MEG detects neural consequences of anomalous nasalization in vowel–consonant pairs

Flagg, Elissa J.; Cardy, Janis Oram; Roberts, Timothy P.L.

doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2005.12.034

Cited by 25 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If correct, this pop-out effect must cancel out any positive expectation for [x] after [u] and the result is a null vowel effect for German listeners on the [x-f] continuum. In any case, the asymmetric vowel effect observed here closely resembles various other findings of perceptual asymmetry in recent literature (Flagg et al, 2006;Monahan et al, 2008;Hwang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Positive expectation in the processing of allophones

Key

2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does native knowledge introduce a perceptual bias against allophones that mismatch their context? In German, [x] only occurs after back vowels, while [ç] occurs elsewhere. German and English listeners heard “allophonic” ([ç-x]) and “non-allophonic” ([ç-f], [x-f]) continua after front and back vowels. Vowel affected German responses to [ç-x] and [ç-f], but not [x-f]. Vowel affected English responses to all continua. The asymmetric effect on German responses is explained as a perceptual expectation of [ç] after [y]. The effect on English responses is explained by acoustic misparsing, which causes some of the vowel's spectrum to cue a spectrally similar fricative.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Positive expectation in the processing of allophones

Key

2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One example of the coarticulated nature of speech can be found in vowel-consonant coarticulation; in English, a vowel preceding a nasalized consonant will also tend to be nasalized (Bell-Berti and Krakow, 1991). Both behavioral (Fowler and Brown, 2000) and neuroimaging experiments (Flagg et al, 2006) reveal that English listeners are sensitive to this nasalization as an indicator of an upcoming nasal consonant. The ability of listeners to recognize segments as the same under such varying conditions, and to utilize such cues, was a primary factor leading to the characterization of representations involved in speech perception as ultimately articulatory in nature (Liberman and Mattingly, 1985).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensorimotor adaptation affects perceptual compensation for coarticulation

Schuerman

Nagarajan

McQueen

et al. 2017

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A given speech sound will be realized differently depending on the context in which it is produced. Listeners have been found to compensate perceptually for these coarticulatory effects, yet it is unclear to what extent this effect depends on actual production experience. In this study, whether changes in motor-to-sound mappings induced by adaptation to altered auditory feedback can affect perceptual compensation for coarticulation is investigated. Specifically, whether altering how the vowel [i] is produced can affect the categorization of a stimulus continuum between an alveolar and a palatal fricative whose interpretation is dependent on vocalic context is tested. It was found that participants could be sorted into three groups based on whether they tended to oppose the direction of the shifted auditory feedback, to follow it, or a mixture of the two, and that these articulatory responses, not the shifted feedback the participants heard, correlated with changes in perception. These results indicate that sensorimotor adaptation to altered feedback can affect the perception of unaltered yet coarticulatorily-dependent speech sounds, suggesting a modulatory role of sensorimotor experience on speech perception.

show abstract

“…These hypothesised operations can be examined experimentally as it is possible to manipulate acoustic material to create stimuli in which the expectations regarding the identity of an upcoming feature are either confirmed or violated. Poeppel and Monahan review MEG investigations by Flagg, Cardy, and Roberts (2005) and from their research group that examine the neural response to the presence of prediction-consistent vs. prediction-violating acoustic material. The findings of these studies show differences within the M100 window that are sensitive to at least certain of these prediction violations.…”

Section: The Logic Of Neural Markersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to papers from the 5th Workshop on Language Production: The neural bases of language production

Rapp

Miozzo

2011

Language and Cognitive Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The papers in this special issue of Language and Cognitive Processing on the neural bases of language production illustrate two general approaches in current cognitive neuroscience. One approach focuses on investigating cognitive issues, making use of the logic of associations/dissociations or the logic of neural markers as key investigative tools. The other approach has as its primary goal identifying the cognitive and computational functions performed by specific brain areas and understanding the underlying neurobiological mechanisms. The research described in the papers of this special issue applies these approaches to the study of fundamental questions concerning sign language, multilingualism, speech motor control and the interaction between speech production, and comprehension. We discuss how, in doing so, this research sheds light on the cognitive and brain mechanisms of language production.

show abstract

MEG detects neural consequences of anomalous nasalization in vowel–consonant pairs

Cited by 25 publications

References 16 publications

Positive expectation in the processing of allophones

Positive expectation in the processing of allophones

Sensorimotor adaptation affects perceptual compensation for coarticulation

Introduction to papers from the 5th Workshop on Language Production: The neural bases of language production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About