2. Study Questions. How has sentence ambiguity been used to study the psycholinguistics of grammar. Describe the classical localization model of brain and language. How do different aphasias relate to the model. Give examples. 6/14/2015 Oh freddled guntbuggly, thy micturations are to me As plurdled gabbleblothchits on a lugid bee Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes And booptiously drangle me with crinkly bindlewurdles Or I will rend thee in the gobberwarts With my blurglecruncheon, see if I don’t Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Language »Articulatory Phonetics ◊Top down processes »Syntax »Lexical and semantic factors ◊Case Grammar »Neuropsychology of language ◊Classical Localization Model »Neurophysiology of language

3. Language Articulatory Phonetics »Voicing

4. Percentage Identified 100 80 60 40 20 0 Voice-onset time (ms) 40506070102030 Language Is speech special? »Do we possess specialized neural mechanisms for perceiving speech? »Categorical perception ◊Voice onset-time and distinguishing /d/ from /t/

5. Language Articulatory Phonetics »Vowels ◊Positioning and part of tongue –Height High (/i/ beet) Med (/e/ bait) Low (/a/ pot) –Part Front (/I/ bit) Central (but) Back (/o/ boat)

6. Language The search for invariants »Distinctive features »Problems with a simple bottom-up approach ◊There are no periods of silence between phonemes –The speech spectrograph

7. Language The search for invariants

8. Language The search for invariants »Phonemic information is presented in parallel ◊Coarticulation ◊E.g. Cf. /M/ in “Tim” vs. “/M/ in “mad” »We perceive them as the same, but they are different »We perceive the same sound differently according to the context ◊E.g.: Writer vs. Rider ◊E.g.: Insert a silence between /s/ and /i/ --> “ski” Insert a silence between /s/ and /u/ --> “spew”

9. Language Top down processes »Phonemic restoration effect (Warren, 1970) ◊Their respective legi*latures ◊Found a *eel on the axle ◊Found a *eel on the shoe

10. Language Perceiving conversational speech »Two main problems: ◊There are no physical boundaries between words –Anna Mary candy lights since imp pulp lay things –( An American delights in simple play things) ◊Speech is sloppy –He wants to kiss this Guy? –Misheard Lyrics (www.kissthisguy.com) –This was the best buy vs. She is a bad girl

11. Language Perceiving conversational speech

12. Language W h a d’ a y a D oo w i n Perceiving conversational speech

13. Language Top-down processes and speech perception »Phonemic perception ◊The McGurk EffectThe McGurk Effect »Sentence comprenension ◊Miller & Isard (1963) –Participants shadow sentences: Grammatic: Bears steal honey from the hive. Semantically incorrect: Bears shoot honey on the highways. Ungrammatic: Across bears eyes honey the bill.

14. Language Top-down processes and speech perception ◊Miller & Isard (1963) –Results Gram.Nonsem. Nongram. No noise 89% 79%56% Noise 63% 22% 3%

15. Language Syntax »Finite state grammar ◊E.g, Miller (1958). 0 1 3 2 0´ Start Finish S N N X S G G X

16. Language Syntax »Finite state grammar ◊E.g, Miller (1958). StructuredRandom L1L2R1R2 SSXGNNSGGNSXNXGS NNXSGNNSXGNSGXNGNXSG SXSXGSXXSGXGSSNSXNGG Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.

17. Language Syntax »Finite state grammar ◊E.g, Miller (1958).

18. Language Syntax »Finite state grammar ◊Problems with finite state grammar –Linguistic competence –Judgements of grammaticity (Chomsky) e.g., Colourless green ideas sleep furiously (For words never paired together) –Judgements of agrammaticity (Miller and Selfridge) e.g., Was he went to the newspaper is in deep end. (For words often paired together) –Resolving/explaining ambiguity e.g., They are cooking apples.

19. Language Syntax »Phrase structure grammar »Constituent analysis The boyhit the ball Verb phrase (VP) Noun phrase (NP) NPDet. The Det. the Noun boy Verb hit Noun ball

20. Language Syntax »Phrase structure grammar ◊Three types of sentences –Grammatical / meaningful: maps onto only one phrase structure. –Nongrammatical: cannot be mapped onto a phrase structure –Grammatical / ambiguous: maps onto more than one phrase structure. e.g., They are flying planes

21. Language Syntax »Transformational grammar ◊Some ambiguous sentences are not explained by phrase structure E.g, Visiting relatives can be boring ◊Both interpretations map onto the same phrase structure...but, they map onto different meanings »Surface structure: Superficial appearance (i.e., phrase structure). »Deep structure: The meaning of the sentence. »Transformational rules: convert the deep structure into a surface structure (a sentence ready to be spoke)

22. Language Syntax »Resolving ambiguity (McKay, 1966) ◊Lexical ambiguity –E.g., Although he was continually bothered by the cold … –Control: headache ◊Surface ambiguity –E.g., Although Hannibal sent troops over a week ago … –Control: almost ◊Underlying ambiguity –E.g., Knowing that visiting relatives could be bothersome …. –Control: visiting some

23. Language Syntax »Resolving ambiguity (McKay, 1966) ◊Results

24. Language Syntax »Case grammar ◊Semantic analysis involves determining the semantic role of each word or concept and computing sentence meaning based on that analysis. ◊E.g, A] The key will open the door B] The janitor will open the door with the key –The ‘key’ is the subject of [A] and an object in [B] but serves the same role in each sentence.

25. Language Syntax »Interaction between syntax and semantics ◊Fillenbaum (1974) –Had subjects read and then paraphrase several sentences –Normal sentences: Threat: Don’t print that or I will sue you. Control: John got off the bus and went to the store –Perverse/disordered Threat: Don’t print that or I won’t sue you Control: John went in the store and got on the bus. –Results: Perverse: 50% normalized in their paraphrases Disordered: 60 % normalized. When subjects checked their work, they missed half of the errors…

26. Nice we’re having weather isn’t it?

27. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Aphasia: Language deficits resulting from brain-related disorders and injury. ◊Very common –40 % of all strokes produce some aphasia »Broca’s Aphasia ◊Paul Broca - studied patient Leborgne (A.K.A.’Tan’) –Treated for leg injury –Died a few days later –Autopsied brain –Discovered ‘Broca’s area’ –Left Hemisphere dominance for language

28. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Broca’s Aphasia Paul Broca

29. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Broca’s Aphasia ◊Production Deficits –Problems in producing fluent language –Range from ‘Tan,tan,tan,…’ to short phrases –Lack function words and grammar May retain idioms (‘fit as a fiddle’) or songs –Proximity to motor cortex Dysarthria: loss of control over articulatory muscles Speech Apraxia: Unable to program voluntary articulatory movements. Paul Broca

30. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Broca’s Aphasia ◊Comprehension deficits –Unable to analyze precise grammatical information E.g. “The Boy ate the cookie” Who ate the Cookie? “Boy ate cookie” Implied grammar (cookies don’t eat boys) “The Boy was kicked by the girl” Who kicked whom? “Boy kick girl” Paul Broca

31. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Wernicke’s Aphasia ◊Carl Wernicke, 1870s –Examined two patients Problems understanding language following strokes Fluent but nonsensical speech Poor language comprehension Proximity to auditory sensory areas (Wernicke proposed word memory area) Carl Wernicke

32. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Wernicke’s Aphasia ◊Production deficits –Sounds fluent (e.g., foreign language) –Neologistic (invented words) –Semantic substitutions E.g. I called my mother on the television and did not understand the romers by the door. Carl Wernicke

33. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Wernicke’s Aphasia ◊Comprehension deficits –Do not recognize the incomprehensibility of their own sentences –Do not comprehend written or spoken language ◊“Here and gone again” –Aphasia improves over time –Anomia: Losing the ability to retrieve words (nouns) Carl Wernicke

34. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Classical localization model (Lichtheim, 1885; Geschwand, 1967) Conceptual Information Wernicke’sBroca’s

35. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Classical localization model (Lichtheim, 1885; Geschwand, 1967) ◊Damage to main areas –Broca’s Aphasia –Wernicke’s Aphasia ◊Damage to connections –Conduction aphasia –Transcortical sensory aphasia

36. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Conduction aphasia ◊Damage to the connection between Wernicke’s and Broca’s area –Arcuate Fasciculus

37. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Conduction aphasia ◊Production deficits –Problems producing spontaneous speech –Problem repeating speech –Sometimes use words incorrectly ◊Comprehension –Can understand spoken/written words –Can hear their own speech errors, but cannot correct them

38. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »Conduction aphasia Conceptual Information Wernicke’sBroca’s

39. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »A prediction Conceptual Information Wernicke’sBroca’s

40. Brain & Language Neuropsychology of language »A prediction ◊ Disconnecting Wernicke’s from the conceptual area should lead to repetition without comprehension. ◊Transcortical Sensory Aphasi –Damage to the angular gyri

41. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain »ERP studies ◊The N400: Semantic violations

42. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain »ERP studies ◊The P600: Syntactic Positive Shift (syntactic violation)

43. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain ◊Dispreferred continuation of ambiguous sentences –E.g., The spy saw the cop with the binoculars Who has the binoculars? “The spy has the binoculars” -> preferred continuation ◊The N400 and aphasia –Swaab et al. Patients listened to sentences that had an anomalous word at the end.

44. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain ◊Swaab et al. (1997)

45. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain ◊A caveat: Individual differences –Stimulation mapping of the brain Neurosurgery around left hemisphere language areas –A couple hundred of partients – Correlation with effects in Wernicke and Broca’s area are week Some patients have naming problems in the area, not all. –Anatomical localizations vary considerably.

46. Brain & Language Neurophysiology of language in the intact brain ◊A caveat: Individual differences