Search results
Dec 31, 2006 · In mixed substitution errors the intrusion is both semantically and phonologically related to the target (e.g. 13 and 14). W e find mixed errors far more often
May 18, 2023 · Interestingly, 57 lexical substitutions (5.21%) are both semantically and form-related. Compared to the chance rates of these mixed errors from prior research (e.g., less than half of 1% in Dell et al., 1997), these errors are clearly above chance.
- 10.5334/joc.278
- 2023
- J Cogn. 2023; 6(1): 26.
Although PPA is distinct from the better understood stroke-induced aphasias, one common characteristic is the production of phonological paraphasias (production errors where phonemes are omitted, added, or substituted in a target word).
The shape of speech errors also supports fundamental assumptions in phonology. For example, the single phoneme effect states that most sound errors involve a single segment, and not sequences or features (Nooteboom 1969; Shattuck-Hufnagel 1983), giving psychological reality to phonological segments.
In this paper, we introduced a simulator that automates word substitution errors (given a WER) on perfectly transcribed corpora to simulate ASR-plausible errors, considering both phonemic and semantic similarities between words.
- Rohit Voleti, Julie M. Liss, Visar Berisha
- 10.1109/icassp.2019.8683367
- 2019
- 2019/05
Semantic errors are primarily sensitive to the properties of the semantic field involved, whereas phonological errors are sensitive to phonological properties of the targets and intrusions. We explore the features of a corpus of naturally occurring word substitution speech errors.
People also ask
Are mixed substitution errors semantic or phonological?
How do speech errors affect phonology?
Does word frequency affect phonological errors?
What is the difference between semantic errors and phonological errors?
Are phonological substitutions over-represented?
Are phonological patterns of speech errors coherent?
Apr 2, 2021 · We quantified lexical and non-lexical errors, repeated attempts, phonetic errors, and syllabifications. We assessed effects of word frequency, word length, phoneme position, and syllabic and phonological complexity. Results: CS made similar errors across tasks, consistent with a post-lexical impairment.
