wk 11 Flashcards
preformulation
producing phrases that have been used before
under specification
using simplified expressions
3 stages of speech production
-Conceptualisation= think of an idea to communicate
-Formulation= express ideas with lang tools
-Articulation= move muscles
2 theories of speech production
-WEAVER++ model = serial process
-spreading activation
WEAVER++ model
1) Think of idea to convey
2) Identify appropriate lexical item (lemma level)
3) Retrieve words morphemic code (e.g: adding s onto end to make plural)
4)Retrieve word’s phonological code (speech sounds)
5) Syllabify word & access articulatory gestures (how sounds within word are governed)
6) Move muscles + produce speech waves
spreading activation model
¡ Nodes corresponding to words or concepts vary in activation
When a word is activated, activation spreads to other related nodes
¡ E.g., activation of node for tree can spread activation to node for plant
¡ Spreading activation can also occur for sounds
Interactive information flow
¡ From meaning to sound & sound to meaning
¡ Lemma is an intermediate stage between activating
an idea and the speech sound
¡ Lexicalisation is not a one stage process
Lemma is
an intermediate stage between activating
an idea and the speech sound
problems with WEAVER++ model
-Tip of tongue, can access info about word without knowing the word.
-picture-word interference task
semantic relatedness slows down word processing whereas phonological relatedness speeds it up
lexical bias effect
speech errots tend to feature real words vs non-real
Mixed-error effect -
incorrect word is semantically and phonemically related to
the correct word
Audience design –
making communication effective
by accounting for our listener’s specific needs
syntactic priming
using the structure that we’ve heard most recently instead of alternative
WHY DO WE USE SYNTACTIC PRIMING?
Repeating previously used structures, reduces demands on speech production
¡ We can be sure that we are using language that our partner understands
¡ (e.g., child/bilingual speaker)
¡ Helps us ‘align’ with conversational partner
¡ interlocutors often like to be ‘on the same wavelength’ as each other
phonemes
elementary (smallest) units of sound. E.g.,‘rice’ and ‘lice’ differ from each other by just one phoneme
morphemes
elementary (smallest) units of meaning in language. E.g., dog-s
Phonology
rules governing the sound of words and parts of words.
Syntax
: rules governing word order and meaning resulting in sentences. E.g., ‘pass the salt’, not ‘the pass salt’
Semantics:
the meanings of words/sentences. E.g., ‘bank’ which could refer to the entity where money is stored or the act of saving
Pragmatics
the use of language as a function of content & social rules. E.g., ‘hello’, ‘hi’ or ‘hey’
TRACE (MCCLELLAND & ELMAN, 1986) model
processing units at 3 levels = `
Auditory feature nodes connected to phoneme nodes which are connected to word nodes
TRACE (MCCLELLAND & ELMAN, 1986) model
order of processing the word CAT
- hear C
- Activates phoneme C
- activates words Cat, Can, Cop
- Words then activate additional phonemes A, N, O etc
- Hear A
- Activates A phoneme
- Activates words cat, can; decreases
activation for cop - Continued activation for phoneme N,
P, T; decreased activation for O - Hear /t/
- Activates phoneme T
- Activates word cat; decreases
activation for can
MOTOR THEORY (LIBERMAN ET AL., 1967)
¡ Listeners perceive spoken words by reproducing the movements of the speaker’s
vocal tract rather than by identifying the sound patterns that speech generates.
Motor system is involved in both speech perception and production
¡ Bridges the two language processes
McGurk Effect
when the auditory component of one sound pairs with the visual
component of another sound, leading to the perception of a third sound.
¡ We integrate non-acoustic information into what we hear.
¡ Our auditory and visual information processing is merged.
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR MOTOR THEORY (LIBERMAN ET AL., 1967)
McGurk effect
¡ Categorical perception
¡ Motor cortex is functionally involved in speech perception
CATEGORICAL SPEECH PERCEPTION (RAIZADA & POLDRACK, 2007)
supporting motor theory
Speakers did not perceive gradual change.
¡ They suddenly switched from perceiving one sound to
perceiving the other.
¡ Better discrimination of pairs of sounds when sounds
were across the crucial point.
