Talk:Speech perception
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Acoustic landmarks and distinctive features was copied or moved into Speech perception with this edit on September 23 2019. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fiorellamedinaperez.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
A major update edit
An update of this topic is being prepared Gmilbrat —Preceding undated comment added 13:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC).
An update of this entry is being prepared... Jonas.kluk 21:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- This rewrite is excellent! I vote to replace the text of the main page with it. One concern might be that it is too technical for a general Wikipedia article. This could probably be fixed with a bunch of minor edits though. dzou 14:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! is it too technical? it's hard to find the balance... --Jonas.kluk 07:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, it can be. Now that I look at it again though, I think it's good, and the amount of technical detail seems comparable to other articles on broad science topics. I'll try to work on it a bit more later also, but I think it's definitely ready to be moved to the main page. dzou 19:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Today we finished the last missing bits and moved the rewritten article from here to the main page. We hope our work will serve its purpose well. We'd like to thank dzou for his acknowledging comment and for his contributions into the text of the rewrite. --Jonas.kluk, --KaMiKaLuEvJo 11:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Phonological account of speech perception edit
There is something we didn't have enough time and energy to include into our rewrite. It is how speech perception is treated in phonology (e.g. how OT models the recognition of speech sounds and larger units. Any help is welcome... --KaMiKaLuEvJo 11:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Well it is noticeable that at least parts of the article display discourse in which it is assumed that the ontological status of the phoneme is not problematic and that a unit such as this is integral to speech perception. Since much of mainstream academic linguistics does not integrate well with where most speech perception and recognition work comes from, there may be no hope here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.213.98.31 (talk) 03:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Question edit
What concept would explain the following: speaking with my father and believing he is fluent in English; then speaking with him on the telephone and discovering he has a heavy European accent Pendragon39 19:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Your perceptions have proven to be variable. Face-to-face communication has more information from the source to help you interpret and understand it. Indirect communication, such as through a phone, lacks crucial visual information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.213.98.31 (talk) 03:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Perception of female speech vs male speech in men edit
Some time ago I read an article about some research showing that men mentally process female speech more similar to how they process music, in contrast to their "regular" processing of male speech. The University of Sheffield made the study using 12 men:
I think this and the other facts from the study are worth mentioning in this article or in one related to musical cognition. --Rev L. Snowfox (talk) 12:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)