Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme

Ayşe Altıparmak

doi:10.29110/soylemdergi.356190

EN TR

AN ANALYSIS ON PSYCHOLINGUISTIC SPEECH PRODUCTION MODELS

Abstract

Psycholinguistic speech production models are based on two main theories. In the first of these, since the researchers assume that the different units interact with each other during speech production, and the decisions about speech production are determined according to the activation level of the nodes representing these units, the models prepared in the direction of this theory are classified as spreading activation models. Models prepared according to the second theory are described as modular speech production models since it is assumed that speech production is realized by separate units which have a one-way connection between different levels in these models. The purpose of this study is to compile the most effective ones of these models and evaluate their effectiveness in explaining the processes of speech production and examine the production of speech in the context of the emergence of speech disfluencies.

Keywords

Psycholinguistics,speech,speech production models,speech disfluencies,linguistics

References

Altıparmak, A. (2015). Türkçe Konuşmada Akıcısızlık: Psikodilbilimsel Bir İnceleme. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). İzmir: Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
Berg, T. (1986). The Problem of Language Control: Editing, Monitoring and Feedback. Psychological Research. 48: 133-144.
Bock, J. K. (1982). Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Syntax: Information Processing Contributions to Sentence Formulation. American Psychological Association. 89 (1): 1-47.
Bock, K. ve Levelt, W. (1994). Grammatical Encoding. Handbook of Psycholinguistics (2006). Editors Matthew J. Traxler and M. A. Gernsbacher. San Diego: Academic Press (ss.945-984).
Butterworth, B. (1981). Speech Errors: Old Data in Search of New Theories. Linguistics. 19: 627-662.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton & Co.
Chomsky, N. (1959). A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language. 35(1): 26-58.
Cohen, A. (1968). Errors of Speech and Their Implication for Understanding the Strategy of Language Users. Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence (1973). Editor Victoria A. Fromkin. The Hague & Paris: Mouton (ss.88-92).
Dell, G. S. (1986). A Spreading-Activation Theory of Retrieval in Sentence Production. Psychological Review. 93(3): 283-321.
Dell, G. S. ve Reich, P. A. (1980). Slips of the Tongue: The Facts and A Stratificational Model. The Rice University Studies. 66(2):19-34.

De Smedt, K. ve Kempen, G. (1987). Incremental Sentence Production, Self-Correction and Coordination. Natural Language Generation, NATO ASI Series E 135 (ss.365-376). Editor Gerard Kempen. Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Dordrecht.
Eklund, R. (2004). Disfluency in Swedish Human-Human and Human-Machine Travel Booking Dialogues. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Linköping, Sweden.
Freud, S. (1901). The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. Çev. Abraham Arden Brill. London: T. Fisher Unwin.
Fromkin, V. A. (1971). The Non-Anomalous Nature of Anomalous Utterances. Speech errors as linguistic evidence (1973). Editor Victoria A. Fromkin. The Hague & Paris: Mouton (ss.215-242).
Garrett, M. F. (1975). The Analysis of Sentence Production. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation Volume 9 (1975). Editor Gordon H. Bower. New York: Academic Press (ss.133-177).
Harley, T. A. (1984). A Critique of Top-Down Independent Levels Models of Speech Production: Evidence from Non-Plan-Internal Speech Errors. Cognitive Science. 8: 191-219.
Hartsuiker, R. J. ve Kolk, H. H. J. (2001). Error Monitoring in Speech Production: A Computational Test of the Perceptual Loop Theory. Cognitive Psychology. 42: 113- 157.
Hockett, C. F. (1967). Where the Tongue Slips, There Slip I. Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence (1973). Editor Victoria A. Fromkin. The Hague & Paris: Mouton (ss.93-119).
Kempen, G. (1978). Sentence Construction by a Psychologically Plausible Formulator. Recent Advances in the Psychology of Language: Formal and Experimental Approaches Volume 2. Editors Robin N. Campbell and Philipp T. Smith. New York: Plenum Press (ss.103-124).
Kempen, G. ve Hoenkamp, E. (1987). An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation. Cognitive Science. 11: 201-258.
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech Production and Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lashley, K. S. (1951). The Problem of Serial Order in Behavior. Hixon Symposium on Cerebral Mechanisms in Behavior. Editor Lloyd A. Jeffress. New York: Wiley (ss.112-136).
Laver, J. D. M. (1969). The Detection and Correction of Slips of the Tongue. Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence (1973). Editor Victoria A. Fromkin. The Hague & Paris: Mouton (ss.132-143).
Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and Self-Repair in Speech. Cognition. 14: 41-104.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1992). Accessing Words in Speech Production: Stages, Processes and Representations. Cognition. 42: 1-22.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1999). Producing Spoken Language: A Blueprint of the Speaker. The Neurocognition of Language (ss.83-122). Editors Colin M. Brown and Peter Hagoort. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
MacKay, D. G. (1992). Awareness and Error Detection: New Theories and Research Paradigms. Consciousness and Cognition. 1: 199-225.
Morton, J. (1964). A Model for Continuous Language Behaviour. Language and Speech. 7: 40-70.
Motley, M. T., Camden, C. T. ve Baars, B. J. (1982). Covert Formulation and Editing of Anomalies in Speech Production: Evidence from Experimentally Elicited Slips of the Tongue. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour. 21: 578-594.
Nooteboom, S. G. (1967). Some Regularities in Phonemic Speech Errors. Instituut voor Perceptie Onderzoek, Annual Progress Report 2. Eindhoven.
Poulisse, N. (1999). Slips of the Tongue. Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Roelofs, A. (1992). A Spreading-Activation Theory of Lemma Retrieval in Speaking. Cognition. 42: 107-142.
Roelofs, A. (1993). Testing a Non-Decompositional Theory of Lemma Retrieval in Speaking. Cognition. 42: 107-142.
Roelofs, A. (1997). The WEAVER Model of Word-Form Encoding in Speech Production. Cognition. 64: 249-284.
Roelofs, A. (1999). Phonological Segments and Features as Planning Units in Speech Production. Language and Cognitive Processes. 14 (2): 173-200.
Traxler, M. J. ve Gernsbacher, M. A. (2006). Handbook of Psycholinguistics 2nd Edition. Oxford: Academic Press.
Wells, R. (1951). Predicting Slips of the Tongue. Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence (1973). Editor Victoria A. Fromkin. The Hague & Paris: Mouton (ss.82-87).

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Linguistics

Journal Section

Review

Authors

Ayşe Altıparmak
MİLLİ SAVUNMA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, HAVA HARP OKULU
Türkiye

Publication Date

December 15, 2017

Submission Date

November 19, 2017

Acceptance Date

December 5, 2017

Published in Issue

Year 2017 Volume: 2 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.356190

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA73KL77BY

APA

Altıparmak, A. (2017). Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 2(2), 314-347. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.356190

AMA

1.Altıparmak A. Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme. Söylem. 2017;2(2):314-347. doi:10.29110/soylemdergi.356190

Chicago

Altıparmak, Ayşe. 2017. “Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme”. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 2 (2): 314-47. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.356190.

EndNote

Altıparmak A (December 1, 2017) Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 2 2 314–347.

IEEE

[1]A. Altıparmak, “Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme”, Söylem, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 314–347, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.29110/soylemdergi.356190.

ISNAD

Altıparmak, Ayşe. “Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme”. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 2/2 (December 1, 2017): 314-347. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.356190.

JAMA

1.Altıparmak A. Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme. Söylem. 2017;2:314–347.

MLA

Altıparmak, Ayşe. “Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme”. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 2, Dec. 2017, pp. 314-47, doi:10.29110/soylemdergi.356190.

Vancouver

1.Ayşe Altıparmak. Psikodilbilimsel Konuşma Üretimi Modellerine İlişkin Bir İnceleme. Söylem. 2017 Dec. 1;2(2):314-47. doi:10.29110/soylemdergi.356190

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

AN ANALYSIS ON PSYCHOLINGUISTIC SPEECH PRODUCTION MODELS

Abstract

Keywords