Literature DB >> 33776832

Behavioral and Neurodynamic Effects of Word Learning on Phonotactic Repair.

David W Gow1,2,3,4, Adriana Schoenhaut1, Enes Avcu1, Seppo P Ahlfors5.   

Abstract

Processes governing the creation, perception and production of spoken words are sensitive to the patterns of speech sounds in the language user's lexicon. Generative linguistic theory suggests that listeners infer constraints on possible sound patterning from the lexicon and apply these constraints to all aspects of word use. In contrast, emergentist accounts suggest that these phonotactic constraints are a product of interactive associative mapping with items in the lexicon. To determine the degree to which phonotactic constraints are lexically mediated, we observed the effects of learning new words that violate English phonotactic constraints (e.g., srigin) on phonotactic perceptual repair processes in nonword consonant-consonant-vowel (CCV) stimuli (e.g., /sre/). Subjects who learned such words were less likely to "repair" illegal onset clusters (/sr/) and report them as legal ones (/∫r/). Effective connectivity analyses of MRI-constrained reconstructions of simultaneously collected magnetoencephalography (MEG) and EEG data showed that these behavioral shifts were accompanied by changes in the strength of influences of lexical areas on acoustic-phonetic areas. These results strengthen the interpretation of previous results suggesting that phonotactic constraints on perception are produced by top-down lexical influences on speech processing.
Copyright © 2021 Gow, Schoenhaut, Avcu and Ahlfors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  effective connectivity; emergence; magnetoencephalography; phonology; phonotactic; rule; speech perception; word learning

Year:  2021        PMID: 33776832      PMCID: PMC7987836          DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.590155

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Psychol        ISSN: 1664-1078


  80 in total

1.  The interaction between vocabulary size and phonotactic probability effects on children's production accuracy and fluency in nonword repetition.

Authors:  Jan Edwards; Mary E Beckman; Benjamin Munson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  A new Kalman filter approach for the estimation of high-dimensional time-variant multivariate AR models and its application in analysis of laser-evoked brain potentials.

Authors:  Thomas Milde; Lutz Leistritz; Laura Astolfi; Wolfgang H R Miltner; Thomas Weiss; Fabio Babiloni; Herbert Witte
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Learning to speak by listening: Transfer of phonotactics from perception to production.

Authors:  Audrey K Kittredge; Gary S Dell
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  Repair or Violation Detection? Pre-Attentive Processing Strategies of Phonotactic Illegality Demonstrated on the Constraint of g-Deletion in German.

Authors:  Johanna Steinberg; Thomas Konstantin Jacobsen; Thomas Jacobsen
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Contextual variability and exemplar strength in phonotactic learning.

Authors:  Thomas Denby; Jeffrey Schecter; Sean Arn; Svetlin Dimov; Matthew Goldrick
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Superior parietal cortex is critical for the manipulation of information in working memory.

Authors:  Michael Koenigs; Aron K Barbey; Bradley R Postle; Jordan Grafman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Can infants learn phonology in the lab? A meta-analytic answer.

Authors:  Alejandrina Cristia
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2017-11-05

8.  New levels of language processing complexity and organization revealed by granger causation.

Authors:  David W Gow; David N Caplan
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-11-19

9.  Phonotactic Constraints Are Activated across Languages in Bilinguals.

Authors:  Max R Freeman; Henrike K Blumenfeld; Viorica Marian
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-05-18

10.  Effortful listening: the processing of degraded speech depends critically on attention.

Authors:  Conor J Wild; Afiqah Yusuf; Daryl E Wilson; Jonathan E Peelle; Matthew H Davis; Ingrid S Johnsrude
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.