Cours 05

Sharon

Description

Acoustic input vs. phonological representationWhat you hear:ry o: h o: m i m i g a a tt e ry o: h o: d e o t o o k i k uGoal: recover string of phonemic symbolsProblems:• Segmentation• Categorization• High vowels are devoiced in Japanese when between voiceless obstruentsKazanina et al. (2006): perception ofphonemic versus allophonic contrastsVery similar patterns at the phonetic surface in Russian and Korean:Kazanina et al. (2006): perception ofphonemic versus allophonic contrastsHowever, different surface distributions:»Kazanina et al. (2006): perception ofphonemic versus allophonic contrastsAnd different underlying ( lexical) representations However, different surface distributions:Kazanina et al. (2006): perception ofphonemic versus allophonic contrastsIn other words (picture):phonemic contrastallophonic contrast/T/ [d] in between voiced sounds[t] elsewhereExperiment• Russian and Korean participants• stimuli: [ta]-[da] continuum– one for each language, constructed from a naturalrecording of [ta] by a native speaker• tasks:– Russians: identification– Koreans: naturalness rating– all: AX discriminationResultsidentification /ratingResultsidentification /ratingdiscriminationExperiment• MEG recordings during passive listening• oddball paradigm(AAAABAAAABAAAABAA…)• two conditions:– linguistic (da vs. ta)– non-linguistic (1 vs. 1.2 kHz tones)Magnetoencephalography (MEG)• a non-invasive neurophysiological ...

Informations

• Publié par: Chiwyog
• Nombre de lectures: 19
• Langue: English

Extrait

ry

o:

• •

•

Acoustic input vs. phonolo representation

u hear:

m i m i g a

cover strin s: entation orization

e ry o: h o:

nemic symbo

ical

High vowels are devoiced in Japanese when between voiceless obstruents

o o k i

k

u

Kazanina et al. (2006): perception of phonemic versus allophonic contrasts

Very similar patterns at the phonetic surface in Russian and Korean:

Kazanina phonemic

However, different surface distributions:

et al. (2006): perception of versus allophonic contrasts

Kazanina phonemic

And different underlying ( » lexical) representations 

However, different surface distributions:

et al. (2006): perception of versus allophonic contrasts

Kazanina et al. (2006): perception of phonemic versus allophonic contrasts

In other words (picture):

/T/[d] in between voiced sounds [t] elsewhere

phonemic contrast

allophonic contrast

• •

•

Experiment

Russian and Korean participants stimuli: [ta]-[da] continuum – one for each language, constructed from a natural recording of [ta] by a native speaker tasks: –Russians: identification –Koreans: naturalness rating – all: AX discrimination

identification / rating

Results

identification / rating

discrimination

Results

•

•

•

Experiment

MEG recordings during passive listening

oddball paradigm (AAAABAAAABAAAABAA…)

two conditions:

– linguistic (da vs. ta)

– non-linguistic (1 vs. 1.2 kHz tones)

• •

•

•

Magnetoencephalography (MEG)

a non-invasive neurophysiological technique measures the magnetic fields generated by neuronal activity of the brain; hence like EEG it provides a direct measure of brain function (cf. fMRI, which reflects brainmetabolismand only secondarily brain function) very high temporal resolution (like EEG); events with time scales on the order of milliseconds can be resolved excellent spatial resolution (like fMRI); sources can be localized with millimeter precision

syll.

tones

Russian

Results

Korean