Across languages, certain syllables are systematically preferred to others (e.g., plaf > ptaf). H... more Across languages, certain syllables are systematically preferred to others (e.g., plaf > ptaf). Here, we examine whether these preferences arise from motor simulation. In the simulation account, ill-formed syllables (e.g., ptaf) are disliked because their motor plans are harder to simulate. Four experiments compared sensitivity to the syllable structure of labial-vs. corona-initial speech stimuli (e.g., plaf > pnaf > ptaf vs. traf > tmaf > tpaf); meanwhile, participants (English vs. Russian speakers) lightly bit on their lips or tongues. Results suggested that the perception of these stimuli was selectively modulated by motor stimulation (e.g., stimulating the tongue differentially affected sensitivity to labial vs. coronal stimuli). Remarkably, stimulation did not affect sensitivity to syllable structure. This dissociation suggests that some (e.g., phonetic) aspects of speech perception are reliant on motor simulation, hence, embodied; others (e.g., phonology), however, are possibly abstract. These conclusions speak to the role of embodiment in the language system, and the separation between phonology and phonetics, specifically.
Core phonology: Evidence from grammatical universals Iris Berent ([email protected]) Northeastern ... more Core phonology: Evidence from grammatical universals Iris Berent ([email protected]) Northeastern University, Department of Psychology, 125 Nightingale Hall, 360 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02115 The human capacity for language is one of the most contentious topics in cognitive science. While some researchers attribute language to domain-general mechanisms, others postulate a specialized language system. When it comes to the phonological component, however, even proponents of domain-specificity concede that specialization is unlikely (Fitch et al., 2005). Phonological competence, in this view, is the product of experience, auditory perception, and motor control. And indeed, phonological systems are intimately grounded in phonetics. But while the domain-general perspective can account for this fact, it offers no explanation for several key features of language. It fails to explain why all languages—signed and spoken—have a phonological system, why phonological systems emerge spontaneo...
Modern linguistic theory posits the existence of universal constraints. But whether these constra... more Modern linguistic theory posits the existence of universal constraints. But whether these constraints concern language structure, generally, or speech, specifically, is unknown. To address this question, here we ask whether the constraints identified in spoken languages transfer to sign languages. ANCHORING (McCarthy & Prince, 1993) is a putatively universal constraint on reduplication. ANCHORING requires that the final element of a suffixed reduplicant match the final element of the base (e.g., pana 'chase'->panana, 'run' not panapa). Here, we examine whether ANCHORING is likewise operative in a signed language. In our experiments, native ASL signers rated novel reduplicated forms: either ones consistent or inconsistent with ANCHORING (i.e., ABB vs. ABA, where A and B are syllables). Results showed that signers reliably favored ABB forms over ABA. These findings show for the first time that ANCHORING constrains a sign language. This conclusion is consistent with the existence of amodal linguistic principles.
Why do humans drink and drive but fail to rdink and rdive? Here, I suggest that these regularitie... more Why do humans drink and drive but fail to rdink and rdive? Here, I suggest that these regularities could reflect abstract phonological principles that are active in the minds and brains of all speakers. In support of this hypothesis, I show that (a) people converge on the same phonological preferences (e.g., dra over rda) even when the relevant structures (e.g., dra, rda) are unattested in their language and that (b) such behavior is inexplicable by purely sensorimotor pressures or experience with similar syllables. Further support for the distinction between phonology and the sensorimotor system is presented by their dissociation in dyslexia, on the one hand, and the transfer of phonological knowledge from speech to sign, on the other. A detailed analysis of the phonological system can elucidate the functional architecture of the typical mind/brain and the etiology of speech and language disorders.
Duality of patterning, is, by hypothesis, a universal design feature of language. Every language ... more Duality of patterning, is, by hypothesis, a universal design feature of language. Every language constructs words from meaningful units (morphemes), which, in turn, are comprised of meaningless phonological elements (e.g., segments, syllables). But whether the language faculty does, in fact, include a separate morphological level, distinct from the phonology, is a matter of controversy. To elucidate the role of morphology, here we ask whether morphological forms are constrained by putatively universal combinatorial principles, distinct from those applying to phonological patterns. Our research exploits the structural ambiguity of doubling. Doubling (e.g., trafraf) is open to two competing interpretations-as either a purely phonological form, or as a complex morphological structure that is systematically linked to meaning (e.g., trafraf is the diminutive of traf). Our experiments show that responses to doubling (trafraf) shift radically, depending on its level of analysis. Viewed as a meaningless phonological form, doubling is dispreferred irrespective of its kind (i.e., trafraf is as bad as traftaf, even though the latter violates a morphological constraint on contiguity). But once doubling is systematically linked to meaning (i.e., as a morphological structure), the doubling dislike shifts into a reliable preference, and an additional constraint on its contiguity arises (i.e., trafraf > traftaf). Remarkably, the dissociation between morphological and phonological doubling emerges regardless of whether morphological reduplication is abundant in participants' language (in Hebrew) or relatively rare (in English). These results suggest the existence of distinct linguistic constraints that preferentially target the morphological vs. phonological levels. We discuss various explanations for the origins of these restrictions.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Jan 29, 2016
Does knowledge of language consist of abstract principles, or is it fully embodied in the sensori... more Does knowledge of language consist of abstract principles, or is it fully embodied in the sensorimotor system? To address this question, we investigate the double identity of doubling (e.g., slaflaf, or generally, XX; where X stands for a phonological constituent). Across languages, doubling is known to elicit conflicting preferences at different levels of linguistic analysis (phonology vs. morphology). Here, we show that these preferences are active in the brains of individual speakers, and they are demonstrably distinct from sensorimotor pressures. We first demonstrate that doubling in novel English words elicits divergent percepts: Viewed as meaningless (phonological) forms, doubling is disliked (e.g., slaflaf < slafmak), but once doubling in form is systematically linked to meaning (e.g., slaf = ball, slaflaf = balls), the doubling aversion shifts into a reliable (morphological) preference. We next show that sign-naive speakers spontaneously project these principles to novel ...
Everett (2016b) criticizes The Phonological Mind thesis (Berent, 2013a,b) on logical, methodologi... more Everett (2016b) criticizes The Phonological Mind thesis (Berent, 2013a,b) on logical, methodological and empirical grounds. Most of Everett's concerns are directed toward the hypothesis that the phonological grammar is constrained by universal grammatical (UG) principles. Contrary to Everett's logical challenges, here I show that the UG hypothesis is readily falsifiable, that universality is not inconsistent with innateness (Everett's arguments to the contrary are rooted in a basic confusion of the UG phenotype and the genotype), and that its empirical evaluation does not require a full evolutionary account of language. A detailed analysis of one case study, the syllable hierarchy, presents a specific demonstration that people have knowledge of putatively universal principles that are unattested in their language and these principles are most likely linguistic in nature. Whether Universal Grammar exists remains unknown, but Everett's arguments hardly undermine the viability of this hypothesis.
Most evidence for the role of regular inflection as a default operation comes from languages that... more Most evidence for the role of regular inflection as a default operation comes from languages that confound the morphological properties of regular and irregular forms with their phonological characteristics. For instance, regular plurals tend to faithfully preserve the base's phonology (e.g., rat-rats), whereas irregular nouns tend to alter it (e.g., mouse-mice). The distinction between regular and irregular inflection may thus
Productivity-the hallmark of linguistic competence-is typically attributed to algebraic rules tha... more Productivity-the hallmark of linguistic competence-is typically attributed to algebraic rules that support broad generalizations. Past research on spoken language has documented such generalizations in both adults and infants. But whether algebraic rules form part of the linguistic competence of signers remains unknown. To address this question, here we gauge the generalization afforded by American Sign Language (ASL). As a case study, we examine reduplication (X→XX)-a rule that, inter alia, generates ASL nouns from verbs. If signers encode this rule, then they should freely extend it to novel syllables, including ones with features that are unattested in ASL. And since reduplicated disyllables are preferred in ASL, such a rule should favor novel reduplicated signs. Novel reduplicated signs should thus be preferred to nonreduplicative controls (in rating), and consequently, such stimuli should also be harder to classify as nonsigns (in the lexical decision task). The results of four experiments support this prediction. These findings suggest that the phonological knowledge of signers includes powerful algebraic rules. The convergence between these conclusions and previous evidence for phonological rules in spoken language suggests that the architecture of the phonological mind is partly amodal.
Humans instinctively form words by weaving patterns of meaningless speech elements. Moreover, we ... more Humans instinctively form words by weaving patterns of meaningless speech elements. Moreover, we do so in specific, regular ways. We contrast dogs and gods, favour blogs to lbogs. We begin forming sound-patterns at birth and, like songbirds, we do so spontaneously, even in the absence of an adult model. We even impose these phonological patterns on invented cultural technologies such as reading and writing. But why are humans compelled to generate phonological patterns? And why do different phonological systems - signed and spoken - share aspects of their design? Drawing on findings from a broad range of disciplines including linguistics, experimental psychology, neuroscience and comparative animal studies, Iris Berent explores these questions and proposes a new hypothesis about the architecture of the phonological mind.
Connectionist models have gained considerable success as accounts of how printed words are named.... more Connectionist models have gained considerable success as accounts of how printed words are named. Their success challenges the view of grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) as rules. By extension, however, this challenge is sometimes interpreted also as evidence against linguistic rules and variables. This inference tacitly assumes that the generalizations inherent in reading (specifically, GPCs) are similar in their scope to linguistic generalizations and that they are each reducible to token associations. I examine this assumption by comparing the scope of generalizationsrequired for mapping graphemes to phonemes and several linguistic phonological generalizations. Marcus (1998b) distinguishes between two types of generalizations: those that fall within a model's training space and those that exceed it. The scope of generalizations is determined by the model's representational choicesspecifically, the implementation of operations over mental variables. An analysis of GPCs suggests that such generalizations do not appeal to variables; hence, they may not exceed the training space. Likewise, certain phonological regularities,such as syllable phonotactic constraints and place assimilation, may be captured by an associativeprocess. In contrast, other phonological processes appeal to variables; hence, such generalizations potentially exceed the training space. I discuss one such case, the obligatory contour principle. I demonstrate that speakers conform to this constraint and that their behavior is inexplicable by the statistical structure of the language. This analysis suggests that, unlike GPCs, phonological generalizations may exceed the training space. Thus, despite their success in modeling GPCs, eliminative connectionist models of phonology assembly may be unable to provide a complete account for phonology. To the extent that reading is subject to phonological constraints, its modeling may require implementing operations over variables.
The authors propose a model of phonological assembly that postulates a multilinear representation... more The authors propose a model of phonological assembly that postulates a multilinear representation that segregates consonants and vowels in different planes. This representation determines the online process of assembly: Consonants and vowels are derived in 2 consecutive cycles that differ in their automaticity. The model's temporal properties resolve critical contradictions in the phonological processing literature. Its claims are further supported by a series of English-masking and Englishpriming experiments demonstrating that the contributions of consonants and vowels depend on target exposure duration and differ in their susceptibility to digit load. One methodological implication of the model is that regularity effects are not necessary evidence for assembly. This claim is supported by naming studies showing that vowel assembly requires long target durations, but short target durations permit consonant assembly despite null evidence for vowels.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2008
Do speakers know universal restrictions on linguistic elements that are absent from their languag... more Do speakers know universal restrictions on linguistic elements that are absent from their language? We report an experimental test of this question. Our case study concerns the universal restrictions on initial consonant sequences, onset clusters (e.g., bl in block ). Across languages, certain onset clusters (e.g., lb ) are dispreferred (e.g., systematically under-represented) relative to others (e.g., bl ). We demonstrate such preferences among Korean speakers, whose language lacks initial C 1 C 2 clusters altogether. Our demonstration exploits speakers' well known tendency to misperceive ill-formed clusters. We show that universally dispreferred onset clusters are more frequently misperceived than universally preferred ones, indicating that Korean speakers consider the former cluster-type more ill-formed. The misperception of universally ill-formed clusters is unlikely to be due to a simple auditory failure. Likewise, the aversion of universally dispreferred onsets by Korean s...
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014
Significance It is well known that across languages, certain structures are preferred to others. ... more Significance It is well known that across languages, certain structures are preferred to others. For example, syllables like blif are preferred to syllables like bdif and lbif . But whether such regularities reflect strictly historical processes, production pressures, or universal linguistic principles is a matter of much debate. To address this question, we examined whether some precursors of these preferences are already present early in life. The brain responses of newborns show that, despite having little to no linguistic experience, they reacted to syllables like blif, bdif, and lbif in a manner consistent with adults’ patterns of preferences. We conjecture that this early—possibly universal—bias helps shaping language acquisition.
All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these r... more All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these restrictions concern the design of the language system, broadly, or speech, specifically, remains unknown. To address this question, here, we gauge the structure of signed syllables in American Sign Language (ASL). Like spoken languages, signed syllables must exhibit a single sonority/energy peak (i.e., movement). Four experiments examine whether this restriction is enforced by signers and nonsigners. We first show that Deaf ASL signers selectively apply sonority restrictions to syllables (but not morphemes) in novel ASL signs. We next examine whether this principle might further shape the representation of signed syllables by nonsigners. Absent any experience with ASL, nonsigners used movement to define syllable-like units. Moreover, the restriction on syllable structure constrained the capacity of nonsigners to learn from experience. Given brief practice that implicitly paired syllables with sonority peaks (i.e., movement)-a natural phonological constraint attested in every human language-nonsigners rapidly learned to selectively rely on movement to define syllables and they also learned to partly ignore it in the identification of morpheme-like units. Remarkably, nonsigners failed to learn an unnatural rule that defines syllables by handshape, suggesting they were unable to ignore movement in identifying syllables. These findings indicate that signed and spoken syllables are subject to a shared phonological restriction that constrains phonological learning in a new modality. These conclusions suggest the design of the phonological system is partly amodal.
All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these r... more All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these restrictions concern the design of the language system, broadly, or speech, specifically, remains unknown. To address this question, here, we gauge the structure of signed syllables in American Sign Language (ASL). Like spoken languages, signed syllables must exhibit a single sonority/energy peak (i.e., movement). Four experiments examine whether this restriction is enforced by signers and nonsigners. We first show that Deaf ASL signers selectively apply sonority restrictions to syllables (but not morphemes) in novel ASL signs. We next examine whether this principle might further shape the representation of signed syllables by nonsigners. Absent any experience with ASL, nonsigners used movement to define syllable-like units. Moreover, the restriction on syllable structure constrained the capacity of nonsigners to learn from experience. Given brief practice that implicitly paired syllables with sonority peaks (i.e., movement)-a natural phonological constraint attested in every human language-nonsigners rapidly learned to selectively rely on movement to define syllables and they also learned to partly ignore it in the identification of morpheme-like units. Remarkably, nonsigners failed to learn an unnatural rule that defines syllables by handshape, suggesting they were unable to ignore movement in identifying syllables. These findings indicate that signed and spoken syllables are subject to a shared phonological restriction that constrains phonological learning in a new modality. These conclusions suggest the design of the phonological system is partly amodal.
Linguistic research suggests that certain skeletal frames (e.g., CVC) are preferred to others (e.... more Linguistic research suggests that certain skeletal frames (e.g., CVC) are preferred to others (e.g., VCC). We examine whether such preferences constrain reading in the Stroop task. We demonstrate that CCVC nonwords facilitate naming the color black (/blaek/, a CCVC frame) relative to CVC controls. Conversely, CCVC items inhibit red (a CVC frame) relative to CVC controls. These results suggest that readers are sensitive to the congruency between the skeletal structure of color names and printed nonwords. However, various frames are not all equally preferred: The color black is named faster with a VCC frame, an infrequent and ill-formed frame, relative to a CVC frame, a frequent and grammatically preferred frame. These findings suggest that the representation of printed words specifies distinct slots for consonants and vowels, and readers are equipped with preferences (either grammatical or statistical) concerning skeletal frames. These conclusions underscore the contribution of linguistic knowledge to skilled reading. A large body of research suggests that the representation assembled to printed words is shaped by phonological knowledge. Readers routinely compute the sound-structure of printed words using phonology assembly-the process of mapping graphemes to phonemes (e.g., Berent, 1997; Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Van Orden, 1991). Moreover, the representation of printed words specifies various phonological properties of spoken language, such as the syllable structure (e.g., Treiman, Mullennix, Bijeljac-Babic, & Richmond-Welty, 1995), feature composition (Abramson & Goldinger, 1997; Lukatela, Eaton, & Turvey, 2001) and morphological structure (Taft & Kougious, 2004). These findings suggest that the representation of print is shaped by linguistic knowledge. The following research further tests this hypothesis by examining the phonological skeleton-a structure whose role in reading has not been widely explored.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2001
Four experiments examined the effect of shared skeletal structure versus content overlap on namin... more Four experiments examined the effect of shared skeletal structure versus content overlap on naming printed nonwords. Experiments 1-2 compared priming among nonwords sharing either skeletal structure and content (e.g., dus-DVS) or structure alone (e.g., pid-BAF) with controls that differed from the target in the number of skeleton slots (e.g., pid-BAF vs. plid-BAF). Conversely, in Experiments 3-4, sameversus different-structure primes contrasted only in the ordering of CV skeletal slots (e.g., fap-DVS vs. ift-DUS). Priming effects were modulated by shared content and skeletal similarity. The sensitivity of skeletal priming to the abstract arrangement of consonants and vowels suggests that skeletal representations assign distinct slots for consonants and vowels. Readers' sensitivity to skeletal structure in nonword identification indicates that assembled phonological representations are constrained by linguistic knowledge.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2005
Do readers encode the sequencing of consonant (C) and vowel (V) phonemes (skeletal structure) in ... more Do readers encode the sequencing of consonant (C) and vowel (V) phonemes (skeletal structure) in printed words? The authors used the Stroop task to examine readers' sensitivity to skeletal structure. In Experiment 1, CVC nonwords (e.g., pof) facilitated the naming of colors with congruent frames (e.g., red, a CVC word) but not with incongruent ones (e.g., green). In Experiment 2, the color black (a CCVC frame) was named faster with a congruent CCVC frame (e.g., grof) compared to either CCVCC (e.g., groft) or CVC (e.g., gof) incongruent controls. Finally, in Experiment 3, the color pink (a CVCC frame) was named faster with a CVCC frame (e.g., goft) compared to either CCVCC or CVC incongruent controls. In most cases, congruent frames shared no segments with the color name. These findings demonstrate that readers automatically assemble the skeletal structure of printed words.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2008
Are the phonological representations of printed and spoken words isomorphic? This question is add... more Are the phonological representations of printed and spoken words isomorphic? This question is addressed by investigating the restrictions on onsets. Cross-linguistic research suggests that onsets of rising sonority are preferred to sonority plateaus, which, in turn, are preferred to sonority falls (e.g., bnif bdif lbif). Of interest is whether these grammatical preferences constrain the recognition of auditory and printed words by speakers of English-a language in which such onsets are unattested. Five experiments compare phonological lexical decision responses to nonwords, including unattested onsets, through either aural or visual presentation. Results suggest that both hearers and readers are sensitive to the phonotactics of unattested onsets. However, the phonotactic generalizations of hearers and readers differ on their scope and source. Hearers differentiated all three types of onsets (e.g., bnif, bdif, and lbif), and their behavior implicated both grammatical and statistical constraints. In contrast, readers were able to differentiate only those structures similar to attested English onsets from dissimilar structures (i.e., bnif vs. bdif or lbif), and their preferences reflected statistical knowledge alone. These findings suggest that the phonological representations informing lexical decision to spoken and printed words are not isomorphic.
Across languages, certain syllables are systematically preferred to others (e.g., plaf > ptaf). H... more Across languages, certain syllables are systematically preferred to others (e.g., plaf > ptaf). Here, we examine whether these preferences arise from motor simulation. In the simulation account, ill-formed syllables (e.g., ptaf) are disliked because their motor plans are harder to simulate. Four experiments compared sensitivity to the syllable structure of labial-vs. corona-initial speech stimuli (e.g., plaf > pnaf > ptaf vs. traf > tmaf > tpaf); meanwhile, participants (English vs. Russian speakers) lightly bit on their lips or tongues. Results suggested that the perception of these stimuli was selectively modulated by motor stimulation (e.g., stimulating the tongue differentially affected sensitivity to labial vs. coronal stimuli). Remarkably, stimulation did not affect sensitivity to syllable structure. This dissociation suggests that some (e.g., phonetic) aspects of speech perception are reliant on motor simulation, hence, embodied; others (e.g., phonology), however, are possibly abstract. These conclusions speak to the role of embodiment in the language system, and the separation between phonology and phonetics, specifically.
Core phonology: Evidence from grammatical universals Iris Berent ([email protected]) Northeastern ... more Core phonology: Evidence from grammatical universals Iris Berent ([email protected]) Northeastern University, Department of Psychology, 125 Nightingale Hall, 360 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02115 The human capacity for language is one of the most contentious topics in cognitive science. While some researchers attribute language to domain-general mechanisms, others postulate a specialized language system. When it comes to the phonological component, however, even proponents of domain-specificity concede that specialization is unlikely (Fitch et al., 2005). Phonological competence, in this view, is the product of experience, auditory perception, and motor control. And indeed, phonological systems are intimately grounded in phonetics. But while the domain-general perspective can account for this fact, it offers no explanation for several key features of language. It fails to explain why all languages—signed and spoken—have a phonological system, why phonological systems emerge spontaneo...
Modern linguistic theory posits the existence of universal constraints. But whether these constra... more Modern linguistic theory posits the existence of universal constraints. But whether these constraints concern language structure, generally, or speech, specifically, is unknown. To address this question, here we ask whether the constraints identified in spoken languages transfer to sign languages. ANCHORING (McCarthy & Prince, 1993) is a putatively universal constraint on reduplication. ANCHORING requires that the final element of a suffixed reduplicant match the final element of the base (e.g., pana 'chase'->panana, 'run' not panapa). Here, we examine whether ANCHORING is likewise operative in a signed language. In our experiments, native ASL signers rated novel reduplicated forms: either ones consistent or inconsistent with ANCHORING (i.e., ABB vs. ABA, where A and B are syllables). Results showed that signers reliably favored ABB forms over ABA. These findings show for the first time that ANCHORING constrains a sign language. This conclusion is consistent with the existence of amodal linguistic principles.
Why do humans drink and drive but fail to rdink and rdive? Here, I suggest that these regularitie... more Why do humans drink and drive but fail to rdink and rdive? Here, I suggest that these regularities could reflect abstract phonological principles that are active in the minds and brains of all speakers. In support of this hypothesis, I show that (a) people converge on the same phonological preferences (e.g., dra over rda) even when the relevant structures (e.g., dra, rda) are unattested in their language and that (b) such behavior is inexplicable by purely sensorimotor pressures or experience with similar syllables. Further support for the distinction between phonology and the sensorimotor system is presented by their dissociation in dyslexia, on the one hand, and the transfer of phonological knowledge from speech to sign, on the other. A detailed analysis of the phonological system can elucidate the functional architecture of the typical mind/brain and the etiology of speech and language disorders.
Duality of patterning, is, by hypothesis, a universal design feature of language. Every language ... more Duality of patterning, is, by hypothesis, a universal design feature of language. Every language constructs words from meaningful units (morphemes), which, in turn, are comprised of meaningless phonological elements (e.g., segments, syllables). But whether the language faculty does, in fact, include a separate morphological level, distinct from the phonology, is a matter of controversy. To elucidate the role of morphology, here we ask whether morphological forms are constrained by putatively universal combinatorial principles, distinct from those applying to phonological patterns. Our research exploits the structural ambiguity of doubling. Doubling (e.g., trafraf) is open to two competing interpretations-as either a purely phonological form, or as a complex morphological structure that is systematically linked to meaning (e.g., trafraf is the diminutive of traf). Our experiments show that responses to doubling (trafraf) shift radically, depending on its level of analysis. Viewed as a meaningless phonological form, doubling is dispreferred irrespective of its kind (i.e., trafraf is as bad as traftaf, even though the latter violates a morphological constraint on contiguity). But once doubling is systematically linked to meaning (i.e., as a morphological structure), the doubling dislike shifts into a reliable preference, and an additional constraint on its contiguity arises (i.e., trafraf > traftaf). Remarkably, the dissociation between morphological and phonological doubling emerges regardless of whether morphological reduplication is abundant in participants' language (in Hebrew) or relatively rare (in English). These results suggest the existence of distinct linguistic constraints that preferentially target the morphological vs. phonological levels. We discuss various explanations for the origins of these restrictions.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Jan 29, 2016
Does knowledge of language consist of abstract principles, or is it fully embodied in the sensori... more Does knowledge of language consist of abstract principles, or is it fully embodied in the sensorimotor system? To address this question, we investigate the double identity of doubling (e.g., slaflaf, or generally, XX; where X stands for a phonological constituent). Across languages, doubling is known to elicit conflicting preferences at different levels of linguistic analysis (phonology vs. morphology). Here, we show that these preferences are active in the brains of individual speakers, and they are demonstrably distinct from sensorimotor pressures. We first demonstrate that doubling in novel English words elicits divergent percepts: Viewed as meaningless (phonological) forms, doubling is disliked (e.g., slaflaf < slafmak), but once doubling in form is systematically linked to meaning (e.g., slaf = ball, slaflaf = balls), the doubling aversion shifts into a reliable (morphological) preference. We next show that sign-naive speakers spontaneously project these principles to novel ...
Everett (2016b) criticizes The Phonological Mind thesis (Berent, 2013a,b) on logical, methodologi... more Everett (2016b) criticizes The Phonological Mind thesis (Berent, 2013a,b) on logical, methodological and empirical grounds. Most of Everett's concerns are directed toward the hypothesis that the phonological grammar is constrained by universal grammatical (UG) principles. Contrary to Everett's logical challenges, here I show that the UG hypothesis is readily falsifiable, that universality is not inconsistent with innateness (Everett's arguments to the contrary are rooted in a basic confusion of the UG phenotype and the genotype), and that its empirical evaluation does not require a full evolutionary account of language. A detailed analysis of one case study, the syllable hierarchy, presents a specific demonstration that people have knowledge of putatively universal principles that are unattested in their language and these principles are most likely linguistic in nature. Whether Universal Grammar exists remains unknown, but Everett's arguments hardly undermine the viability of this hypothesis.
Most evidence for the role of regular inflection as a default operation comes from languages that... more Most evidence for the role of regular inflection as a default operation comes from languages that confound the morphological properties of regular and irregular forms with their phonological characteristics. For instance, regular plurals tend to faithfully preserve the base's phonology (e.g., rat-rats), whereas irregular nouns tend to alter it (e.g., mouse-mice). The distinction between regular and irregular inflection may thus
Productivity-the hallmark of linguistic competence-is typically attributed to algebraic rules tha... more Productivity-the hallmark of linguistic competence-is typically attributed to algebraic rules that support broad generalizations. Past research on spoken language has documented such generalizations in both adults and infants. But whether algebraic rules form part of the linguistic competence of signers remains unknown. To address this question, here we gauge the generalization afforded by American Sign Language (ASL). As a case study, we examine reduplication (X→XX)-a rule that, inter alia, generates ASL nouns from verbs. If signers encode this rule, then they should freely extend it to novel syllables, including ones with features that are unattested in ASL. And since reduplicated disyllables are preferred in ASL, such a rule should favor novel reduplicated signs. Novel reduplicated signs should thus be preferred to nonreduplicative controls (in rating), and consequently, such stimuli should also be harder to classify as nonsigns (in the lexical decision task). The results of four experiments support this prediction. These findings suggest that the phonological knowledge of signers includes powerful algebraic rules. The convergence between these conclusions and previous evidence for phonological rules in spoken language suggests that the architecture of the phonological mind is partly amodal.
Humans instinctively form words by weaving patterns of meaningless speech elements. Moreover, we ... more Humans instinctively form words by weaving patterns of meaningless speech elements. Moreover, we do so in specific, regular ways. We contrast dogs and gods, favour blogs to lbogs. We begin forming sound-patterns at birth and, like songbirds, we do so spontaneously, even in the absence of an adult model. We even impose these phonological patterns on invented cultural technologies such as reading and writing. But why are humans compelled to generate phonological patterns? And why do different phonological systems - signed and spoken - share aspects of their design? Drawing on findings from a broad range of disciplines including linguistics, experimental psychology, neuroscience and comparative animal studies, Iris Berent explores these questions and proposes a new hypothesis about the architecture of the phonological mind.
Connectionist models have gained considerable success as accounts of how printed words are named.... more Connectionist models have gained considerable success as accounts of how printed words are named. Their success challenges the view of grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) as rules. By extension, however, this challenge is sometimes interpreted also as evidence against linguistic rules and variables. This inference tacitly assumes that the generalizations inherent in reading (specifically, GPCs) are similar in their scope to linguistic generalizations and that they are each reducible to token associations. I examine this assumption by comparing the scope of generalizationsrequired for mapping graphemes to phonemes and several linguistic phonological generalizations. Marcus (1998b) distinguishes between two types of generalizations: those that fall within a model's training space and those that exceed it. The scope of generalizations is determined by the model's representational choicesspecifically, the implementation of operations over mental variables. An analysis of GPCs suggests that such generalizations do not appeal to variables; hence, they may not exceed the training space. Likewise, certain phonological regularities,such as syllable phonotactic constraints and place assimilation, may be captured by an associativeprocess. In contrast, other phonological processes appeal to variables; hence, such generalizations potentially exceed the training space. I discuss one such case, the obligatory contour principle. I demonstrate that speakers conform to this constraint and that their behavior is inexplicable by the statistical structure of the language. This analysis suggests that, unlike GPCs, phonological generalizations may exceed the training space. Thus, despite their success in modeling GPCs, eliminative connectionist models of phonology assembly may be unable to provide a complete account for phonology. To the extent that reading is subject to phonological constraints, its modeling may require implementing operations over variables.
The authors propose a model of phonological assembly that postulates a multilinear representation... more The authors propose a model of phonological assembly that postulates a multilinear representation that segregates consonants and vowels in different planes. This representation determines the online process of assembly: Consonants and vowels are derived in 2 consecutive cycles that differ in their automaticity. The model's temporal properties resolve critical contradictions in the phonological processing literature. Its claims are further supported by a series of English-masking and Englishpriming experiments demonstrating that the contributions of consonants and vowels depend on target exposure duration and differ in their susceptibility to digit load. One methodological implication of the model is that regularity effects are not necessary evidence for assembly. This claim is supported by naming studies showing that vowel assembly requires long target durations, but short target durations permit consonant assembly despite null evidence for vowels.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2008
Do speakers know universal restrictions on linguistic elements that are absent from their languag... more Do speakers know universal restrictions on linguistic elements that are absent from their language? We report an experimental test of this question. Our case study concerns the universal restrictions on initial consonant sequences, onset clusters (e.g., bl in block ). Across languages, certain onset clusters (e.g., lb ) are dispreferred (e.g., systematically under-represented) relative to others (e.g., bl ). We demonstrate such preferences among Korean speakers, whose language lacks initial C 1 C 2 clusters altogether. Our demonstration exploits speakers' well known tendency to misperceive ill-formed clusters. We show that universally dispreferred onset clusters are more frequently misperceived than universally preferred ones, indicating that Korean speakers consider the former cluster-type more ill-formed. The misperception of universally ill-formed clusters is unlikely to be due to a simple auditory failure. Likewise, the aversion of universally dispreferred onsets by Korean s...
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014
Significance It is well known that across languages, certain structures are preferred to others. ... more Significance It is well known that across languages, certain structures are preferred to others. For example, syllables like blif are preferred to syllables like bdif and lbif . But whether such regularities reflect strictly historical processes, production pressures, or universal linguistic principles is a matter of much debate. To address this question, we examined whether some precursors of these preferences are already present early in life. The brain responses of newborns show that, despite having little to no linguistic experience, they reacted to syllables like blif, bdif, and lbif in a manner consistent with adults’ patterns of preferences. We conjecture that this early—possibly universal—bias helps shaping language acquisition.
All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these r... more All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these restrictions concern the design of the language system, broadly, or speech, specifically, remains unknown. To address this question, here, we gauge the structure of signed syllables in American Sign Language (ASL). Like spoken languages, signed syllables must exhibit a single sonority/energy peak (i.e., movement). Four experiments examine whether this restriction is enforced by signers and nonsigners. We first show that Deaf ASL signers selectively apply sonority restrictions to syllables (but not morphemes) in novel ASL signs. We next examine whether this principle might further shape the representation of signed syllables by nonsigners. Absent any experience with ASL, nonsigners used movement to define syllable-like units. Moreover, the restriction on syllable structure constrained the capacity of nonsigners to learn from experience. Given brief practice that implicitly paired syllables with sonority peaks (i.e., movement)-a natural phonological constraint attested in every human language-nonsigners rapidly learned to selectively rely on movement to define syllables and they also learned to partly ignore it in the identification of morpheme-like units. Remarkably, nonsigners failed to learn an unnatural rule that defines syllables by handshape, suggesting they were unable to ignore movement in identifying syllables. These findings indicate that signed and spoken syllables are subject to a shared phonological restriction that constrains phonological learning in a new modality. These conclusions suggest the design of the phonological system is partly amodal.
All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these r... more All spoken languages encode syllables and constrain their internal structure. But whether these restrictions concern the design of the language system, broadly, or speech, specifically, remains unknown. To address this question, here, we gauge the structure of signed syllables in American Sign Language (ASL). Like spoken languages, signed syllables must exhibit a single sonority/energy peak (i.e., movement). Four experiments examine whether this restriction is enforced by signers and nonsigners. We first show that Deaf ASL signers selectively apply sonority restrictions to syllables (but not morphemes) in novel ASL signs. We next examine whether this principle might further shape the representation of signed syllables by nonsigners. Absent any experience with ASL, nonsigners used movement to define syllable-like units. Moreover, the restriction on syllable structure constrained the capacity of nonsigners to learn from experience. Given brief practice that implicitly paired syllables with sonority peaks (i.e., movement)-a natural phonological constraint attested in every human language-nonsigners rapidly learned to selectively rely on movement to define syllables and they also learned to partly ignore it in the identification of morpheme-like units. Remarkably, nonsigners failed to learn an unnatural rule that defines syllables by handshape, suggesting they were unable to ignore movement in identifying syllables. These findings indicate that signed and spoken syllables are subject to a shared phonological restriction that constrains phonological learning in a new modality. These conclusions suggest the design of the phonological system is partly amodal.
Linguistic research suggests that certain skeletal frames (e.g., CVC) are preferred to others (e.... more Linguistic research suggests that certain skeletal frames (e.g., CVC) are preferred to others (e.g., VCC). We examine whether such preferences constrain reading in the Stroop task. We demonstrate that CCVC nonwords facilitate naming the color black (/blaek/, a CCVC frame) relative to CVC controls. Conversely, CCVC items inhibit red (a CVC frame) relative to CVC controls. These results suggest that readers are sensitive to the congruency between the skeletal structure of color names and printed nonwords. However, various frames are not all equally preferred: The color black is named faster with a VCC frame, an infrequent and ill-formed frame, relative to a CVC frame, a frequent and grammatically preferred frame. These findings suggest that the representation of printed words specifies distinct slots for consonants and vowels, and readers are equipped with preferences (either grammatical or statistical) concerning skeletal frames. These conclusions underscore the contribution of linguistic knowledge to skilled reading. A large body of research suggests that the representation assembled to printed words is shaped by phonological knowledge. Readers routinely compute the sound-structure of printed words using phonology assembly-the process of mapping graphemes to phonemes (e.g., Berent, 1997; Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Van Orden, 1991). Moreover, the representation of printed words specifies various phonological properties of spoken language, such as the syllable structure (e.g., Treiman, Mullennix, Bijeljac-Babic, & Richmond-Welty, 1995), feature composition (Abramson & Goldinger, 1997; Lukatela, Eaton, & Turvey, 2001) and morphological structure (Taft & Kougious, 2004). These findings suggest that the representation of print is shaped by linguistic knowledge. The following research further tests this hypothesis by examining the phonological skeleton-a structure whose role in reading has not been widely explored.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2001
Four experiments examined the effect of shared skeletal structure versus content overlap on namin... more Four experiments examined the effect of shared skeletal structure versus content overlap on naming printed nonwords. Experiments 1-2 compared priming among nonwords sharing either skeletal structure and content (e.g., dus-DVS) or structure alone (e.g., pid-BAF) with controls that differed from the target in the number of skeleton slots (e.g., pid-BAF vs. plid-BAF). Conversely, in Experiments 3-4, sameversus different-structure primes contrasted only in the ordering of CV skeletal slots (e.g., fap-DVS vs. ift-DUS). Priming effects were modulated by shared content and skeletal similarity. The sensitivity of skeletal priming to the abstract arrangement of consonants and vowels suggests that skeletal representations assign distinct slots for consonants and vowels. Readers' sensitivity to skeletal structure in nonword identification indicates that assembled phonological representations are constrained by linguistic knowledge.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2005
Do readers encode the sequencing of consonant (C) and vowel (V) phonemes (skeletal structure) in ... more Do readers encode the sequencing of consonant (C) and vowel (V) phonemes (skeletal structure) in printed words? The authors used the Stroop task to examine readers' sensitivity to skeletal structure. In Experiment 1, CVC nonwords (e.g., pof) facilitated the naming of colors with congruent frames (e.g., red, a CVC word) but not with incongruent ones (e.g., green). In Experiment 2, the color black (a CCVC frame) was named faster with a congruent CCVC frame (e.g., grof) compared to either CCVCC (e.g., groft) or CVC (e.g., gof) incongruent controls. Finally, in Experiment 3, the color pink (a CVCC frame) was named faster with a CVCC frame (e.g., goft) compared to either CCVCC or CVC incongruent controls. In most cases, congruent frames shared no segments with the color name. These findings demonstrate that readers automatically assemble the skeletal structure of printed words.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2008
Are the phonological representations of printed and spoken words isomorphic? This question is add... more Are the phonological representations of printed and spoken words isomorphic? This question is addressed by investigating the restrictions on onsets. Cross-linguistic research suggests that onsets of rising sonority are preferred to sonority plateaus, which, in turn, are preferred to sonority falls (e.g., bnif bdif lbif). Of interest is whether these grammatical preferences constrain the recognition of auditory and printed words by speakers of English-a language in which such onsets are unattested. Five experiments compare phonological lexical decision responses to nonwords, including unattested onsets, through either aural or visual presentation. Results suggest that both hearers and readers are sensitive to the phonotactics of unattested onsets. However, the phonotactic generalizations of hearers and readers differ on their scope and source. Hearers differentiated all three types of onsets (e.g., bnif, bdif, and lbif), and their behavior implicated both grammatical and statistical constraints. In contrast, readers were able to differentiate only those structures similar to attested English onsets from dissimilar structures (i.e., bnif vs. bdif or lbif), and their preferences reflected statistical knowledge alone. These findings suggest that the phonological representations informing lexical decision to spoken and printed words are not isomorphic.
Uploads
Papers by Iris Berent