Processing consequences of superfluous and missing prosodic breaks in auditory sentence comprehension

被引:17
作者
Bogels, Sara [1 ,2 ]
Schriefers, Herbert [2 ]
Vonk, Wietske [1 ]
Chwilla, Dorothee J. [2 ]
Kerkhofs, Roe [3 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Psycholinguist, NL-6500 AH Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Donders Inst Brain Cognit & Behav, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Ctr Language Studies, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
Language comprehension; Prosody; Syntax; Event-related potentials; P600; EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; LEXICAL DECISION TASK; BRAIN POTENTIALS; LANGUAGE; SYNTAX; INTERPLAY; REVEALS; MEMORY;
D O I
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.008
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
This ERP study investigates whether a superfluous prosodic break (i.e., a prosodic break that does not coincide with a syntactic break) has more severe processing consequences during auditory sentence comprehension than a missing prosodic break (i.e., the absence of a prosodic break at the position of a syntactic break). Participants listened to temporarily ambiguous sentences involving a prosody syntax match or mismatch. The disambiguation of these sentences was always lexical in nature in the present experiment. This contrasts with a related study by Pauker, Itzhak, Baum, and Steinhauer (2011), where the disambiguation was of a lexical type for missing PBs and of a prosodic type for superfluous PBs. Our results converge with those of Pauker et al. (2011): superfluous prosodic breaks lead to more severe processing problems than missing prosodic breaks. Importantly, the present results extend those of Pauker et al. (2011) showing that this holds when the disambiguation is always lexical in nature. Furthermore, our results show that the way listeners use prosody can change over the course of the experiment which bears consequences for future studies. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2715 / 2728
页数:14
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1987, ATTENTION PERFORMANC
[2]   Brain potentials during semantic and prosodic processing in French [J].
Astésano, C ;
Besson, M ;
Alter, K .
COGNITIVE BRAIN RESEARCH, 2004, 18 (02) :172-184
[3]   Comprehending semantic and grammatical violations in Italian. N400 and P600 comparison with visual and auditory stimuli [J].
Balconi, C ;
Pozzoli, U .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH, 2005, 34 (01) :71-98
[4]   Prosodic Breaks in Sentence Processing Investigated by Event-Related Potentials [J].
Bogels, Sara ;
Schriefers, Herbert ;
Vonk, Wietske ;
Chwilla, Dorothee J. .
LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS COMPASS, 2011, 5 (07) :424-440
[5]  
Bögels S, 2011, J COGNITIVE NEUROSCI, V23, P2447, DOI 10.1162/jocn.2010.21587
[6]   The Interplay between Prosody and Syntax in Sentence Processing: The Case of Subject- and Object-control Verbs [J].
Bogels, Sara ;
Schriefers, Herbert ;
Vonk, Wietske ;
Chwilla, Dorothee J. ;
Kerkhofs, Roel .
JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 2010, 22 (05) :1036-1053
[7]   The extended argument dependency model: A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages [J].
Bornkessel, Ina ;
Schlesewsky, Matthias .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2006, 113 (04) :787-821
[8]   Getting real about Semantic Illusions: Rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension [J].
Brouwer, Harm ;
Fitz, Hartmut ;
Hoeks, John .
BRAIN RESEARCH, 2012, 1446 :127-143
[9]   Mediated priming in the lexical decision task: Evidence from event-related potentials and reaction time [J].
Chwilla, DJ ;
Kolk, HHJ ;
Mulder, G .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2000, 42 (03) :314-341
[10]   The mechanism underlying backward priming in a lexical decision task: Spreading activation versus semantic matching [J].
Chwilla, DJ ;
Hagoort, P ;
Brown, CM .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 51 (03) :531-560