Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
11) Language Production: Highly variable & improvised (Disorders of…
11) Language Production:
Highly variable & improvised
Comparing speaking, writing, singing
SPEAKING v.s. Writing
Similarities
Involve planning the meaning to be communicated
Proceeds on a phrase-by-phrase or clause-by-clause basis
Involve words, phrases, sentences, ideas
Differences
Speakers
less time to plan
Writers
direct access to what they have written so far
Speakers
get moment-to-moment feedback from listeners
Different effects on memory
Speakers
more often know their audience
SPEAKING v.s. Singing
Similarities
Involve
linguistic
& vocal
planning
prior to vocalisation
Draw on brain resources associated with language capacity
Involve
vocalisation
of words & phrases
Precedes on a phrase-by-phrase or clause-by-clause basis
Differences
Speakers:
Intuitive pitch/timing (speech intonation)
Singers
: Formalised changes in pitch and rhythm
Speaking
: Communication focus/social bonding
Singing
: Aesthetic experience
Speakers
: Improvisation
Singers
: Sing memorised sequences of pitches and words
Speaking
: turn taking
Singing
: All sing at once
Speaking = Improvisation
strategies to reduce processing demands
=
Pre-formulation
: Re-using phrases that were used before (70% of our speech: "OMG" "are you kidding me" "its not that i dont like x3"
Under-specification
: Using simplified expressions > being specific ("And such" "or something" "so forth" "she's overseas" "things like that")
Role of
speech prosody
and
gesture
Gestures
Regulators
Encourages interaction with perceiver
Head nods, eye contact, palms towards listener
Affect displays
Unintentional, reflects emotional states
Facial expressions, clenched fist
Illustrators
Supports or reinforces
Pointing, accentuating certain words
Adaptors
Unintentional, self conscious, coping
Hair twirling, scratching nose, biting lip
Emblems
Can be translated into speech/words
Peace sign, thumbs up
Speech prodosy
Sad
Vocal quality/timbre
Fear
Amount of pitch variability
Tender
Intensity: loud or soft
Anger/irritation
Articulation (precise/relaxed)
Happy
Overall pitch height
Neutral
Contour (of pitch, intensity)
Carries emotional information independent of linguistic content
Speech as communication
Grice's components of communication (1967)
MAXIMS
Maxims
Relation
: Relevant to situation
Quality
: Accurate
Quantity
: Informative, but not more so
Manner
: Make contribution easy to understand
Strategies for effective communication
Syntactic priming
: Repetition of syntactic structure that has been heard recently
Gestures
: Aid understanding and clarification
Prosodic cues
: Intonation used to aid meaning
Discourse markers
: Extra words to help clarify
Audience design
: Speakers account for needs of listeners
Cooperative Principle
: Speakers and listeners must try to be cooperative
Analysis of speech production
Levels
Morphological
Smallest semantically meaningful bits of speech
"pre", "cat", "ed", "s", "un" "ing"
Semantic
Meaning of words
Phonological
Sounds that make up the speech
Mat = "M" + "a+ + "t"
Syntactic
Order of the words
Production may have different "stages of processing" (progresses from high level plans to low-level implementation?)
Units of planning
Phrases
No subject-verb (best friend, for twenty days)
Pauses are
longer
before
complex > simple phrases
Word exchange errors can occur
across
different phrases
Flexibility in planning
Pauses can occur before either clauses & phrases
Amount of planning depends on speed/fluency demands
Clauses
Pauses occur
before
Errors can occur
anywhere
in a clause
Subject-verb (I walked home, she ran to school)
Speech errors
Breakdown in speech planning
Tounge-twisters
Examples
Lexical selection error: No affluence (influence) over him
Had to evaporate (evacuate) the city
Sound-exchange: belly jeans (jelly beans) (often spoonerisms: sound exchange with meaning)
Semantic substitution: Tennis bat (tennis racket)
Word exchange errors: "Your problem (You're welcome, no problem)
Number-agreement error: A study of 300 animals indicate (indicates)- long distance relationship within a phrase
Morpheme-exchange errors: Awful (awesome + beautiful)
Preservatory
: Earlier sound is mistakenly repeated
Chicken noo
k
le soup, little
l
ed riding hood
Error Detection
: Evidence that production system monitors for errors (not comprehension system)
Score on comprehension, score on own speech errors, score on monitoring own speech errors: no relationship between ability to detect errors or comprehension
More production errors = less liekly to detect own errors
Anticipatory
: Planned sound is vocalised early
Cu
ff
of coffee, rail
tr
oad tracks
Disorders of language
Aphasia
Wernicke's aphasia
Problem with language reception
Jargon aphasia
Severe problems with comprehension
Deficit in phonological encoding, after lexical access
Cannot find word they want to say: may produce neologisms
Inadequate speech monitoring
Phonemes found in neologisms determined by
Phonemic frequency
Phonemic recency
Phonemes present in target word
Speech lacks meaning
Fluent & grammatical speech, can get emotion, lacking in detail and specificity
Problems with speech comprehension
Damage to left posterior temporal lobe (Wernicke's area)
Anomia
Impaired ability to name objects (failure in word retrieval)
According to WEAVER++ occurs at lemma selection stage: (have conceptual grasp; have phenological ability to speak it)
What is impaired: the mapping between semantic information about the object and phonological representations
Disconnection
Broca's aphasia
(Undateables)
Intact speech comprehension
Associated with left frontal lobe damage (Broca's area)
Slow, non-fluent speech, poor syntax ability (
production
)
Melodic intonation therapy (MIT)
Singing to stimulate right hemisphere & facilitate speech recovery: compensate for left side
Tapping along with the left hand
Agrammatism
Produce short sentences containing content words: lack function words ("the" "in" "and" word endings)
Associated with Broca's aphasia
Supports notion that production involves a syntactic level
Theories of speech production & communication
WEAVER++ Model
(Levelt)
Tip of the tongue
Strengths
Directly models how word production moves through lexical selection to morphological encoding to phonological encoding
Shifts focus away from errors and towards timing of word production
Limitations
Narrow focus on single word production
Fails to explain errors that suggest parallel processing
Necessity of the lemma? (lexical access)
Some findings with anomia are inconsistent with model
Involves lexicalisation (turning meaning into sounds)
Serial processing (concept --> lexical --> syntactic --> phonological --> articulation)
Stage model of language production
Feed forward activation-spreading network
Spreading Activation
(Dell)
Strengths
Stimulates many speech errors (overgeneralisation)
Spreading activation: can explain lots of cognitive processes
Plausible architecture: brain neurons
Limitations
Vague on processes related to semantics
Not well designed to predict: time taken to produce spoken words (planning)
A lexicon (dictionary): nodes for concepts, words, morphemes and phonemes
"Parallel processing" of 4 levels (neural network)
Nodes vary in activation, which spreads to related nodes
Connecting sound (phenology) nodes for morphemes
Words with similar meaning connected to common semantic nodes
Disorders of music
Acquired amusia
Inability to recognise musical tones or reproduce them (acquired)
Beat deafness
Difficulty finding pulse of music
Congenital amusia
Inability to recognise musical tones or reproduce them (from birth)
Musical dystonia
Motor issue for performers; remapping of the brain & hand cannot function like they used to