Time course of syllabic and sub-syllabic processing in Mandarin word production: Evidence from the picture-word interference paradigm

被引:0
|
作者
Jie Wang
Andus Wing-Kuen Wong
Hsuan-Chih Chen
机构
[1] The Chinese University of Hong Kong,Department of Psychology
[2] City University of Hong Kong,Nam Shan Psychology Laboratory, Department of Applied Social Sciences
来源
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review | 2018年 / 25卷
关键词
Phonological encoding; Mandarin spoken word production; Picture-word interference;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The time course of phonological encoding in Mandarin monosyllabic word production was investigated by using the picture-word interference paradigm. Participants were asked to name pictures in Mandarin while visual distractor words were presented before, at, or after picture onset (i.e., stimulus-onset asynchrony/SOA = −100, 0, or +100 ms, respectively). Compared with the unrelated control, the distractors sharing atonal syllables with the picture names significantly facilitated the naming responses at −100- and 0-ms SOAs. In addition, the facilitation effect of sharing word-initial segments only appeared at 0-ms SOA, and null effects were found for sharing word-final segments. These results indicate that both syllables and subsyllabic units play important roles in Mandarin spoken word production and more critically that syllabic processing precedes subsyllabic processing. The current results lend strong support to the proximate units principle (O’Seaghdha, Chen, & Chen, 2010), which holds that the phonological structure of spoken word production is language-specific and that atonal syllables are the proximate phonological units in Mandarin Chinese. On the other hand, the significance of word-initial segments over word-final segments suggests that serial processing of segmental information seems to be universal across Germanic languages and Chinese, which remains to be verified in future studies.
引用
收藏
页码:1147 / 1152
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Exploring the time course of semantic interference and associative priming in the picture-word interference task
    Sailor, Kevin
    Brooks, Patricia J.
    Bruening, Paul R.
    Seiger-Gardner, Liat
    Guterman, Mark
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 62 (04): : 789 - 801
  • [32] The influence of stimulus onset asynchrony on semantic effect in spoken word production: A picture-word interference paradigm study
    Zhou Yuxi
    Liu Yuhao
    Zhang Qingfang
    ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA SINICA, 2022, 54 (05) : 453 - +
  • [33] Temporal course of cognitive control in a picture-word interference task
    Xiao, Xiao
    Zhang, Qinglin
    Jia, Lei
    Zhang, Ye
    Luo, Junlong
    NEUROREPORT, 2010, 21 (02) : 104 - 107
  • [34] Inhibition deficits in frontal patients? Evidence from picture-word interference
    Swick, D
    Roxby, C
    Burke, D
    JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 2002, : 154 - 155
  • [35] THE TIME COURSE OF PICTURE WORD INTERFERENCE
    GLASER, WR
    DUNGELHOFF, FJ
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1984, 10 (05) : 640 - 654
  • [36] AUDITORY-VISUAL STROOP INTERFERENCE IN PICTURE-WORD PROCESSING
    ISHIO, A
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1990, 61 (05): : 329 - 335
  • [37] Level of categorisation effect: A novel effect in the picture-word interference paradigm
    Costa, A
    Mahon, B
    Savova, V
    Caramazza, A
    LANGUAGE AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES, 2003, 18 (02): : 205 - 233
  • [38] Assessing the role of orthography in speech perception and production: Evidence from picture-word interference tasks
    Damian, Markus F.
    Bowers, Jeffrey S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2009, 21 (04): : 581 - 598
  • [39] Semantic domain and grammatical class effects in the picture-word interference paradigm
    Rodriguez-Ferreiro, Javier
    Davies, Robert
    Cuetos, Fernando
    LANGUAGE COGNITION AND NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 29 (01) : 125 - 135
  • [40] The impact of different types of semantic relationships in the picture-word interference paradigm
    Lazendic, G.
    Taft, M.
    AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 58 : 82 - 82