Detection of pitch violations depends upon the familiarity of intonational contour of sentences

Cortex

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 557-568

  Colombo, Lucia ^a   Deguchi, Chizuru ^a   Boureux, Magali ^a   Sarlo, Michela ^a   Besson, Mireille ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

ERPs; Intonation; Jabberwocky sentences; Pitch detection; Prosody

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE; NORMAL HUMAN; PARIETAL LOBE; PITCH; RESPONSE TIME; TEMPORAL LOBE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; FRANCE; HUMANS; ITALY; LANGUAGE; MALE; PITCH DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79952708672     PISSN: 00109452     EISSN: 00109452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Astésano C., Besson M., Alter K. Brain potentials during semantic and prosodic processing in French. Cognitive Brain Research 2004, 18(2):172-184.
2. Best C., Strange W. Effects of phonological and phonetic factors on cross-language perception of approximants. Journal of Phonetics 1992, 20(3):305-330.
3. Boersma P and Weenink D. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer, version 3.4. Institute of Phonetic Sciences of the University of Amsterdam, Report 132, 1996.
4. Cho T., McQueen J.M. Phonological versus phonetic cues in native and non-native listening: Korean and Dutch listeners' perception of Dutch and English consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 119(5):3085-3096.
5. Christophe A., Gout A., Peperkamp S., Morgan J. Discovering words in the continuous speech stream: The role of prosody. Journal of Phonetics 2003, 31(3-4):585-598.
6. Christophe A., Peperkamp S., Pallier C., Block E., Mehler J. Phonological phrase boundaries constrain lexical access I. Adult data. Journal of Memory and Language 2004, 51(4):523-547.
7. Connolly J.F., Phillips N.A., Stewart S.H., Brake W.G. Event-related potential sensitivity to acoustic and semantic properties of terminal words in sentences. Brain and Language 1992, 43(1):1-18.
8. Connolly J.F., Phillips N.A. Event-related potential components reflect phonological and semantic processing of the terminal word of spoken sentences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1994, 6(3):256-266.
9. Cutler A., Norris D.G. The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1988, 14:113-121.
10. Cutler A., Dahan D., van Donselaar W. Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 1997, 40(2):141-201.
11. Di Cristo A., Hirst D. Intonation Systems 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
12. Dilley L., McAuley J.D. Distal prosodic context affects word segmentation and lexical processing. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59(3):294-311.
13. D'Imperio M. Tonal alignment, scaling and slope in Italian question and statement tunes. Travaux Interdisciplinaires Du Laboratoire Parole Et Langage d'Aix-En-Provence (TIPA) 2002, 21:25-44.
14. D'Imperio M., Petrone C., Nguyen N. Effects of tonal alignment on lexical identification in Italian. Tones and Tunes 2007, 79-106. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. C. Gussenhoven, T. Riad (Eds.).
15. Eckstein K., Friederici A.D. It's early: Event-related potential evidence for initial interaction of syntax and prosody in speech comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 18(10):1696-1711.
16. Flege J.E. Two procedures for training a novel second language phonetic contrast. Applied Psycholinguistics 1995, 16(4):425-442.
17. Friedrich C.K., Alter K., Kotz S.A. An electrophysiological response to different pitch contours in words. NeuroReport 2001, 12(15):3189.
18. Fujioka T., Ross B., Kakigi R., Pantev C., Trainor L. One year of musical training affects development of auditory cortical-evoked fields in young children. Brain 2006, 129:2593-2608.
19. Hahne A., Friederici A.D. Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1999, 11(2):194-205.
20. Halliday M.A.K., Greaves W. Intonation in the Grammar of English 2006, Equinox Pub., London; Oakville, CT.
21. Heim S., Alter K. Prosodic pitch accents in language comprehension and production: ERP data and acoustic analyses. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis 2006, 66(1):55-68.
22. Hillyard S.A., Squires K.C., Bauer J.W., Lindsay P.H. Evoked potential correlates of auditory signal detection. Science 1971, 172:1357-1360.
23. Isel F., Alter K., Friederici A.D. Influence of prosodic information on the processing of split particles: ERP evidence from spoken German. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17(1):154-167.
24. Kuhl P.K., Stevens E., Hayashi A., Deguchi T., Kiritani S., Iverson P. Infants show a facilitation effect for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months. Developmental Science 2006, 9(2):F13-F21.
25. Magne C., Astésano C., Lacheret-Dujour A., Morel M., Alter K., Besson M. On-line processing of " pop-out" words in spoken French dialogues. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17(5):740-756.
26. Magne C., Schön D., Besson M. Musician children detect pitch violations in both music and language better than nonmusician children: Behavioral and electrophysiological approaches. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 18(2):199-211.
27. Magne C., Astésano C., Aramaki M., Ystad S., Kronland-Martinet R., Besson M. Influence of syllabic lengthening on semantic processing in spoken French: Behavioural and electrophysiological evidence. Cerebral Cortex 2007, 17(11):2659-2668.
28. Marques C., Moreno S., Castro S.L., Besson M. Musicians detect pitch violation in a foreign language better than nonmusicians: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 19(9):1453-1463.
29. Marslen-Wilson W.S., Tyler L.K., Warren P., Genier P., Lee C.S. Prosodic effects in minimal attachment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology 1992, 45A(1):73-87.
30. Mietz A., Toepel U., Ischebeck A., Alter K. Inadequate and infrequent are not alike: ERPs to deviant prosodic patterns in spoken sentence comprehension. Brain and Language 2008, 104(2):159-169.
31. Moreno S., Marques C., Santos A., Santos M., Castro S.L., Besson M. Musical training influences linguistic abilities in 8-year-old children: More evidence for brain plasticity. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:712-723.
32. Morton J., Jassem W. Acoustic correlates of stress. Language and Speech 1965, 8:159-187.
33. Okamoto H., Stracke H., Wolters C.H., Schmael F., Pantev C. Attention improves population-level frequency tuning in human auditory cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 2007, 27(39):10383-10390.
34. Pannekamp A., Toepel U., Alter K., Hahne A., Friederici A.D. Prosody-driven sentence processing: An event-related brain potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17(3):407-421.
35. Rossi M. Intonation in Italian. Intonation Systems: A Survey of Twenty Languages 1998, 219-238. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. D. Hirst, A. Di Cristo (Eds.).
36. Sanders L.D., Ameral V., Sayles K. Event-related potentials index segmentation of nonsense sounds. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47(4):1183-1186.
37. Sanders L.D., Neville H.J. Segmenting nonsense: An event-related potential index of perceived onsets in continuous speech. Nature Neuroscience 2002, 5(7):700-703.
38. Sanders L.D., Neville H.J., Woldorff M. Speech segmentation of native and non-native speakers: The use of lexical, syntactic, and stress-pattern cues. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2002, 45(3):519-530.
39. Sanders L.D., Neville H.J. An ERP study of continuous speech processing. I. Segmentation, semantics, and syntax in native speakers. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 15(3):228-240.
40. Schafer A.J., Speer S.R., Warren P., White S.D. Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2000, 29(2):169-182.
41. Schön D., Magne C., Besson M. The music of speech: Music training facilitates pitch processing in both music and language. Psychophysiology 2004, 41(3):341-349.
42. Steinhauer K., Alter K., Friederici A.D. Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature Neuroscience 1999, 2(2):191.
43. Steinhauer K., Friederici A.D. Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2001, 30(3):267-295.
44. Steinhauer K. Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain and Language 2003, 86(1):142-164.
45. Warren P., Grabe E., Nolan F. Prosody, phonology and parsing in closure ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes 1995, 10(5):457-486.