Speech Rhythm Facilitates Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution: ERP Evidence

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2013, Pages

  Roncaglia Denissen, Maria Paula ^a   Schmidt Kassow, Maren ^b   Kotz, Sonja A ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

^b GOETHE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ETHNIC GROUP; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; FREQUENCY MODULATION; GERMAN; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MENTAL TASK; NORMAL HUMAN; RESPONSE TIME; SPEECH; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH RHYTHM;

ADULT; COMPREHENSION; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINGUISTICS; MALE; REACTION TIME; SPEECH; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84873663554     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056000     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Lehiste I (1973) Phonetic Disambiguation of Syntactic Ambiguity. Available:http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ087996. Accessed 31 July 2012.
2. Price PJ, Ostendorf M, Shattuck-Hufnagel S, Fong C, (1991) The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation. J Acoust Soc Am 90: 2956-2970.
3. Warren P (1985) The temporal organisation and perception of speech. [Ph.D.]. University of Cambridge. Available:http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.355053. Accessed 5 October 2012.
4. Marslen-Wilson WD, Tyler LK, Warren P, Grenier P, Lee CS, (1992) Prosodic Effects in Minimal Attachment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 45: 73-87 doi:10.1080/14640749208401316.
5. Watt SM, Murray WS, (1996) Prosodic form and parsing commitments. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 25: 291-318 doi:10.1007/BF01708575.
6. Carroll PJ, Slowiaczek ML (1987) Modes and modules: Multiple pathways to the language processor. In: Garfiled JL, editor. Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding. Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press. pp. 221-247.
7. Kjelgaard MM, Speer SR, (1999) Prosodic Facilitation and Interference in the Resolution of Temporary Syntactic Closure Ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language 40: 153-194 doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2620.
8. Speer SR, Kjelgaard MM, Dobroth KM, (1996) The influence of prosodic structure on the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguities. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 25: 249-271 doi:10.1007/BF01708573.
9. Bögels S, Schriefers H, Vonk W, Chwilla D, Kerkhofs R, (2009) The Interplay between Prosody and Syntax in Sentence Processing: The Case of Subject- and Object-control Verbs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22: 1036-1053 doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21269.
10. Schafer A, Carter J, Clifton C, Frazier L, (1996) Focus in relative clause control. Language and Cognitive Processes pp. 135-166.
11. Streeter LA, (1978) Acoustic determinants of phrase boundary location. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America pp. 1582-1592.
12. Swets B, Desmet T, Hambrick DZ, Ferreira F, (2007) The role of working memory in syntactic ambiguity resolution: A psychometric approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General;Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 136: 64-81 doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.64.
13. Beach CM, (1991) The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language 30: 644-663 doi:10.1016/0749-596X(91)90030-N.
14. Steinhauer K, Alter K, Friederici AD, (1999) Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature Neuroscience 2: 191-196.
15. Warren P, Grabe E, Nolan F, (1995) Prosody, phonology and parsing in closure ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes 10: 457-486 doi:10.1080/01690969508407112.
16. Schafer AJ (1997) Prosodic parsing: The role of prosody in sentence comprehension University of Massachusetts- Amherst. Available:http://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI9809396. Accessed 3 October 2012.
17. Slowiaczek M, (1981) Prosodic Units as Language Processing Units. University of Massachusetts.
18. Gussenhoven C, (1984) On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents. Walter de Gruyter pp. 368.
19. Shriberg E, Stolcke A, Hakkani-Tür D, Tür G, (2000) Prosody-based automatic segmentation of speech into sentences and topics. Speech Communication 32: 127-154 doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(00)00028-5.
20. Rothermich K, Schmidt-Kassow M, Kotz SA, (2012) Rhythm's gonna get you: Regular meter facilitates semantic sentence processing. Neuropsychologia 50: 232-244 doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.10.025.
21. Schmidt-Kassow M, Kotz SA, (2008) Event-related Brain Potentials Suggest a Late Interaction of Meter and Syntax in the P600. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 21: 1693-1708 doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.21153.
22. Eckstein K, Friederici AD, (2006) It's Early: Event-related Potential Evidence for Initial Interaction of Syntax and Prosody in Speech Comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18: 1696-1711 doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.10.1696.
23. Lehiste I (1970) Suprasegmentals. Available:http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=5623&ttype=2. Accessed 22 August 2012.
24. Hayes B (1995) Metrical stress theory: principles and case studies. University of Chicago Press. 476 p.
25. Nooteboom S (1997) The prosody of speech: melody and rhythm. In:; in Hardcastle L, editor. The handbook of phonetic sciences. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 640-673.
26. Magne C, Aramaki M, Astesano C, Gordon RL, Ystad S, (2004) Comparison of rhythmic processing in language and music: An interdisciplinary approach.- Google Scholar. Journal of Music and Meaning Available:http://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=de&q=MAGNE%2CC.%2CM.Aramaki%2CC.Astesano%2CR.L.Gordon%2CS.Ystad.%282004%29.Comparisonofrhythmicprocessinginlanguageandmusic%3AAninterdisciplinaryapproach.&btnG=Suche&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0. Accessed 30 January 2012.
27. Patel AD (2008) Music, Language and the Brain. New York: Oxford University Press. p.
28. Dilley LC, McAuley JD, (2008) Distal prosodic context affects word segmentation and lexical processing. Journal of Memory and Language 59: 294-311 doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.006.
29. Niebuhr O, (2009) F0-Based Rhythm Effects on the Perception of Local Syllable Prominence. Phonetica 66: 95-112 doi:10.1159/000208933.
30. Robinson GM, (1977) Rhythmic organization in speech processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 3: 83-91 doi:10.1037/0096-1523.3.1.83.
31. Magne C, Astésano C, Aramaki M, Ystad S, Kronland-Martinet R, et al. (2007) Influence of Syllabic Lengthening on Semantic Processing in Spoken French: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence. Cereb Cortex 17: 2659-2668 doi:10.1093/cercor/bhl174.
32. Dooling DJ, (1974) Rhythm and syntax in sentence perception. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13: 255-264 doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80062-9.
33. Nespor M, Vogel I (1986) Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 364 p.
34. Hayes B (1989) The prosodic hierarchy in meter. In: Kiparsky P, Youmans G, editors. Rhythm and Meter. Orlando, FL.: Academic Press.
35. Johnson RE, (1970) Recall of prose as a function of the structural importance of the linguistic units. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 9: 12-20 doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(70)80003-2.
36. Tyler LK, Warren P, (1987) Local and global structure in spoken language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 26: 638-657 doi:10.1016/0749-596X(87)90107-0.
37. Jusczyk PW, Hirsh-Pasek K, Kemler Nelson DG, Kennedy LJ, Woodward A, et al. (1992) Perception of acoustic correlates of major phrasal units by young infants. Cognitive Psychology 24: 252-293 doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90009-Q.
38. Morgan JL, (1996) Prosody and the Roots of Parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 69-106 doi:10.1080/016909696387222.
39. Frazier L, Carlson K, Clifton C Jr, (2006) Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 244-249 doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.04.002.
40. Handy TC (2004) Event-Related Potentials: A Methods Handbook. MIT Press. 430 p.
41. Kerkhofs R, Vonk W, Schriefers H, Chwilla DJ, (2007) Discourse, Syntax, and Prosody: The Brain Reveals an Immediate Interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19: 1421-1434 doi:10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1421.
42. Bornkessel I, McElree B, Schlesewsky M, Friederici AD, (2004) Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking. Journal of Memory and Language 51: 495-522 doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.06.011.
43. Bornkessel I, Schlesewsky M, (2006) The extended argument dependency model: A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review 113: 787-821 doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.787.
44. Haupt FS, Schlesewsky M, Roehm D, Friederici AD, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I, (2008) The status of subject-object reanalyses in the language comprehension architecture. Journal of Memory and Language 59: 54-96 doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.02.003.
45. Vos SH, Gunter TC, Schriefers H, Friederici AD, (2001) Syntactic parsing and working memory: The effects of syntactic complexity, reading span, and concurrent load. Language and Cognitive Processes 16: 65-103 doi:10.1080/01690960042000085.
46. Frisch S, Schlesewsky M, Saddy D, Alpermann A, (2002) The P600 as an indicator of syntactic ambiguity. Cognition 85: B83-B92 doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00126-9.
47. Friederici AD, Mecklinger A, Spencer KM, Steinhauer K, Donchin E, (2001) Syntactic parsing preferences and their on-line revisions: a spatio-temporal analysis of event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research 11: 305-323 doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00065-3.
48. Kennedy A, Murray WS, Jennings F, Reid C, (1989) Parsing complements: Comments on the generality of the principle of minimal attachment. Language and Cognitive Processes 4: SI51-SI76 doi:10.1080/01690968908406363.
49. Murray WS, Watt S, Kennedy A, (1998) Parsing ambiguities: Modality, processing options and the garden path. [unpublished manuscript].
50. Mecklinger A, Schriefers H, Steinhauer K, Friederici AD, (1995) Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory & Cognition 23: 477-494 doi:10.3758/BF03197249.
51. Croft RJ, Barry RJ, (2000) Removal of ocular artifact from the EEG: a review. Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology 30: 5-19 doi:10.1016/S0987-7053(00)00055-1.
52. Friederici AD, Steinhauer K, Mecklinger A, Meyer M, (1998) Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses. Biological Psychology 47: 193-221 doi:10.1016/S0301-0511(97)00033-1.
53. Steinhauer K, Mecklinger A, Friederici AD, Meyer M, (1997) Wahrscheinlichkeit und strategie: Eine EKP-Studie zur verarbeitung syntaktischer anomalien. [Probability and strategy: An ERP study on the processing of syntactic anomalies.]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie 44: 305-331.
54. Gorrell P (2000) The subject-before-object preference in German clauses. In: Hemforth B, Konieczny L, editors. Cognitive Parsing in German. Dordrecht: Kluwer. pp. 25-63.
55. Friederici AD, Mecklinger A, (1996) Syntactic parsing as revealed by brain responses: First-pass and second-pass parsing processes. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 25: 157-176 doi:10.1007/BF01708424.
56. Stirling L, (1996) Does Prosody Support or Direct Sentence Processing? Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 193-212 doi:10.1080/016909696387268.
57. Martin JG, (1967) Hesitations in the speaker's production and listener's reproduction of utterances. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 6: 903-909 doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80157-9.
58. Höhle B, Bijeljac-Babic R, Herold B, Weissenborn J, Nazzi T, (2009) Language specific prosodic preferences during the first half year of life: Evidence from German and French infants. Infant Behavior and Development 32: 262-274 doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2009.03.004.
59. Nazzi T, Ramus F, (2003) Perception and acquisition of linguistic rhythm by infants. Speech Communication 41: 233-243 doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(02)00106-1.
60. Ramus F, (2002) Language discrimination by newborns: Teasing apart phonotactic, rhythmic, and intonational cues. Annual Review of Language Acquisition 2: 85-115 doi:10.1075/arla.2.05ram.
61. Jusczyk PW, (1999) How infants begin to extract words from speech. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3: 323-328 doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01363-7.
62. Jusczyk PW, (2002) How Infants Adapt Speech-Processing Capacities to Native-Language Structure. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11: 15-18 doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00159.
63. Gerken LA (1996) Phonological and distributional information in syntax acquisition. In: Morgan JL, Demuth K, editors. Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping From Speech To Grammar in Early Acquisition. Routledge.
64. Bor D, Duncan J, Wiseman RJ, Owen AM, (2003) Encoding Strategies Dissociate Prefrontal Activity from Working Memory Demand. Neuron 37: 361-367 doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01171-6.
65. Carpenter PA, Just MA (1989) The role of working memory in language comprehension. In: Klahr D, Kotovsky K, editors. Complex Information Processing: The Impact of Herbert A. Simon. Routledge.
66. Cutler A, (1994) The Perception of rhythm in language. Cognition pp. 79-81.
67. Cutler A, (1994) Segmentation problems, rhythmic solutions. Lingua 92: 81-104 doi:10.1016/0024-3841(94)90338-7.
68. Mattys SL, Jusczyk PW, Luce PA, Morgan JL, (1999) Phonotactic and Prosodic Effects on Word Segmentation in Infants. Cognitive Psychology 38: 465-494 doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0721.
69. Boucher VJ, (2006) On the Function of Stress Rhythms in Speech: Evidence of a Link with Grouping Effects on Serial Memory. Language and Speech 49: 495-519 doi:10.1177/00238309060490040301.
70. Henson RN, Burgess N, Frith C, (2000) Recoding, storage, rehearsal and grouping in verbal short-term memory: an fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 38: 426-440 doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00098-6.
71. Hitch GJ, (1996) Temporal Grouping Effects in Immediate Recall: A Working Memory Analysis. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 49: 116-139 doi:10.1080/713755609.