), 刘梦, 张政华, 邓娜丽, 邢钰珊 辽宁师范大学脑与认知神经科学研究中心, 大连 116029
收稿日期:2018-01-05出版日期:2018-11-30发布日期:2018-10-30基金资助:* 国家自然科学基金(31000505, 31471075);教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(17YJC190013);天津市哲学社会科学规划项目(TJJX13-006);中国科学院行为科学重点实验室开放课题基金资助Neural processing of ambiguous Chinese phrases of stutters
LI Weijun(), LIU Meng, ZHANG Zhenghua, DENG Nali, XING Yushan Research Center of Brain and Cognitive Neuroscience, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China
Received:2018-01-05Online:2018-11-30Published:2018-10-30摘要/Abstract
摘要： 韵律边界是口语韵律特征的有机组成部分, 在语言理解中发挥着重要作用。口吃作为一种言语节律性障碍, 主要表现为音节经常性的重复、拖长或停顿等。本研究采用ERP, 考察口吃者完成词汇判断和结构判断两种任务时, 加工歧义短语(动宾/偏正歧义结构)内部韵律边界的认知过程。结果发现口吃者和言语流畅者在加工汉语歧义短语过程中, 所诱发的反映韵律切分的脑电成分CPS (closure positive shift)不存在显著差异。在0~300 ms, 不论中线还是两侧, 口吃者和言语流畅者加工两类短语时, 动宾短语韵律边界诱发正效应的头皮分布范围小于偏正短语。在300~600 ms, 中线上, 口吃和言语流畅者在完成两种任务时, 两类短语的韵律边界均稳定诱发了正效应; 在两侧, 结构判断任务中两类短语的韵律边界都诱发了正效应, 但词汇判断任务中只有偏正短语稳定诱发该效应。综上, 口吃者和言语流畅者一样对口语韵律边界敏感, 并且他们加工歧义短语内部韵律边界时, 诱发的脑电效应受到实验任务和短语结构类型的影响。
图/表 5
表1被试基本信息
| 被试 | 口吃被试 | 正常被试 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 年龄(岁) | 性别 | 教育程度 | 严重程度 | 年龄(岁) | 性别 | 教育程度 | |
| 1 | 24 | 男 | 研究生 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 |
| 2 | 20 | 女 | 大学 | 中度 | 20 | 女 | 大学 |
| 3 | 22 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 22 | 男 | 大学 |
| 4 | 25 | 女 | 研究生 | 中度到严重 | 25 | 女 | 研究生 |
| 5 | 23 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 23 | 男 | 大学 |
| 6 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 中度到严重 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 7 | 22 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 大学 |
| 8 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 |
| 9 | 20 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 22 | 男 | 大学 |
| 10 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 11 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 12 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| M | 22.92 | 23.08 | |||||
| SD | 1.62 | 1.31 | |||||
表1被试基本信息
| 被试 | 口吃被试 | 正常被试 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 年龄(岁) | 性别 | 教育程度 | 严重程度 | 年龄(岁) | 性别 | 教育程度 | |
| 1 | 24 | 男 | 研究生 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 |
| 2 | 20 | 女 | 大学 | 中度 | 20 | 女 | 大学 |
| 3 | 22 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 22 | 男 | 大学 |
| 4 | 25 | 女 | 研究生 | 中度到严重 | 25 | 女 | 研究生 |
| 5 | 23 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 23 | 男 | 大学 |
| 6 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 中度到严重 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 7 | 22 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 大学 |
| 8 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 | 轻度到中度 | 23 | 男 | 研究生 |
| 9 | 20 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 22 | 男 | 大学 |
| 10 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 11 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 轻度到中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| 12 | 24 | 男 | 大学 | 中度 | 24 | 男 | 大学 |
| M | 22.92 | 23.08 | |||||
| SD | 1.62 | 1.31 | |||||
图1偏正结构(灰)和动宾结构(黑)短语口语信号的韵律差异。(a)短语片段和停顿(#)时长以及二者差异：动宾结构表现为动词“理解”的时长延长和之后的无声段插入, 偏正结构则表现为第二个名词“呼声”时间延长以及之前的一个无声段插入。(b)基频：动宾结构的主要重音在动词“理解”上, 而偏正结构的主要重音在名词“呼声”上。
图1偏正结构(灰)和动宾结构(黑)短语口语信号的韵律差异。(a)短语片段和停顿(#)时长以及二者差异：动宾结构表现为动词“理解”的时长延长和之后的无声段插入, 偏正结构则表现为第二个名词“呼声”时间延长以及之前的一个无声段插入。(b)基频：动宾结构的主要重音在动词“理解”上, 而偏正结构的主要重音在名词“呼声”上。
图2口吃和言语流畅者(各12名)完成词汇判断任务时, (a)动宾短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形, ERP分析起始点为动词(如“理解”)结束位置; (b)偏正短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形图, ERP分析起始点为助词(“的”)结束位置。
图2口吃和言语流畅者(各12名)完成词汇判断任务时, (a)动宾短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形, ERP分析起始点为动词(如“理解”)结束位置; (b)偏正短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形图, ERP分析起始点为助词(“的”)结束位置。
图3口吃和言语流畅者(各12名)完成结构判断任务时, (a)动宾短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形, ERP分析起始点为动词(如“理解”)结束位置; (b)偏正短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形图, ERP分析起始点为助词(“的”)结束位置。
图3口吃和言语流畅者(各12名)完成结构判断任务时, (a)动宾短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形, ERP分析起始点为动词(如“理解”)结束位置; (b)偏正短语边界处诱发脑电总平均波形图, ERP分析起始点为助词(“的”)结束位置。
图4口吃和言语流畅者完成词汇判断任务(左)时, 加工偏正结构短语的韵律边界时诱发明显正波; 完成结构判断任务(右)时, 二者在加工两种结构的韵律短语边界时均诱发明显正波。***p < 0.001, **p < 0.005
图4口吃和言语流畅者完成词汇判断任务(左)时, 加工偏正结构短语的韵律边界时诱发明显正波; 完成结构判断任务(右)时, 二者在加工两种结构的韵律短语边界时均诱发明显正波。***p < 0.001, **p < 0.005参考文献 51
| 1 | Baddeley, A. ( 1992). Working memory. Science, 255( 5044), 556-559. |
| 2 | Bogels S., Schriefers H., Vonk W., Chwilla D. J., & Kerkhofs R . ( 2010). The interplay between prosody and syntax in sentence processing: The case of subject-and object-control verbs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22( 5), 1036-1053. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21269URLpmid: 19445602 |
| 3 | Bosshardt H.-G., Ballmer W., & de Nil L . ( 2002). Effects of category and rhyme decisions on sentence production. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 45, 844-857. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2002/068)URLpmid: 12381043 |
| 4 | Chang S., Kenney M. K., Loucks T. M. J., & Ludlow C. L . ( 2009). Brain activation abnormalities during speech and non-speech in stuttering speakers. NeuroImage, 46( 1), 201-212. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.066URLpmid: 2693291 |
| 5 | Chang S. E., Horwitz B., Ostuni J., Reynolds R., & Ludlow C. L . ( 2011). Evidence of left inferior frontal-premotor structural and functional connectivity deficits in adults who stutter. Cerebral Cortex, 21( 11), 2507-2518. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr028URLpmid: 3183422 |
| 6 | Christophe A., Peperkamp S., Pallier C., Block E., & Mehler J . ( 2004). Phonological phrase boundaries constrain lexical access. i. Adult data. Journal of Memory and Language, 51( 4), 523-547. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.07.001URL |
| 7 | Corbera S., Corral M. J., Escera C., & Idiazábal M. A . ( 2005). Abnormal speech sound representation in persistent developmental stuttering. Neurology, 65( 8), 1246-1252. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000180969.03719.81URLpmid: 16247052 |
| 8 | Cuadrado,E. M., & Weber-Fox, C. M . ( 2003). Atypical syntactic processing in individuals who stutter: Evidence from event-related brain potentials and behavioral measures. Journal of Speech Language & Hearing Research, 46, 960-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.04.012URLpmid: 12959473 |
| 9 | Cykowski M. D., Fox P. T., Ingham R. J., Ingham J. C., & Robin D. A . ( 2010). A study of the reproducibility and etiology of diffusion anisotropy differences in developmental stuttering: A potential role for impaired myelination. Neuroimage, 52( 4), 1495-1504. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.011URLpmid: 4135434 |
| 10 | Dorman,M. F., & Porter Jr, R. J . ( 1975). Hemispheric lateralization for speech perception in stutterers 1. Cortex, 11( 2), 181-185. doi: 10.1016/S0010-9452(75)80042-6URLpmid: 1149477 |
| 11 | Etchell A. C., Civier O., Ballard K. J., & Sowman P. F . ( 2017). A systematic literature review of neuroimaging research on developmental stuttering between 1995 and 2016. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 55, 6-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2017.03.007URLpmid: 28778745 |
| 12 | Foundas A. L., Corey D. M., Hurley M. M., & Heilman K. M . ( 2004). Verbal dichotic listening in developmental stuttering: Subgroups with atypical auditory processing. Cognitive & Behavioral Neurology, 17( 4), 224-232. URLpmid: 15622019 |
| 13 | Fox P. T., Ingham R. J., Ingham J. C., Hirsch T. B., Downs J. H., Martin C., Jerabek P., Glass T., & Lancaster J. L . ( 1996). A PET study of the neural systems of stuttering. Nature, 382, 158-162. doi: 10.1038/382158a0URLpmid: 8700204 |
| 14 | Giraud A. L., Neumann K., Bachoud-Levi A. C., von Gudenberg A.W., Euler H.A., Lanfermann H., & Preibisch C . ( 2008). Severity of dysfluency correlates with basal ganglia activity in persistent developmental stuttering. Brain and Language. 104 ( 2), 190-199. |
| 15 | Hall, J. W., &Jerger, J. ( 1978). Central auditory function in stutterers. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 21( 2), 324-337. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(78)90018-8URLpmid: 703279 |
| 16 | Hannley M, & Dorman, M. F . ( 1982). Some observations on auditory function and stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 7( 1), 93-108. doi: 10.1016/S0094-730X(82)80003-XURL |
| 17 | Holzgrefe H., Wellmann C., Petrone, C, Truckenbrodt, H, H?hle, B., & Wartenburger I . ( 2013). Brain response to prosodic boundary cues depends on boundary position. Frontiers in Psychology, 4( 14), 1-14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00421URLpmid: 3714540 |
| 18 | Howell P., Davis S., & Williams S. M . ( 2006). Auditory abilities of speakers who persisted, or recovered, from stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 31( 4), 257-270. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2006.07.001URLpmid: 16920188 |
| 19 | Kerkhofs R., Vonk W., Schriefers H., & Chwilla D. J . ( 2007). Discourse, syntax, and prosody: The brain reveals an immediate interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19( 9), 1421-1434. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1421URLpmid: 17714005 |
| 20 | Kjelgaard,M. M., & Speer, S. R . ( 1999). Prosodic facilitation and interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity. Journal of Memory & Language, 40( 2), 153-194. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2620URL |
| 21 | Kn?sche T. R., Neuhaus C., Haueisen J., Alter K., Maess B., & Witte O. W., & Friederici A. D . ( 2005). Perception of phrase structure in music. Human Brain Mapping, 24( 4), 259-273. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20088URLpmid: 15678484 |
| 22 | Li Li & Yang Y . ( 2007). Prosodic resolution of syntactic ambiguity: From the point of view of speaker and listener. Advances in Psychological Science, 15( 2), 282-287. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.001URL |
| 23 | [ 李卫君, 杨玉芳 . ( 2007). 从讲话者和听话者两个角度看韵律的句法解歧. 心理科学进展, 15( 2), 282-287.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-3710.2007.02.015URL |
| 24 | Li W.& Yang , Y. ( 2009). Perception of prosodic hierarchical boundaries in Mandarin Chinese sentences. Neuroscience, 158( 4), 1416-1425. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.10.065URLpmid: 19111906 |
| 25 | Li W& Yang Y . ( 2010). The cognitive processing of prosodic boundary and its related brain effect in quatrain. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 42( 11), 1021-1032. doi: |
| 26 | [ 李卫君, 杨玉芳 . ( 2010). 绝句韵律边界的认知加工及其脑电效应. 心理学报, 42( 11), 1021-1032.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2010.01021URL |
| 27 | , ., Li W& Yang Y . ( 2010). Perception of Chinese poem and its electrophysiological effects. Neuroscience, 168( 3), 757-768. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.03.069URLpmid: 20382205 |
| 28 | Li X. Q., Yang Y. F., & Lu Y . ( 2010). How and when prosodic boundaries influence syntactic parsing under different discourse contexts: An ERP study. Biological Psychology, 83( 3), 250-259. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.01.009URLpmid: 20083152 |
| 29 | Lincoln M., Packman A., & Onslow M . ( 2006). Altered auditory feedback and the treatment of stuttering: A review. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 31( 2), 71-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2006.04.001URLpmid: 16750562 |
| 30 | Liu B., Wang Z., & Jin Z . ( 2010). The effects of punctuations in Chinese sentence comprehension: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 23( 1), 66-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2009.08.004URL |
| 31 | Nan Y., Knosche T. R., & Friederici A. D . ( 2006). The perception of musical phrase structure: A cross-cultural ERP study. Brain Research, 1094( 1), 179-191. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.03.115URLpmid: 16712816 |
| 32 | Pannekamp A., Toepel U., Alter K., Hahne A., & Friederici A. D . ( 2005). Prosody-driven sentence processing: An event-related brain potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17( 3), 407-421. doi: 10.1162/0898929053279450URLpmid: 15814001 |
| 33 | Peter V., Mcarthur G., & Crain S . ( 2014). Using event-related potentials to measure phrase boundary perception in English. BMC Neuroscience, 15( 1), 1-11. doi: 10.1186/s12868-014-0129-zURLpmid: 25424987 |
| 34 | Ramus F., Hauser M. D., Miller C., Morris D., & Mehler J . ( 2000). Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys. Science, 288, 349-351. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5464.349URLpmid: 10764650 |
| 35 | Salverda A. P., Dahan D., & McQueen J. M . ( 2003). The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90( 1), 51-89. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00139-2URLpmid: 14597270 |
| 36 | , ., Schepman A0 &Rodway p , ( 2000). Prosody and parsing in coordination structures. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53( 2), 377-396. doi: 10.1080/713755895URLpmid: 10881611 |
| 37 | Shattuck-Hufnagel S, &Turk A. E . ( 1996). A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25( 2), 193-246. doi: 10.1007/BF01708572URLpmid: 8667297 |
| 38 | Smith A, &Weber C . ( 2017). How stuttering develops: The multifactorial dynamic pathways theory. Journal of Speech and Language Hearing Research, 60( 9), 2483-2505. doi: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-16-0343URLpmid: 28837728 |
| 39 | Steinhauer K., Alter K., & Friederici A. D . ( 1999). Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature Neuroscience, 2( 2), 191-196. doi: 10.1038/5757URLpmid: 10195205 |
| 40 | Steinhauer K, &Friederici ,A.D . ( 2001). Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30( 3), 267-295. doi: 10.1023/A:1010443001646URLpmid: 11523275 |
| 41 | Weber-Fox C . ( 2001). Neural systems for sentence processing in stuttering. Journal of Speech Language & Hearing Research, 44( 4), 814-825. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/064)URLpmid: 11521774 |
| 42 | Weber-Fox C, &Hampton A . ( 2008). Stuttering and natural speech processing of semantic and syntactic constraints on verbs. Journal of Speech Language & Hearing Research, 51( 5), 1058-1071. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0164)URLpmid: 2638126 |
| 43 | Weber-Fox C., Spencer R. M. C., Spruill J. E., & Smith A . ( 2004). Phonologic processing in adults who stutter: Electrophysiological and behavioral evidence. Journal of Speech Language& Hearing Research, 47( 6), 1244-1258. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2004/094)URLpmid: 15842008 |
| 44 | Wei H., Dong Y., Boland J. E., & Yuan F . ( 2016). Structural priming and frequency effects interact in Chinese sentence comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 7( 45), 1-9. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00045URLpmid: 26869954 |
| 45 | World Health Organization. ( 2010). International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Retrieved from < 2010). International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Retrieved from . |
| 46 | Yairi E,& Ambrose N , . ( 2013). Epidemiology of stuttering: 21st century advances. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 38( 2), 66-87. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2012.11.002URLpmid: 3687212 |
| 47 | Yang X., Shen X., Li W., & Yang Y . ( 2014). How listeners weight acoustic cues to intonational phrase boundaries. Plos One, 9( 7), 1-9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102166URLpmid: 25019156 |
| 48 | Yaruss J. S., & Quesal, R. W . ( 2006). Overall assessment of the speaker's experience of stuttering (OASES): Documenting multiple outcomes in stuttering treatment. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 31( 2), 90-115. doi: 10.1016/j.jfludis.2006.02.002URLpmid: 16620945 |
| 49 | Zhang J., Jiang C., Zhou L., & Yang Y . ( 2016). Perception of hierarchical boundaries in music and its modulation by expertise. Neuropsychologia, 91, 490-498. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.09.013URLpmid: 27659874 |
| 50 | Zhang Y., Zhang H., & Shu H . ( 2000). A study on the processing of ambiguous phrases in Chinese. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 32( 1), 13-19. |
| 51 | [ 张亚旭, 张厚粲, 舒华 . ( 2000). 汉语偏正/述宾歧义短语加工初探. 心理学报, 32( 1), 13-19.] |
相关文章 5
| [1] | 陈穗清,张积家,肖二平. 图-词干扰范式下汉语口吃者的语义编码[J]. 心理学报, 2011, 43(09): 1013-1025. |
| [2] | 李卫君,杨玉芳. 绝句韵律边界的认知加工及其脑电效应[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(11): 1021-1032. |
| [3] | 宁宁,杨双,彭聃龄,丁国盛,董方白. 准备间隔对口吃者言语反应速度的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2009, 41(05): 387-396. |
| [4] | 张积家,肖二平. 汉语口吃者在不出声言语中的语音编码[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(03): 263-273. |
| [5] | 宁宁,卢春明,彭聃龄,马振玲,丁国盛. 口吃者的言语计划缺陷 ——来自词长效应的证据 [J]. 心理学报, 2007, 39(2): 215-224. |
PDF全文下载地址:
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=4319
