Can the mismatch negativity really be elicited by abstract linguistic contrasts?

IF 3.6 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Stephen Politzer-Ahles, B. Jap
{"title":"Can the mismatch negativity really be elicited by abstract linguistic contrasts?","authors":"Stephen Politzer-Ahles, B. Jap","doi":"10.1162/nol_a_00147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The mismatch negativity (MMN) is an ERP component that reflects pre-attentive change detection in the brain. As an electrophysiological index of processing that responds to differences in incoming consecutive stimuli, the MMN can be elicited through, for example, the presentation of two different categories of sounds in an oddball paradigm where sounds from the \"standard\" category occur frequently and sounds from the \"deviant\" category occur rarely. The specificity of what can elicit the MMN is yet to be fully defined. Here we test whether the MMN can be generated by an abstract linguistic contrast with no reliable acoustic cue. Previous studies have shown that the way in which an acoustic cue is used to elicit MMN is influenced by linguistic knowledge, but have not shown that a non-acoustic, abstract linguistic contrast can itself elicit MMN. In this study, we test the strongest interpretation of the claim that the MMN can be generated through a purely linguistic contrast, by contrasting tenses in ablauting irregular English verbs (where there is no reliable acoustic cue for tense). We find that this contrast elicits a negativity, as do other linguistic contrasts previously shown to elicit MMN. The findings provide evidence that the MMN is indeed sensitive to purely abstract linguistic categories.","PeriodicalId":34845,"journal":{"name":"Neurobiology of Language","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurobiology of Language","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The mismatch negativity (MMN) is an ERP component that reflects pre-attentive change detection in the brain. As an electrophysiological index of processing that responds to differences in incoming consecutive stimuli, the MMN can be elicited through, for example, the presentation of two different categories of sounds in an oddball paradigm where sounds from the "standard" category occur frequently and sounds from the "deviant" category occur rarely. The specificity of what can elicit the MMN is yet to be fully defined. Here we test whether the MMN can be generated by an abstract linguistic contrast with no reliable acoustic cue. Previous studies have shown that the way in which an acoustic cue is used to elicit MMN is influenced by linguistic knowledge, but have not shown that a non-acoustic, abstract linguistic contrast can itself elicit MMN. In this study, we test the strongest interpretation of the claim that the MMN can be generated through a purely linguistic contrast, by contrasting tenses in ablauting irregular English verbs (where there is no reliable acoustic cue for tense). We find that this contrast elicits a negativity, as do other linguistic contrasts previously shown to elicit MMN. The findings provide evidence that the MMN is indeed sensitive to purely abstract linguistic categories.
抽象的语言对比真的能引起错配否定吗?
错配负性(MMN)是一种ERP成分,它反映了大脑中的前注意变化检测。作为对连续输入刺激的差异做出反应的处理过程的电生理指标,MMN 可以通过以下方式激发:例如,在一个怪人范例中呈现两种不同类别的声音,其中 "标准 "类别的声音经常出现,而 "偏差 "类别的声音很少出现。目前还没有完全确定哪些因素可以诱发MMN。在这里,我们测试了抽象的语言对比是否能产生 MMN,而这种对比并没有可靠的声音线索。以往的研究表明,使用声音线索来诱发 MMN 的方式会受到语言知识的影响,但并没有表明非声音的抽象语言对比本身可以诱发 MMN。在本研究中,我们通过对比不规则英语动词的时态(没有可靠的时态声学线索),检验了对 "MMN 可以通过纯粹的语言对比产生 "这一说法的最有力解释。我们发现,这种对比会引起一种否定性,就像之前被证明能引起 MMN 的其他语言对比一样。研究结果证明,MMN 的确对纯粹抽象的语言类别很敏感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurobiology of Language
Neurobiology of Language Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
32
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信