Lip protrusion and tongue position in French vowels produced by blind speakers and sighted speakers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of visual experience in speech production was investigated through a study of the French vowels /i y u a/. Articulatory and acoustic recordings of ten repetitions of the vowels in CVC syllables embedded in carrier sentences were conducted in three consonant environments (/b d g/) and two prosodic conditions (neutral and under contrastive emphasis). Six congenitally blind adults and six sighted adults were recorded. All participants were native speakers of Canadian French and had no history of speech disorder. The audio signal, lip movement, and tongue shapes were recorded using a digital camera and an ultrasound system. The minimal (for /i a/) or maximal (for /y u/) horizontal position of the upper lip was tracked and the front-back position of the tongue was measured for each vowel. Formant frequencies were extracted using LPC analyses. Results show that, despite similar acoustic differences, the rounded and unrounded vowels are less differentiated along the protrusion dimension for blind speakers compared to sighted speakers. It is suggested that this variability is related to a trade-off between lip protrusion and tongue position. Significant interaction effects between consonant environment and vowel category are discussed for each speaker group. [Work supported by SSHRC, NSERC.]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".