• Documents
  • Authors
  • Tables
  • Log in
  • Sign up
  • MetaCart
  • DMCA
  • Donate

CiteSeerX logo

Advanced Search Include Citations
Advanced Search Include Citations | Disambiguate

From listening to sounds to listening to words: Early steps in word learning. In (2004)

by J F Werker, C Fennell
Add To MetaCart

Tools

Sorted by:
Results 1 - 5 of 5

Language experience and the organization of brain activity to phonetically similar words: ERP evidence from 14- and 20-montholds

by Debra L. Mills, Chantel Prat, Renate Zangl, Christine L. Stager, Helen J. Neville, Janet F. Werker - Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 2004
"... & The ability to discriminate phonetically similar speech sounds is evident quite early in development. However, inexperienced word learners do not always use this informa-tion in processing word meanings [Stager & Werker (1997). Nature, 388, 381–382]. The present study used event-related po ..."
Abstract - Cited by 26 (4 self) - Add to MetaCart
& The ability to discriminate phonetically similar speech sounds is evident quite early in development. However, inexperienced word learners do not always use this informa-tion in processing word meanings [Stager & Werker (1997). Nature, 388, 381–382]. The present study used event-related potentials (ERPs) to examine developmental changes from 14 to 20 months in brain activity important in processing phonetic detail in the context of meaningful words. ERPs were compared to three types of words: words whose meanings were known by the child (e.g., ‘‘bear’’), nonsense words that differed by an initial phoneme (e.g., ‘‘gare’’), and nonsense words that differed from the known words by more than one phoneme (e.g., ‘‘kobe’’). These results supported the behavio-ral findings suggesting that inexperienced word learners do not use information about phonetic detail when processing word meanings. For the 14-month-olds, ERPs to known words (e.g., ‘‘bear’’) differed from ERPs to phonetically dissimilar nonsense words (e.g., ‘‘kobe’’), but did not differ from ERPs to phonetically similar nonsense words (e.g., ‘‘gare’’), suggesting that known words and similar mispronunciations were processed as the same word. In contrast, for experienced word learners (i.e., 20-month-olds), ERPs to known words (e.g., ‘‘bear’’) differed from those to both types of nonsense words (‘‘gare’ ’ and ‘‘kobe’’). Changes in the lateral distribution of ERP differences to known and unknown (nonce) words between 14 and 20 months replicated previous findings. The findings suggested that vocabulary development is an impor-tant factor in the organization of neural systems linked to processing phonetic detail within the context of word comprehension. &
(Show Context)

Citation Context

...see also Bailey & Plunkett, 2002). Even 14-month-old children with exceptionally large vocabularies perform successfully in this task. On the basis of these results, Stager and Werker (1997; see also =-=Werker & Fennell, 2004-=-; Fennell & Werker, 2003) concluded that because the typical child at 14 months is still a novice word learner; the task of linking words to meanings is still very computationally intensive. This leav...

The "Perceptual Wedge Hypothesis" as the basis for bilingual babies phonetic processing advantage: New insights from fNIRS brain imaging

by L A Petitto , M S Berens , I Kovelman , M H Dubins , K Jasinska , M Shalinsky - Brain and Language , 2012
"... a b s t r a c t In a neuroimaging study focusing on young bilinguals, we explored the brains of bilingual and monolingual babies across two age groups (younger 4-6 months, older 10-12 months), using fNIRS in a new event-related design, as babies processed linguistic phonetic (Native English, Non-Na ..."
Abstract - Cited by 5 (1 self) - Add to MetaCart
a b s t r a c t In a neuroimaging study focusing on young bilinguals, we explored the brains of bilingual and monolingual babies across two age groups (younger 4-6 months, older 10-12 months), using fNIRS in a new event-related design, as babies processed linguistic phonetic (Native English, Non-Native Hindi) and nonlinguistic Tone stimuli. We found that phonetic processing in bilingual and monolingual babies is accomplished with the same language-specific brain areas classically observed in adults, including the left superior temporal gyrus (associated with phonetic processing) and the left inferior frontal cortex (associated with the search and retrieval of information about meanings, and syntactic and phonological patterning), with intriguing developmental timing differences: left superior temporal gyrus activation was observed early and remained stably active over time, while left inferior frontal cortex showed greater increase in neural activation in older babies notably at the precise age when babies' enter the universal first-word milestone, thus revealing a first-time focal brain correlate that may mediate a universal behavioral milestone in early human language acquisition. A difference was observed in the older bilingual babies' resilient neural and behavioral sensitivity to Non-Native phonetic contrasts at a time when monolingual babies can no longer make such discriminations. We advance the ''Perceptual Wedge Hypothesis'' as one possible explanation for how exposure to greater than one language may alter neural and language processing in ways that we suggest are advantageous to language users. The brains of bilinguals and multilinguals may provide the most powerful window into the full neural ''extent and variability'' that our human species' language processing brain areas could potentially achieve.
(Show Context)

Citation Context

...s, Hindi) at time when monolingual babies’ perception of phonetic contrasts is fixed to those found only in their native language (such as, English). Indeed, this difference between the bilingual baby’s still ‘‘open’’ phonetic discrimination capacity versus the monolingual baby’s already ‘‘closed,’’ or stabilized, phonetic discrimination capacity to native language phonetic contrasts only has led some researchers to claim that the bilingual baby’s difference is ‘‘deviant’’ and/or language delayed (Bosch & SebastiánGallés, 2001, 2003; Burns, Yoshida, Hill, & Werker, 2007; Sundara et al., 2008; Werker & Fennell, 2004). By contrast, bilingual babies are not delayed relative to monolingual babies in the achievement of all classic language-onset milestones, such as canonical babbling, first words, first two-word, and first fifty-words (Holowka & Petitto, 2002; Oller, Eilers, Urbano, & Cobo-Lewis, 1997; Pearson, Fernández, & Oller, 1993; Petitto, 1997, 2000, 2009; Petitto, Holowka, Sergio, Levy, & Ostry, 2004; Petitto, Holowka, Sergio, & Ostry, 2001a; Petitto et al., 2001b). With such mixed findings, behavioral studies have not satisfactorily illuminated the types of processes 132 L.A. Petitto et al. / Brain &...

unknown title

by unknown authors
"... Special section: Language development in multilingual environments ..."
Abstract - Add to MetaCart
Special section: Language development in multilingual environments
(Show Context)

Citation Context

...infants’ ability to perceive relevant phonetic differences with their apparent inability to use this information in some tasks. One proposal is that word learning initially entails high task demands (=-=Werker & Fennell, 2004-=-). Infants must concurrently learn about objects, words, and the connection between them, all while appropriately storing and retrieving the rich phonetic detail of the target words. This might be esp...

Acquisition of syllabic prominence in German speaking children

by Britta Lintfert, Bernd Möbius
"... An investigation of the acoustic correlates of word stress in infant polysyllabic vocalization was carried out on the basis of data from 6 German-learning infants between 7 and 36 months of age in order to describe the development of word stress in German. The data were analyzed with respect to dura ..."
Abstract - Add to MetaCart
An investigation of the acoustic correlates of word stress in infant polysyllabic vocalization was carried out on the basis of data from 6 German-learning infants between 7 and 36 months of age in order to describe the development of word stress in German. The data were analyzed with respect to duration, intensity, fundamental frequency (f0), as well as vowel quality parameters describing the time and degree of opening of the glottis, the slope of the spectrum and glottal leakage. With beginning of babbling children are able to produce different stress patterns. However, the implementation and usage of the parameters contributing to marking word stress appear to be inconsistent. The children used all measured acoustic parameters for marking word stress but the usage of the parameters depended on age and on the individual child. The most important cue to mark different stress patterns is to learn to reduce the acoustic parameters for the production of unstressed vowels.
(Show Context)

Citation Context

...al representations are established in the pre-linguistic period, trained during babbling and help to build up more adult-like representations which are used when children begin to establish a lexicon =-=[4]-=-. If the sensitivity to metrical stress is less developeda dysfunction in the acquisition of speech can occur [5]. Between the beginning of babbling to the onset of language-specific sounds, children ...

Word recognition

by Jennifer Vannest A, Elissa L. Newport B, Aaron J. Newman C, Daphne Bavelier B , 2010
"... available at www.sciencedirect.com www.elsevier.com/locate/brainres ..."
Abstract - Add to MetaCart
available at www.sciencedirect.com www.elsevier.com/locate/brainres
(Show Context)

Citation Context

...ith other studies of bilinguals revealing differences in phonetic categorization around 8 months of age (Bosch & Sebastián-Gallés, 2003a) and later success in word learning tasks using minimal pairs (=-=Werker & Fennell, 2004-=-). 3.1. Method 3.1.1. Participants The simultaneous Catalan–Spanish bilingual sample comprised 24 children between 18;22 and 26;08 months of age (range from 562 to 788 days, mean 661, median 644 days)...

Powered by: Apache Solr
  • About CiteSeerX
  • Submit and Index Documents
  • Privacy Policy
  • Help
  • Data
  • Source
  • Contact Us

Developed at and hosted by The College of Information Sciences and Technology

© 2007-2019 The Pennsylvania State University