Literature DB >> 23161428

Perceptual representations of phonotactically illegal syllables.

Mara Breen1, John Kingston, Lisa D Sanders.   

Abstract

Listeners often categorize phonotactically illegal sequences (e.g., /dla/ in English) as phonemically similar legal ones (e.g., /gla/). In an earlier investigation of such an effect in Japanese, Dehaene-Lambertz, Dupoux, and Gout (2000) did not observe a mismatch negativity in response to deviant, illegal sequences, and therefore argued that phonotactics constrain early perceptual processing. In the present study, using a priming paradigm, we compared the event-related potentials elicited by Legal targets (e.g., /gla/) preceded by (1) phonemically distinct Control primes (e.g., /kla/), (2) different tokens of Identity primes (e.g., /gla/), and (3) phonotactically Illegal Test primes (e.g., /dla/). Targets elicited a larger positivity 200-350 ms after onset when preceded by Illegal Test primes or phonemically distinct Control primes, as compared to Identity primes. Later portions of the waveforms (350-600 ms) did not differ for targets preceded by Identity and Illegal Test primes, and the similarity ratings also did not differ in these conditions. These data support a model of speech perception in which veridical representations of phoneme sequences are not only generated during processing, but also are maintained in a manner that affects perceptual processing of subsequent speech sounds.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23161428      PMCID: PMC5998820          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-012-0376-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  24 in total

1.  Merging information in speech recognition: feedback is never necessary.

Authors:  D Norris; J M McQueen; A Cutler
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Development of neural processes mediating rhyme judgments: Phonological and orthographic interactions.

Authors:  Christine Weber-Fox; Rebecca Spencer; Elizabeth Cuadrado; Anne Smith
Journal:  Dev Psychobiol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.038

3.  Categorical perception depends on the discrimination task.

Authors:  E Gerrits; M E H Schouten
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2004-04

4.  ERP nonword rhyming effects in children and adults.

Authors:  Donna Coch; Giordana Grossi; Wendy Skendzel; Helen Neville
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 5.  The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: a review.

Authors:  R Näätänen; P Paavilainen; T Rinne; K Alho
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-10-10       Impact factor: 3.708

6.  Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels.

Authors:  David B Pisoni
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1973-06-01

7.  Reaction times to comparisons within and across phonetic categories.

Authors:  David B Pisoni; Jeffrey Tash
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1974

8.  The TRACE model of speech perception.

Authors:  J L McClelland; J L Elman
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Categorical and noncategorical modes of speech perception along the voicing continuum.

Authors:  D B Pisoni; J H Lazarus
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1974-02       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Gradient sensitivity to within-category variation in words and syllables.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; Richard N Aslin; Michael K Tanenhaus; Michael J Spivey; Dana Subik
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  1 in total

1.  Behavioral and Neurodynamic Effects of Word Learning on Phonotactic Repair.

Authors:  David W Gow; Adriana Schoenhaut; Enes Avcu; Seppo P Ahlfors
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-03-10
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.