Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T05:58:16.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Medium-Term Dynamics of Accents on Reality Television

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Morgan Sonderegger ,
Max Bane  and
Peter Graff
Morgan Sonderegger*
Affiliation:
McGill University and Centre for Research on Brain, Language, and Music
Max Bane*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Peter Graff*
Affiliation:
University of Vienna
*
[morgan.sonderegger@mcgill.ca], [max@thebanes.org], [graffmail@gmail.com]
[morgan.sonderegger@mcgill.ca], [max@thebanes.org], [graffmail@gmail.com]
[morgan.sonderegger@mcgill.ca], [max@thebanes.org], [graffmail@gmail.com]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How flexible is an individual's accent during adulthood, and how does this flexibility relate to longer-term change? Previous work has found that accents are remarkably flexible in conversational interaction, but predominantly stable over years, leading to very different views of the role of individuals in community-level sound change. This article examines MEDIUM-TERM accent dynamics (days to months) by taking advantage of a ‘natural experiment’: a reality television show where contestants live in an isolated house for three months and are constantly recorded, forming a closed system where it is possible to both determine the dynamics of contestants’ speech from day to day and reason about the sources of any observed changes. We build statistical models to examine time dependence in five phonetic variables within individuals, in 14.5 hours of spontaneous speech from twelve English-speaking contestants. We find that time dependence in pronunciation is ubiquitous over the medium term: large daily fluctuations in pronunciation are the norm, while longer-term change over weeks to months occurs in a minority of cases. These patterns mirror the conflicting findings of previous work and suggest a possible bridge between the two. We argue that time dependence in phonetic variables is influenced by contrast between sounds, as well as systematic differences between speakers in how malleable their accents are over time; however, we find only limited evidence for convergence in individuals’ accents. Our results have implications for theories of the role of individuals in sound change, and suggest that medium-term pronunciation dynamics are a fruitful direction for future work.

Keywords

longitudinal studiesaccent dynamicsphonetic variationindividual differenceslanguage change

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 93 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 598 - 640
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agresti, Alan. 2002. Categorical data analysis. 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.10.1002/0471249688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J. Sean, Miller, Joanne L.; and DeSteno, David. 2003. Individual talker differences invoice-onset-time. The Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 113. 544–52. DOI: 10.1121/1.1528172.10.1121/1.1528172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, Barden, Birgit; and GROßKOPF, Beate. 1998. Subjective and objective parameters determining ‘salience’ in long-term dialect accommodation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 2. 163–87. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9481.00039.10.1111/1467-9481.00039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Hinskens, Frans. 2005. The role of interpersonal accommodation in a theory of language change. In Auer et al., 335–57.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter, Hinskens, Frans; and Kerswill, Paul (eds.) 2005. Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auzou, Pascal, Ozsancak, Canan, Morris, Richard J., Jan, Mary, Eustachę, Francis; and Hannequin, Didier. 2000. Voice onset time in aphasia, apraxia of speech and dysarthria: A review. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 14. 131–50. DOI: 10.1080/026992000298878.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Davidson, Douglas J.; and Bates, Douglas M.. 2008. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59. 390–412. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005.10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Piepenbrock, Richard; and Gulickers, Leon. 1996. CELEX2 [CDROM]. LDC96L14. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Babel, Molly. 2010. Dialect divergence and convergence in New Zealand English. Language in Society 39. 437–56. DOI: 10.1017/S0047404510000400.10.1017/S0047404510000400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babel, Molly. 2011. Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics 40. 177–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.09.001.Google Scholar
Babel, Molly, Garrett, Andrew, Houser, Michael J.; and Toosarvandani, Maziar. 2013. Descent and diffusion in language diversification: A study of Western Numic dialectology. International Journal of American Linguistics 79. 445–89. DOI: 10.1086/671772.10.1086/671772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Adam, Archangeli, Diana; and Mielke, Jeff. 2011. Variability in American English s-retraction suggests a solution to the actuation problem. Language Variation and Change 23. 347–74. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394511000135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bane, Max, Graff, Peter; and Sonderegger, Morgan. 2010. Longitudinal phonetic variation in a closed system. Chicago Linguistic Society 46 (1). 43–58.Google Scholar
Barden, Birgit, and GROßKOPF, Beate. 1998. Sprachliche Akkommodation und soziale Integration [Speech accommodation and social integration]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110935073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, Dale J., Levy, Roger, Scheepers, Christoph; and Tily, Harry J.. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68. 255–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001.10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, Douglas, Maechler, Martin, Bolker, Ben; and Walker, Steven. 2014. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using ‘Eigen’ and S4. R package version 1. 1–7. Online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html.Google Scholar
Beal, Joan. 2004. English dialects in the North of England: Phonology. In Schneider et al., 113–33.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patrice S. 1982. Phonological and phonetic effects of nasalization on vowel height. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota dissertation.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1984. Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13. 145–204. DOI: 10.1017/S004740450001037X.10.1017/S004740450001037XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul, and Weenink, David. 2011. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.2.17. Online: http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bourhis, Richard y., and Giles, Howard. 1977. The language of intergroup distinctiveness. Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations, ed. by Giles, Howard, 119–35. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bowie, David. 2005. Language change over the lifespan: A test of the apparent time construct. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 11. 45–58. Online: http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol11/iss2/3.Google Scholar
Breen, Mara, Fedorenko, Evelina, Wagner, Michael; and Gibson, Edward. 2010. Acoustic correlates of information structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 25. 1044–98. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.504378.10.1080/01690965.2010.504378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brink, Lars, and Lund, Jørn. 1975. Dansk rigsmål: Lydudviklingen siden 1840 med særligt henblikpå sociolekterne i københavn. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack K. 2003. Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. 2nd edn. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong. 2005. Prosodic strengthening and featural enhancement: Evidence from acoustic and articulatory realizations of/a, i/in English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 117. 3867–78. DOI: 10.1121/1.1861893.10.1121/1.1861893CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chodroff, Eleanor, Godfrey, John, Khudanpur, Sanjeev; and Wilson, Colin. 2015. Structured variability in acoustic realization: A corpus study of voice onset time in American English stops. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Glasgow. Online: https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS2015/Papers/ICPHS0632.pdf.Google Scholar
Clark, Urszula. 2004. The English West Midlands: Phonology. In Schneider et al., 134— 62.Google Scholar
Cole, Jennifer, Kim, Heejin, Choi, Hansook; and Hasegawa-Johnson, Mark. 2007. Prosodic effects on acoustic cues to stop voicing and place of articulation: Evidence from radio news speech. Journal of Phonetics 35. 180–209. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2006.03.004.10.1016/j.wocn.2006.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coupland, Nikolas. 1980. Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting. Language in Society 9. 1–12. DOI: 10.1017/S0047404500007752.10.1017/S0047404500007752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Felicity, and Palethorpe, Sallyanne. 2007. Australian English. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 37. 341–50. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100307003192.10.1017/S0025100307003192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cukor-Avila, Patricia. 2015. Growing INTO and IN African American Vernacular English. Paper presented at the 10th UK Language Variation and Change (UKLVC) conference, University of York.Google Scholar
Cukor-Avila, Patricia, and Bailey, Guy. 2013. Real time and apparent time. The handbook of language variation and change, 2nd edn., ed. by Chambers, Jack K. and Schilling, Natalie, 237–62. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Darlington, Richard b., and Smulders, Tom V.. 2001. Problems with residual analysis. Animal Behaviour 62. 599–602. DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2001.1806.10.1006/anbe.2001.1806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delvaux, Véronique, and Soquet, Alain. 2007. The influence of ambient speech on adult speech productions through unintentional imitation. Phonetica 64. 145–73. DOI: 10.1159/000107914.10.1159/000107914CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Docherty, Gerard. 1992. The timing of voicing in British English obstruents. Berlin: Foris.10.1515/9783110872637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Docherty, Gerard. 2010. Phonological innovation in contemporary spoken British English. The Routledge handbook of world Englishes, ed. by Kirkpatrick, Andy, 59–75. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard, Watt, Dominic, Llamas, Carmen, Hall, Damien; and Nycz, Jennifer. 2011. Variation in voice onset time along the Scottish-English border. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Hong Kong, 591–94. Online: https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS2011/OnlineProceedings/RegularSession/Docherty/Docherty.pdf.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2000. Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Evans, Bronwen g., and Iverson, Paul. 2007. Plasticity in vowel perception and production: A study of accent change in young adults. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121. 3814–26. DOI: 10.1121/1.2722209.10.1121/1.2722209CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferragne, Emmanuel, and Pellegrino, François. 2010. Formant frequencies of vowels in 13 accents of the British Isles. Journal of the International Phonetic Association. 40. 1–34. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100309990247.10.1017/S0025100309990247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, Fernanda, and Charles Clifton, Jr. 1986. The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language 25. 348–68. DOI: 10.1016/0749-596X(86)90006-9.10.1016/0749-596X(86)90006-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Alex b., Jaeger, T. Florian, Farmer, Thomas A.; and Qian, Ting. 2013. Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension. PLoS ONE 8:e77661. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077661.10.1371/journal.pone.0077661.10.1371/journal.pone.0077661.10.1371/journal.pone.0077661.10.1371/journal.pone.0077661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foreman, Annik. 2003. Pretending to be someone you 're not: A study of second dialect acquisition in Australia. Melbourne: Monash University dissertation.Google Scholar
Fourakis, Marios. 1991. Tempo, stress, and vowel reduction in American English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90. 1816–27. DOI: 10.1121/1.401662.10.1121/1.401662CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fowler, Carol a., Brown, Julie Μ., Sabadini, Laura; and Weihing, Jeffrey. 2003. Rapid access to speech gestures in perception: Evidence from choice and simple response time tasks. Journal of Memory and Language 49. 396–413. DOI: 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00072-X.10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00072-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freckleton, Robert P. 2002. On the misuse of residuals in ecology: Regression of residuals vs. multiple regression. Journal of Animal Ecology 71. 542–45. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00618.X.10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00618.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Andrew, and Johnson, Keith. 2013. Phonetic bias in sound change. Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization, ed. by Yu, Alan C. L., 51–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.003.0003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and Hill, Jennifer. 2007. Data analysis using regression and multi-level/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giles, Howard, Coupland, Justine; and Coupland, Nikolas. 1991. Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics, ed. by Giles, Howard, Coupland, Justine, and Coupland, Nikolas, 1–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511663673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldinger, Stephen D. 1998. Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review 105. 251–79. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251.10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldinger, Stephen D. 2000. The role of perceptual episodes in lexical processing. Proceedings of the workshop on spoken word access processes, ed. by Cutler, Anne, McQueen, James M., and Zondervan, Rian, 155–58. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute.Google Scholar
Good, Phillip. 2013. Permutation tests: A practical guide to resampling methods for testing hypotheses. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Gregersen, Frans, Jensen, Torben Juel; and Pharao, Nicolai. 2017. Comparing speech samples: On the challenge of comparability in panel studies of language change in real time. Panel studies of variation and change, ed. by Wagner, Suzanne Evans and Buchstaller, Isabelle. London: Routledge, to appear.Google Scholar
Gregersen, Frans, Normann Jørgensen, J., Møller, Janus Spindler, Pharao, Nicolai; and Hansen, Gert Foget. 2017. Sideways: Five methodological studies of sociolinguistic interviews. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia. DOI: 10.1080/03740463.2017.1335111.10.1080/03740463.2017.1335111.10.1080/03740463.2017.1335111.10.1080/03740463.2017.1335111.10.1080/03740463.2017.1335111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddican, Bill, Foulkes, Paul, Hughes, Vincent; and Richards, Hazel. 2013. Interaction of social and linguistic constraints on two vowel changes in northern England. Language Variation and Change 25. 371–403. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394513000197.10.1017/S0954394513000197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrell, Frank e. Jr. 2014. rms: Regression modeling strategies. R package version 4. 2–0. Online: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rms.Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne; and Watson, Catherine. 2000. Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: An acoustic analysis of the Queen's Christmas broadcasts. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 30. 63-78. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100300006666.10.1017/S0025100300006666.10.1017/S0025100300006666.10.1017/S0025100300006666.10.1017/S0025100300006666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastie, Trevor J., and Tibshirani, Robert J.. 1990. Generalized additive models. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Sarah, and Midgley, Jonathan. 2005. Formant frequencies of RP monophthongs in four age groups of speakers. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 35. 183–99. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100305002124.10.1017/S0025100305002124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazen, Kirk. 2011. Flying high above the social radar: Coronal stop deletion in modern Appalachia. Language Variation and Change 23. 105–37. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394510000220.10.1017/S0954394510000220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heald, Shannon L. Μ. 2012. Tuning the targets of speech production: Effects of articulatory and perceptual experience on speech production. Chicago: University of Chicago dissertation.Google Scholar
Hillenbrand, James, Clark, Michael J.; and Nearey, Terrance Μ.. 2001. Effects of consonant environment on vowel formant patterns. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109. 748–63. DOI: 10.1121/1.1337959.10.1121/1.1337959CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hillenbrand, James, Getty, Laura a., Clark, Michael J.; and Wheeler, Kimberlee. 1995. Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97. 3099–3111. DOI: 10.1121/1.411872.10.1121/1.411872CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hindle, Donald. 1980. The social and structural conditioning of phonetic variation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1965. Sound change. Language 41. 185–204. DOI: 10.2307/411873.10.2307/411873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 1997. Speech perception without speaker normalization: An exemplar model. Talker variability in speech processing, ed. by Johnson, Keith and Mullennix, John W., 145–65. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Katseff, Shira, and Houde, John. 2008. Partial compensation in speech adaptation. UC Berkeley Phonology Lab Annual Report (2008), 444–61. Online: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2rm0853c.10.5070/P72RM0853CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katseff, Shira, Houde, John; and Johnson, Keith. 2012. Partial compensation for altered auditory feedback: A tradeoff with somatosensory feedback? Language and Speech 55. 295–308. DOI: 10.1177/0023830911417802.10.1177/0023830911417802CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kendall, Tyler. 2013. Speech rate, pause and sociolinguistic variation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137291448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerswill, Paul, and Williams, Ann. 2002. ‘Salience’ as an explanatory factor in language change: Evidence from dialect levelling in urban England. Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors, ed. by Jones, Mari C. and Esch, Edith, 81–110. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110892598.81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keshet, Joseph, Sonderegger, Morgan; and Knowles, Thea. 2014. AutoVOT: Atool for automatic measurement of voice onset time using discriminative structured prediction. Version 0.91. Online: https://github.com/mlml/autovot/.Google Scholar
Kim, Midam, Horton, William S.; and Bradlow, Ann R.. 2011. Phonetic convergence in spontaneous conversations as a function of interlocutor language distance. Laboratory Phonology 2. 125–56. DOI: 10.1515/labphon.2011.004.10.1515/labphon.2011.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klatt, Dennis H. 1975. Voice onset time, frication, and aspiration in word-initial consonant clusters. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 18. 686–706. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.1804.686.10.1044/jshr.1804.686CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kryuchkova, Tatiana, Tucker, Benjamin v., Wurm, Lee h.; and Baayen, R. Harald. 2012. Danger and usefulness are detected early in auditory lexical processing: Evidence from electroencephalography. Brain and Language 122. 81–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.05.005.10.1016/j.bandl.2012.05.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuznetsova, Alexandra, Brockhoff, Per Bruun; and Haubo, Rune Christensen, Bojesen. 2014. lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.011. Online: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest.10.32614/CRAN.package.lmerTestCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2. 205–54. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394500000338.10.1017/S0954394500000338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 1: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2000. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83. 344–87. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0082.10.1353/lan.2007.0082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Page, Robert Brock, and Tabouret-Keller, Andrée. 1985. Acts of identity: Creole-based approaches to language and ethnicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh, and Abramson, Arthur S.. 1967. Some effects of context on voice onset time in English stops. Language and Speech 10. 1–28. DOI: 10.1177/002383096701000101.10.1177/002383096701000101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lobanov, Boris Μ. 1971. Classification of Russian vowels spoken by different speakers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 49. 606–8. DOI: 10.1121/1.1912396.Google Scholar
MacLeod, Bethany. 2012. The effect of perceptual salience on cross-dialectal phonetic convergence in Spanish. Toronto: University of Toronto dissertation.Google Scholar
Miller, Joanne L., Green, Kerry P.; and Reeves, Adam. 1986. Speaking rate and segments: A look at the relation between speech production and speech perception for the voicing contrast. Phonetica 43. 106–15. DOI: 10.1159/000261764.10.1159/000261764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1985. Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of Linguistics 21. 339–84. DOI: 10.1017/S0022226700010306.10.1017/S0022226700010306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitterer, Holger, and Ernestus, Mirjam. 2008. The link between speech perception and production is phonological and abstract: Evidence from the shadowing task. Cognition 109. 168–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.002.10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, Seung-Jae, and Lindblom, Björn. 1994. Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 96. 40–55. DOI: 10.1121/1.410492.10.1121/1.410492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, Richard J., McCrea, Christopher r.; and Herring, Kaileen d.. 2008. Voice onset time differences between adult males and females: Isolated syllables. Journal of Phonetics 36. 308–17. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2007.06.003.10.1016/j.wocn.2007.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, James, and Guy, Gregory R.. 1997. Frequency effects in variable lexical phonology. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4. 215–27. Online: http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/iss1/14.Google Scholar
Nahkola, Kari, and Saanilahti, Marja. 2004. Mapping language changes in real time: A panel study on Finnish. Language Variation and Change 16. 75–92. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394504162017.10.1017/S0954394504162017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Namy, Laura L., Nygaard, Lynne C.; and Sauerteig, Denise. 2002. Gender differences in vocal accommodation: The role of perception. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 21. 422–32. DOI: 10.1177/026192702237958.10.1177/026192702237958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nearey, Terrance m., and Rochet, Bernard L.. 1994. Effects of place of articulation and vowel context on VOT production and perception for French and English stops. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 24. 1–19. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100300004965.10.1017/S0025100300004965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Kuniko. 2011. Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation. Journal of Phonetics 39. 132–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.007.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, Jennifer S. 2006. On phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 119. 2382–93. DOI: 10.1121/1.2178720.10.1121/1.2178720CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pardo, Jennifer S. 2009. Expressing oneself in conversational interaction. Expressing one-self/expressing ones self: Communication, cognition, language, and identity, ed. by Morsella, Ezequiel, 183–96. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pardo, Jennifer S. 2013. Measuring phonetic convergence in speech production. Frontiers in Psychology 4:559. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00559.10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00559CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pardo, Jennifer s., Gibbons, Rachel, Suppes, Alexandra; and Krauss, Robert m.. 2012. Phonetic convergence in college roommates. Journal of Phonetics 40. 190–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.10.001.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, Hermann. 1880. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 1st edn. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Penhallurick, Robert. 2004. Welsh English: Phonology. In Schneider et al., 98–112.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2001. Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, ed. by Bybee, Joan L. and Hopper, Paul J., 137–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pinheiro, José, and Bates, Douglas. 2000. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-0318-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pisoni, David B. 1980. Variability of vowel formant frequencies and the quantal theory of speech: A first report. Phonetica 37. 285–305. DOI: 10.1159/000259999.10.1159/000259999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1987. Sarah Gorby, Yiddish folksinger: A case study of dialect shift. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 67. 83–116. DOI: 10.1515/ijsl.1987.67.83.10.1515/ijsl.1987.67.83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. 2014. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Online: http://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Rickford, John r., and McNair-Knox, Faye. 1994. Addressee- and topic-influenced style shift: A quantitative sociolinguistic study. Sociolinguistic perspectives on register, ed. by Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward, 235–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rickford, John r., and Price, Mackenzie. 2013. Girlz II women: Age-grading, language change, and stylistic variation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17. 143–79. DOI: 10.1111/josl.12017.10.1111/josl.12017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenfelder, Ingrid, Fruehwald, Josef, Evanini, Keelan; and Yuan, Jiahong. 2011. FAVE (Forced Alignment and Vowel Extraction). Online: http://fave.ling.upenn.edu.Google Scholar
Sancier, Michele L., and Fowler, Carol A.. 1997. Gestural drift in a bilingual speaker of Brazilian Portuguese and English. Journal of Phonetics 25. 421–36. DOI: 10.1006/jpho.1997.0051.10.1006/jpho.1997.0051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian. 2005. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies in sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the science of language and society, ed. by Ulrich Ammon, Norbert Dittmar, Klaus J. Mattheier, and Peter Trudgill, vol. 2, 100313. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian. 2013. Longitudinal studies. The Oxford handbook of sociolinguistics, ed. by Bayley, Robert, Cameron, Richard, and Lucas, Ceil, 261–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian, and Blondeau, Hélène. 2007. Language change across the lifespan:/r/in Montreal French. Language 83. 560–88. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0106.10.1353/lan.2007.0106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar w., Burridge, Kate, Kortmann, Bernd, Mesthrie, Rajend; and Upton, Clive (eds.) 2004. A handbook of varieties of English, vol. 1: Phonology. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schreier, Daniel. 2005. Consonant change in English worldwide. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230513327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Misha. 2015. Formant visualization and remeasurement (FVR). Online: https://github.com/mlml/fvr.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James Μ. 2006. Flexibility in the face of incompatible English VOT systems. Laboratory phonology 8, ed. by Goldstein, Louis M., Whalen, Doug H., and Best, Catherine T., 367–92. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Siegel, Jeff. 2010. Second dialect acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511777820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonderegger, Morgan. 2012. Phonetic and phonological dynamics on reality television. Chicago: University of Chicago dissertation.Google Scholar
Sonderegger, Morgan. 2015. Trajectories of voice onset time in spontaneous speech on reality TV. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Glasgow. Online: https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS2015/Papers/lCPHS0903.pdf.Google Scholar
Sonderegger, Morgan, and Keshet, Joseph. 2012. Automatic measurement of voice onset time using discriminative structured prediction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 132. 3965–79. DOI: 10.1121/1.4763995.10.1121/1.4763995CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanford, James N. 2008. A sociotonetic analysis of Sui dialect contact. Language Variation and Change 20. 409–50. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394508000161.10.1017/S0954394508000161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N., and House, Arthur S.. 1963. Perturbation of vowel articulations by consonantal context: An acoustical study. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 6. 111–28. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.0602.111.10.1044/jshr.0602.111CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuart-Smith, Jane. 2004. Scottish English: Phonology. In Schneider et al., 47–67.Google Scholar
Stuart-Smith, Jane, Sonderegger, Morgan, Rathcke, Tamara; and MacDonald, Rachel. 2015. The private life of stops: VOT in a real-time corpus of spontaneous Glaswegian. Laboratory Phonology 6. 505–49. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2015-0015.10.1515/lp-2015-0015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, and Temple, Rosalind. 2005. New perspectives on an ol’ variable: (t,d) in British English. Language Variation and Change 17. 281–302. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394505050118.10.1017/S0954394505050118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, James, Sonderegger, Morgan; and Wagner, Michael. 2017. Production planning and coronal stop deletion in spontaneous speech. Laboratory Phonology 8 (1):15. DOI: 10.5334/labphon.96.10.5334/labphon.96.10.5334/labphon.96.10.5334/labphon.96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, Rosalind A. Μ. 2009. (t,d): The variable status of a variable rule. Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology & Phonetics 12. 145–70.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1986. Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2004. New-dialect formation: The inevitability of colonial Englishes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tsukada, Kimiko. 2008. An acoustic comparison of English monophthongs and diphthongs produced by Australian and Thai speakers. English World-Wide 29. 194–211. DOI: 10.1075/eww.29.2.05tsu.10.1075/eww.29.2.05tsuCrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Rij, Jacolien, Wieling, Martijn, Baayen, R. Harald; and Rijn, Hedderik van. 2016. itsadug: Interpreting time series and autocorrelated data using GAMMs. R package version 2.2. Online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/itsadug/.10.32614/CRAN.package.itsadugCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, James. 2012. Form, function, and frequency in phonological variation. Language Variation and Change 24. 397–415. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394512000142.10.1017/S0954394512000142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, Kevin. 2007. Liverpool English. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 37. 351–60. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100307003180.10.1017/S0025100307003180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, John C. 1982. Accents of English. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wieling, Martijn, Montemagni, Simonetta, Nerbonne, John; and Baayen, R. Harald. 2014. Lexical differences between Tuscan dialects and standard Italian: Accounting for geographic and sociodemographic variation using generalized additive mixed modeling. Language 90. 669–92. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2014.0064.10.1353/lan.2014.0064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wikipedia. 2012a. Big Brother 9 (UK). Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_2008_(UK), accessed 21 April 2012.Google Scholar
Wikipedia. 2012b. Big Brother (UK). Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_(UK), accessed 21 April2012.Google Scholar
Wilson, James. 2010. Moravians in Prague: A sociolinguistic study of dialect contact in the Czech Republic. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Winter, Bodo, and Wieling, Martijn. 2016. How to analyze linguistic change using mixed models, growth curve analysis and generalized additive modeling. Journal of Language Evolution 1. 7–18. DOI: 10.1093/jole/lzv003.10.1093/jole/lzv003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Simon N. 2006. Generalized additive models: An introduction with R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.10.1201/9781420010404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Simon N. 2011. Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 73. 3–36. DOI: 10.im/j.1467-9868.2010.00749.x.10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00749.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Simon N. 2015. mgcv: Mixed GAM computation vehicle with GCV/AIC/REML smoothness estimation and GAMMs by REML/PQL. R package version 1. 8–7. Online: https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/mgcv/html/mgcv-package.html.Google Scholar
Yao, Yao. 2009. Understanding VOT variation in spontaneous speech. Current numbers in unity and diversity of languages, ed. by Pak, Manghyu, 1122–37. Seoul: Linguistic Society of Korea.Google Scholar
Young, Steve, Evermann, Gunnar, Gales, Mark, Hain, Thomas, Kershaw, Dan, Liu, Xun-ying, Moore, Gareth, Odell, Julian, Ollason, Dave, Povey, Dan; et al. 2006. The HTK book (for HTK version 3.4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Engineering Department.Google Scholar
Yu, Alan C. L. 2013. Individual differences in socio-cognitive processing and the actuation of sound change. Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization, ed. by Yu, Alan C. L., 201–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, Alan C. L., Abrego-Collier, Carissa; and Sonderegger, Morgan. 2013. Phonetic imitation from an individual-difference perspective: Subjective attitude, personality and ‘autistic’ traits. PLoS ONE 8:e74746. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074746.10.1371/journal.pone.0074746.10.1371/journal.pone.0074746.10.1371/journal.pone.0074746.10.1371/journal.pone.0074746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Sonderegger et al. supplementary material

Sonderegger et al. supplementary material
Download Sonderegger et al. supplementary material(File)
File 466.5 KB