Characteristics of the rhythmic organization of vocal babbling: Implications for an amodal linguistic rhythm

Dolata, Jill; Davis, Barbara L.; MacNeilage, Peter F.

doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.12.014

Cited by 25 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the trajectory of lip-smacking development is identical to that of babbling-to-consonant-vowel production in humans. The differences in the developmental trajectories between lip-smacking and chewing are also identical to those reported in humans for speech and chewing [77, 83–85]. …”

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…It starts out slower and is more variable. Over development, the rhythmic frequency increases from ~ 3 Hz to ~5 Hz [21, 47, 77, 78], and the variability of this rhythm is very high [77] and does not become fully adult-like until post-pubescence [72]. Importantly, this developmental trajectory from babbling to speech is distinct from that of another cyclical mouth movement, that of chewing .…”

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Ghazanfar¹,

Takahashi²

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A full account of human speech evolution must consider its multisensory, rhythmic, and cooperative characteristics. Humans, apes and monkeys recognize the correspondence between vocalizations and the associated facial postures and gain behavioral benefits from them. Some monkey vocalizations even have a speech-like acoustic rhythmicity, yet they lack the concomitant rhythmic facial motion that speech exhibits. We review data showing that facial expressions like lip-smacking may be an ancestral expression that was later linked to vocal output in order to produce rhythmic audiovisual speech. Finally, we argue that human vocal cooperation (turn-taking) may have arisen through a combination of volubility and prosociality, and provide comparative evidence from one species to support this hypothesis.

show abstract

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Ghazanfar¹,

Takahashi²

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In adults, the speech rhythm is ~5 Hz (Chandrasekaran et al, 2009; Dolata, Davis, & MacNeilage, 2008; Greenberg et al, 2003; Crystal & House, 1982; Malecot et al, 1972), whereas in infant babbling, the rhythm is considerably slower. Infants produce speech-like sounds at a slower rate of roughly 2.8–3.4 Hz (Dolata et al, 2008; Nathani, Oller, & Cobo-Lewis, 2003; Lynch, Oller, Steffens, & Buder, 1995; Levitt & Wang, 1991). In addition to differences in the rhythmic frequency between adults and infants, there are differences in their variability.…”

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to differences in the rhythmic frequency between adults and infants, there are differences in their variability. Infants produce highly variable vocal rhythms (Dolata et al, 2008) that do not become fully adult-like until postpubescence (Smith & Zelaznik, 2004). Importantly, this developmental trajectory from babbling to speech is distinct from that of another cyclical mouth movement—chewing.…”

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facial Expressions and the Evolution of the Speech Rhythm

Ghazanfar¹,

Takahashi²

2014

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In primates, different vocalizations are produced, at least in part, by making different facial expressions. Not surprisingly, humans, apes, and monkeys all recognize the correspondence between vocalizations and the facial postures associated with them. However, one major dissimilarity between monkey vocalizations and human speech is that, in the latter, the acoustic output and associated movements of the mouth are both rhythmic (in the 3- to 8-Hz range) and tightly correlated, whereas monkey vocalizations have a similar acoustic rhythmicity but lack the concommitant rhythmic facial motion. This raises the question of how we evolved from a presumptive ancestral acoustic-only vocal rhythm to the one that is audiovisual with improved perceptual sensitivity. According to one hypothesis, this bisensory speech rhythm evolved through the rhythmic facial expressions of ancestral primates. If this hypothesis has any validity, we expect that the extant nonhuman primates produce at least some facial expressions with a speech-like rhythm in the 3- to 8-Hz frequency range. Lip smacking, an affiliative signal observed in many genera of primates, satisfies this criterion. We review a series of studies using developmental, x-ray cineradiographic, EMG, and perceptual approaches with macaque monkeys producing lip smacks to further investigate this hypothesis. We then explore its putative neural basis and remark on important differences between lip smacking and speech production. Overall, the data support the hypothesis that lip smacking may have been an ancestral expression that was linked to vocal output to produce the original rhythmic audiovisual speech-like utterances in the human lineage.

show abstract

“…Speech production is also likely to exhibit a similar kind of preference for certain rates. Yet, compared with conspicuous oromotor rhythms such as chewing or infantile babbling (Schieppati et al, 1989;Dolata et al, 2008), spontaneous rhythmicity in complex adult speech is likely to be a less salient phenomenon (Smith, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corticomuscular Coherence Is Tuned to the Spontaneous Rhythmicity of Speech at 2–3 Hz

Ruspantini

Saarinen²,

Belardinelli³

et al. 2012

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human speech features rhythmicity that frames distinctive, fine-grained speech patterns. Speech can thus be counted among rhythmic motor behaviors that generally manifest characteristic spontaneous rates. However, the critical neural evidence for tuning of articulatory control to a spontaneous rate of speech has not been uncovered. The present study examined the spontaneous rhythmicity in speech production and its relationship to cortex-muscle neurocommunication, which is essential for speech control. Our MEG results show that, during articulation, coherent oscillatory coupling between the mouth sensorimotor cortex and the mouth muscles is strongest at the frequency of spontaneous rhythmicity of speech at 2-3 Hz, which is also the typical rate of word production. Corticomuscular coherence, a measure of efficient cortex-muscle neurocommunication, thus reveals behaviorally relevant oscillatory tuning for spoken language.

show abstract

Characteristics of the rhythmic organization of vocal babbling: Implications for an amodal linguistic rhythm

Cited by 25 publications

References 17 publications

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Facial Expressions and the Evolution of the Speech Rhythm

Corticomuscular Coherence Is Tuned to the Spontaneous Rhythmicity of Speech at 2–3 Hz

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About