Pruthi Graduate Research Assistant, ECE Room 3180, A V Williams Building University of Maryland, College Park MD 20742 USA Email: tpruthi(at)glue.umd.edu Web: www.ece.umd.edu/~tpruthi Ph: 301-405-1365 ----------------------------------------