Pure word deafness and the bilateral processing of the speech code

Poeppel, David

doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2505_3

Cited by 168 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We hypothesize that this sampling serves as a logistical or administrative device to generate auditory representations of the appropriate granularity to interface with higher-order, abstract representations. The model is outlined in more detail in Poeppel (2001Poeppel ( , 2003, and is consistent with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data in Boemio et al (2005); Schonwiesner et al (2005) and others.…”

Section: Multi-time Resolution Processingsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…In contrast, they argue that left hemisphere areas are better suited to the processing of rapid temporal modulation (Zatorre et al 2002). Their view converges with that of Poeppel (2001Poeppel ( , 2003, where it is suggested that the spectral versus temporal right-left asymmetry is a consequence of the size of the temporal integration windows of the neuronal ensembles in these areas. Neuronal ensembles in left (non-primary) temporal cortex are associated with somewhat shorter integration constants (say, 20-50 ms) and therefore left hemisphere cortical fields preferentially reflect temporal properties of acoustic signals.…”

Section: Functional Anatomic Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Speech perception at the interface of neurobiology and linguistics

Poeppel

Idsardi

Wassenhove

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

411

371

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speech perception consists of a set of computations that take continuously varying acoustic waveforms as input and generate discrete representations that make contact with the lexical representations stored in long-term memory as output. Because the perceptual objects that are recognized by the speech perception enter into subsequent linguistic computation, the format that is used for lexical representation and processing fundamentally constrains the speech perceptual processes. Consequently, theories of speech perception must, at some level, be tightly linked to theories of lexical representation. Minimally, speech perception must yield representations that smoothly and rapidly interface with stored lexical items. Adopting the perspective of Marr, we argue and provide neurobiological and psychophysical evidence for the following research programme. First, at the implementational level, speech perception is a multi-time resolution process, with perceptual analyses occurring concurrently on at least two time scales (approx. 20-80 ms, approx. 150-300 ms), commensurate with (sub)segmental and syllabic analyses, respectively. Second, at the algorithmic level, we suggest that perception proceeds on the basis of internal forward models, or uses an 'analysis-by-synthesis' approach. Third, at the computational level (in the sense of Marr), the theory of lexical representation that we adopt is principally informed by phonological research and assumes that words are represented in the mental lexicon in terms of sequences of discrete segments composed of distinctive features. One important goal of the research programme is to develop linking hypotheses between putative neurobiological primitives (e.g. temporal primitives) and those primitives derived from linguistic inquiry, to arrive ultimately at a biologically sensible and theoretically satisfying model of representation and computation in speech.

show abstract

Section: Multi-time Resolution Processingsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Functional Anatomic Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 85%

Speech perception at the interface of neurobiology and linguistics

Poeppel

Idsardi

Wassenhove

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

411

371

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Speech Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neuroimaging and brain-damage studies suggest that partly distinct sets of brain areas subserve speech and non-speech sounds (Hickok & Poeppel, 2000;Poeppel, 2001;Trout, 2001;Vouloumanos, Kiehl, Werker, & Liddle, 2001). A clear example is pure word deafness, in which a neurological patient has lost the ability to analyze speech while recognizing other environmental sounds (Hickok & Poeppel, 2000;Poeppel, 2001). Cases of amusia and auditory agnosia, in which patients can understand speech yet fail to appreciate music or recognize environmental sounds (Peretz, Gagnon, & Bouchard, 1998;Poeppel, 2001), show that speech and non-speech perception in fact doubly dissociate.…”

Section: Speech Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The faculty of language: what's special about it?

Pinker¹,

Jackendoff²

2005

Cognition

1,024

449

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the question of which aspects of language are uniquely human and uniquely linguistic in light of recent suggestions by Hauser, Chomsky, and Fitch that the only such aspect is syntactic recursion, the rest of language being either specific to humans but not to language (e.g. words and concepts) or not specific to humans (e.g. speech perception). We find the hypothesis problematic. It ignores the many aspects of grammar that are not recursive, such as phonology, morphology, case, agreement, and many properties of words. It is inconsistent with the anatomy and neural control of the human vocal tract. And it is weakened by experiments suggesting that speech perception cannot be reduced to primate audition, that word learning cannot be reduced to fact learning, and that at least one gene involved in speech and language was evolutionarily selected in the human lineage but is not specific to recursion. The recursion-only claim, we suggest, is motivated by Chomsky's recent approach to syntax, the Minimalist Program, which de-emphasizes the same aspects of language. The approach, however, is sufficiently problematic that it cannot be used to support claims about evolution. We contest related arguments that language is not an adaptation, namely that it is "perfect," non-redundant, unusable in any partial form, and badly designed for 0022-2860/$ -see front matter q

show abstract

“…We would like to thank Mandy Naumann, Katrin working memory processes [4,16] Poeppel [49] demonstrated that patients with pure word deafness often suffer from lesions to the pSTG. Thus, for APFEL EIMER TAFEL phonological processing, the pSTG appears to be the (APPLE) (BUCKET) (BLACKBOARD)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological processing during language production: fMRI evidence for a shared production-comprehension network

Heim

Opitz

Müller

et al. 2003

Cognitive Brain Research

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of phonological processes during language comprehension consistently report activation of the superior portion of Broca's area. In the domain of language production, however, there is no unequivocal evidence for the contribution of Broca's area to phonological processing. The present event-related fMRI study investigated the existence of a common neural network for phonological decisions in comprehension and production by using production tasks most comparable to those previously used in comprehension. Subjects performed two decision tasks on the initial phoneme of German picture names (/ b / or not? Vowel or not?). A semantic decision task served as a baseline for both phonological tasks. The contrasts between each phonological task and the semantic task were calculated, and a conjunction analysis was performed. There was significant activation in the superior portion of Broca's area (Brodmann's area (BA) 44) in the conjunction analysis, also present in each single contrast. In addition, further left frontal (BA 45 / 46) and temporal (posterior superior temporal gyrus) areas known to support phonological processing in both production and comprehension were activated. The results suggest the existence of a shared fronto-temporal neural network engaged in the processing of phonological information in both perception and production. 

show abstract

Pure word deafness and the bilateral processing of the speech code

Cited by 168 publications

References 55 publications

Speech perception at the interface of neurobiology and linguistics

Speech perception at the interface of neurobiology and linguistics

The faculty of language: what's special about it?

Phonological processing during language production: fMRI evidence for a shared production-comprehension network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About