Correcting the record: Phonetic potential of primate vocal tracts and the legacy of Philip Lieberman (1934−2022)

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1002/ajp.23637
Axel G. Ekström
{"title":"Correcting the record: Phonetic potential of primate vocal tracts and the legacy of Philip Lieberman (1934−2022)","authors":"Axel G. Ekström","doi":"10.1002/ajp.23637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The phonetic potential of nonhuman primate vocal tracts has been the subject of considerable contention in recent literature. Here, the work of Philip Lieberman (1934−2022) is considered at length, and two research papers—both purported challenges to Lieberman's theoretical work—and a review of Lieberman's scientific legacy are critically examined. I argue that various aspects of Lieberman's research have been consistently misinterpreted in the literature. A paper by Fitch et al. overestimates the would-be “speech-ready” capacities of a rhesus macaque, and the data presented nonetheless supports Lieberman's principal position—that nonhuman primates cannot articulate the full extent of human speech sounds. The suggestion that no vocal anatomical evolution was necessary for the evolution of human speech (as spoken by all normally developing humans) is not supported by phonetic or anatomical data. The second challenge, by Boë et al., attributes vowel-like qualities of baboon calls to articulatory capacities based on audio data; I argue that such “protovocalic” properties likely result from disparate articulatory maneuvers compared to human speakers. A review of Lieberman's scientific legacy by Boë et al. ascribes a view of speech evolution (which the authors term “laryngeal descent theory”) to Lieberman, which contradicts his writings. The present article documents a pattern of incorrect interpretations of Lieberman's theoretical work in recent literature. Finally, the apparent trend of vowel-like formant dispersions in great ape vocalization literature is discussed with regard to Lieberman's theoretical work. The review concludes that the “Lieberman account” of primate vocal tract phonetic capacities remains supported by research: the ready articulation of fully human speech reflects species-unique anatomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajp.23637","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajp.23637","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The phonetic potential of nonhuman primate vocal tracts has been the subject of considerable contention in recent literature. Here, the work of Philip Lieberman (1934−2022) is considered at length, and two research papers—both purported challenges to Lieberman's theoretical work—and a review of Lieberman's scientific legacy are critically examined. I argue that various aspects of Lieberman's research have been consistently misinterpreted in the literature. A paper by Fitch et al. overestimates the would-be “speech-ready” capacities of a rhesus macaque, and the data presented nonetheless supports Lieberman's principal position—that nonhuman primates cannot articulate the full extent of human speech sounds. The suggestion that no vocal anatomical evolution was necessary for the evolution of human speech (as spoken by all normally developing humans) is not supported by phonetic or anatomical data. The second challenge, by Boë et al., attributes vowel-like qualities of baboon calls to articulatory capacities based on audio data; I argue that such “protovocalic” properties likely result from disparate articulatory maneuvers compared to human speakers. A review of Lieberman's scientific legacy by Boë et al. ascribes a view of speech evolution (which the authors term “laryngeal descent theory”) to Lieberman, which contradicts his writings. The present article documents a pattern of incorrect interpretations of Lieberman's theoretical work in recent literature. Finally, the apparent trend of vowel-like formant dispersions in great ape vocalization literature is discussed with regard to Lieberman's theoretical work. The review concludes that the “Lieberman account” of primate vocal tract phonetic capacities remains supported by research: the ready articulation of fully human speech reflects species-unique anatomy.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
更正记录:灵长类动物声道的发音潜力与菲利普-利伯曼(1934-2022 年)的遗产。
非人灵长类发声器官的语音潜力一直是近期文献中争论的焦点。在此,我将对菲利普-利伯曼(Philip Lieberman,1934-2022 年)的研究成果进行详细论述,并对两篇研究论文--这两篇论文都声称是对利伯曼理论研究的挑战--以及对利伯曼科学遗产的回顾进行批判性研究。我认为,利伯曼研究的各个方面在文献中一直被曲解。菲奇(Fitch)等人的一篇论文高估了猕猴的 "语言能力",但所提供的数据支持了利伯曼的主要观点--非人灵长类动物无法完全表达人类的语音。有人认为,人类语言(如所有正常发育的人类所说的语言)的进化不需要声带解剖学的进化,但这一观点并没有得到语音或解剖学数据的支持。博埃等人提出的第二个质疑是,根据音频数据,将狒狒叫声中类似元音的特质归因于发音能力;我认为,这种 "原音 "特质很可能是由于与人类说话者不同的发音技巧造成的。Boë等人对利伯曼的科学遗产进行了回顾,认为利伯曼的语言进化观点(作者称之为 "喉血统论")与其著作相矛盾。本文记录了近期文献中对利伯曼理论工作的错误解释模式。最后,文章结合利伯曼的理论研究,讨论了类人猿发声文献中元音样声母分散的明显趋势。综述的结论是,关于灵长类动物声道发音能力的 "利伯曼理论 "仍然得到研究的支持:完全人类语言的即兴发音反映了物种独特的解剖学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1