Literature DB >> 22891321

Sound-sized segments are significant for Mandarin speakers.

Qingqing Qu1, Markus F Damian, Nina Kazanina.   

Abstract

Do speakers of all languages use segmental speech sounds when they produce words? Existing models of language production generally assume a mental representation of individual segmental units, or phonemes, but the bulk of evidence comes from speakers of European languages in which the orthographic system codes explicitly for speech sounds. By contrast, in languages with nonalphabetical scripts, such as Mandarin Chinese, individual speech sounds are not orthographically represented, raising the possibility that speakers of these languages do not use phonemes as fundamental processing units. We used event-related potentials (ERPs) combined with behavioral measurement to investigate the role of phonemes in Mandarin production. Mandarin native speakers named colored line drawings of objects using color adjective-noun phrases; color and object name either shared the initial phoneme or were phonologically unrelated. Whereas naming latencies were unaffected by phoneme repetition, ERP responses were modulated from 200 ms after picture onset. Our ERP findings thus provide strong support for the claim that phonemic segments constitute fundamental units of phonological encoding even for speakers of languages that do not encode such units orthographically.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22891321      PMCID: PMC3435182          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1200632109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  29 in total

Review 1.  A theory of lexical access in speech production.

Authors:  W J Levelt; A Roelofs; A S Meyer
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Exploring the activation of semantic and phonological codes during speech planning with event-related brain potentials.

Authors:  Jörg D Jescheniak; Herbert Schriefers; Merrill F Garrett; Angela D Friederici
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Effects of syllable frequency in speech production.

Authors:  Joana Cholin; Willem J M Levelt; Niels O Schiller
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2005-06-06

4.  The role of orthography in speech production revisited.

Authors:  F-X Alario; Laetitia Perre; Caroline Castel; Johannes C Ziegler
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2006-03-20

5.  Electrophysiological correlates of different anomic patterns in comparison with normal word production.

Authors:  Marina Laganaro; Stéphanie Morand; Valérie Schwitter; Carmel Zimmermann; Christian Camen; Armin Schnider
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 4.027

6.  Morphological priming in overt language production: electrophysiological evidence from Dutch.

Authors:  Dirk Koester; Niels O Schiller
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-07-12       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Tracking lexical access in speech production: electrophysiological correlates of word frequency and cognate effects.

Authors:  Kristof Strijkers; Albert Costa; Guillaume Thierry
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  The ability to manipulate speech sounds depends on knowing alphabetic writing.

Authors:  C Read; Y F Zhang; H Y Nie; B Q Ding
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1986-11

9.  Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary?

Authors:  W J Levelt; L Wheeldon
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1994 Apr-Jun

10.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity.

Authors:  J G Snodgrass; M Vanderwart
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Learn       Date:  1980-03
View more
  18 in total

1.  The effect of orthographic form-cuing on the phonological preparation unit in spoken word production.

Authors:  Chuchu Li; Min Wang; William Idsardi
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-05

2.  Orthographic effects in Mandarin spoken language production.

Authors:  Qingqing Qu; Markus F Damian
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-02

3.  Abnormal neural response to phonological working memory demands in persistent developmental stuttering.

Authors:  Yang Yang; Fanlu Jia; Peter T Fox; Wai Ting Siok; Li Hai Tan
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-08-26       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Close but not proximate: the significance of phonological segments in speaking depends on their functional engagement.

Authors:  Padraig G O'Seaghdha; Jenn-Yeu Chen; Train-Min Chen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Reply to O’Seaghdha et al.: Primary phonological planning units in Chinese are phonemically specified.

Authors:  Qingqing Qu; Markus F Damian; Nina Kazanina
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Phonemes and Production.

Authors:  Gary S Dell
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2014-01-01

7.  Database of word-level statistics for Mandarin Chinese (DoWLS-MAN).

Authors:  Karl David Neergaard; Hongzhi Xu; James S German; Chu-Ren Huang
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-08-17

8.  The primacy of abstract syllables in Chinese word production.

Authors:  Jenn-Yeu Chen; Pádraig G O'Séaghdha; Train-Min Chen
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  The proximate phonological unit of Chinese-English bilinguals: proficiency matters.

Authors:  Rinus Gerardus Verdonschot; Mariko Nakayama; Qingfang Zhang; Katsuo Tamaoka; Niels Olaf Schiller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Is handwriting constrained by phonology? Evidence from Stroop tasks with written responses and Chinese characters.

Authors:  Markus F Damian; Qingqing Qu
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-10-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.