Publications

Abstract

Research into the role of brain oscillations in basic perceptual and cognitive functions has suggested that the alpha rhythm reflects functional inhibition while the beta rhythm reflects neural ensemble (re)activation. However, little is known regarding the generalization of these proposed fundamental operations to linguistic processes, such as speech comprehension and production. Here, we recorded magnetoencephalography in participants performing a novel rule-switching paradigm. Specifically, Dutch native speakers had to produce an alternative exemplar from the same category or a feature of a given target word embedded in spoken sentences (e.g., for the word “tuna”, an exemplar from the same category—“seafood”—would be “shrimp”, and a feature would be “pink”). A cue indicated the task rule—exemplar or feature—either before (pre-cue) or after (retro-cue) listening to the sentence. Alpha power during the working memory delay was lower for retro-cue compared with that for pre-cue in the left hemispheric language-related regions. Critically, alpha power negatively correlated with reaction times, suggestive of alpha facilitating task performance by regulating inhibition in regions linked to lexical retrieval. Furthermore, we observed a different spatiotemporal pattern of beta activity for exemplars versus features in the right temporoparietal regions, in line with the proposed role of beta in recruiting neural networks for the encoding of distinct categories. Overall, our study provides evidence for the generalizability of the role of alpha and beta oscillations from perceptual to more “complex, linguistic processes” and offers a novel task to investigate links between rule-switching, working memory, and word production.

Abstract

In Swedish, words are associated with either of two pitch contours known as Accent 1 and Accent 2. Using a psychometric test, we investigated how listeners judge pitch accent violations while interpreting discourse. Forty native speakers of Central Swedish were presented with auditory dialogues, where test words were appropriately or inappropriately accented in a given context, and asked to judge the correctness of sentences containing the test words. Data indicated a statistically significant effect of wrong accent pattern on the correctness judgment. Both Accent 1 and Accent 2 violations interfered with the coherent interpretation of discourse and were judged as incorrect by the listeners. Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference in the perceived correctness between the accent patterns. Accent 2 violations led to a lower correctness score compared to Accent 1 violations, indicating that the listeners were more sensitive to pitch accent violations in Accent 2 words than in Accent 1 words. This result is in line with the notion that Accent 2 is marked and lexically represented in Central Swedish. Taken together, these findings indicate that listeners use both Accent 1 and Accent 2 to arrive at the correct interpretation of the linguistic input, while assigning varying degrees of relevance to them depending on their markedness.