نقش صورت نوشتاری ذهنی در تسهیل درک کلمات هم‌آوای ناهم‌نویسه

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد زبان‌شناسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

2 دانشیار گروه زبان‌شناسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

در برخی موارد پردازش­های ذهنی در درک شنیداری زبان گفتار با دشواری روبه­روست. به نظر می­رسد فعال­سازی صورت نوشتاری کلمات در ذهن می­تواند در چنین شرایطی درک را تسهیل نماید. در این مقاله، با توجه به اینکه یافته­های پژوهشی نشان می­دهند که پردازش و دسترسی به کلمات هم­آوای ناهم­نویسه از دیگر کلمات دشوارتر است، در پی شناسایی نقش خط نوشتار و صورت نوشتاری واژگان در پردازش و درک این نوع کلمات به هنگام فرآیندهای پردازشی کل به جزء (مانند درک گفتار) بوده­ایم. به این منظور، یک آزمون انگیزشی براساس انگاره­ی مرکبی از انگاره­های پردازشی و دسترسی لولت، رولفس و مایر (1999) و دل (1990) طراحی شد، که 41 نفر آزمودنی در آن شرکت داشتند. نتایج بدست آمده، فرض تحقیق را مبنی بر فعال­شدن صورت نوشتاری کلمات هم­آوای ناهم­نویسه جهت تسهیل درک با اطمینان 95% تأیید کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Orthography in Facilitation of the Perception of Heterographic Homophones

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fahimeh Nasib Zarraby 1
  • Shahla Sharifi 2
1 M.A. Student of General Linguistics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2 Associate Professor of Ferdowsi University of Mashad
چکیده [English]

The role of orthography in difficult speech perception tasks has already been proved (Dehaene & Cohen, 2011). Since the processing of heterographic homophones is believed to be more difficult than other words (Hino & colleagues, 2013), the present study aimed at identifying the role of orthography and word forms in perception of such words during top-down processes, such as speech perception. A kind of priming experiment was programmed on the basis of a mixed word processing and retrieval model. This model was the result of combining the models proposed by Levelt, Roelofs, and Meyer (1999) and Dell (1990). 41 participants took part in the experiment and the data analysis confirmed the research hypothesis by 95 percent of certainty.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Priming
  • language processing
  • heterographic homophones
  • word form
  • visual word form area (VWFA)
 

Anderson, J. R. 1976. Language, memory, and thought, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Baker, C.I. et al. 2007. Visual word processing and experiential origins of functional selectivity in human extrastriate cortex, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A., 104: 9087–9092.

Biedermann, B. and L. Nickels. 2008. Homographic and heterographic homophones in speech production: Does orthography matter? Cortex, 44: 683-697.

Binder, J.R. et al. 2006. Tuning of the human left fusiform gyrus to sublexical orthographic structure, Neuroimage, 33: 739–748.

Bock, K., and W. Levelt. 1994. Language production: Grammatical encoding, In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (945-984) , San Diego: Academic Press.

Brem, S., et al. 2010. Brain sensitivity to print emerges when children learn letter–speech sound correspondences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A., 107: 7939–7944.

Carreiras, M., et al. 2009. An anatomical signature for literacy, Nature, 461: 983-986.

Cohen, L. and S. Dehaene. 2004. Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area, Neuroimage, 22, 1: 466-476.

Cohen, L. et al. 2004. Distinct unimodal and multimodal regions for word processing in the left temporal cortex, Neuroimage, 23: 1256–1270.

Collins, A. M., and E. F. Loftus. 1975. A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing, Psychological review,82, 6: 407-428.

Cowles, H. W. 2011. Psycholinguistics 101, USA, Springer.

Cutting, J. and V. S. Ferreira. 1999. Semantic and phonological information flow in production lexicon, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25: 318–344.

Dehaene, S. 2013. Inside the Letterbox: How Literacy Transforms the Human Brain, In Cerebrum: the Dana forum on brain science (Vol. 2013) , Dana Foundation, Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/workarea/downloadasset.aspx?id=43942

Dehaene, S. and L. Cohen. 2011. The unique role of visual word form area in reading, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 6: 254-262.

Dehaene, S. et al. 2005. The neural code for written words: a proposal, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9: 335–341.

Dehaene, S. et al. 2010. How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language, Science, 330: 1359–1364.

Dell, G.S. 1990. Effects of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological speech errors, Language and Cognitive Processes, 5: 313–349.

Desroches, A.S. et al. 2010. Children with reading difficulties show differences in brain regions associated with orthographic processing during spoken language processing, Brain Research, 1356: 73–84.

Glezer, L.S. et al. 2009. Evidence for highly selective neuronal tuning to whole words in the “visual word form area”, Neuron, 62: 199–204.

Hino, Y., Y. Kusunose, S. J. Lupker, and D. Jared. 2013. The processing advantage and disadvantage for homophones in lexical decision tasks, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Memory, and Cognition, 39, 2: 529–551.

Kao, C.H. et al. 2009. The inversion effect in visual word form processing, Cortex 46: 217–230.

Levelt, W.J.M., A. Roelofs, and A. S. Meyer. 1999. A theory of lexical access in speech production, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22: 1–75.

Li, G., et al. 2006. Cognitive processing in Chinese literate and illiterate subjects: An fMRI study, Human Brain Mapping, 27, 2: 144-152.

Liu, C. et al. 2008. The Visual Word Form Area: evidence from an fMRI study of implicit processing of Chinese characters, Neuroimage, 40: 1350–1361.

Maurer, U., et al. 2006. Coarse neural tuning for print peaks when children learn to read,Neuroimage, 33, 2: 749-758.

McNamara, T. P. 1992. Priming and constraints it places on theories of memory and retrieval, Psychological Review, 99, 4: 650-662.

McNamara, T. P. 2005. Semantic priming: Perspectives from memory and word recognition, USA, Psychology press.

Norman, D. A., and D. E. Rumelhart. 1975. Explorations in cognition, San Francisco, Freeman.

Pegado, F. et al. 2011. Breaking the symmetry: mirror discrimination for single letters but not for pictures in the Visual Word Form Area, Neuroimage, 55: 742–749.

Petersson, K. M., C. Silva, A. Castro-Caldas, M. Ingvar, and A. Reis. 2007. Literacy: a cultural influence on functional left–right differences in the inferior parietal cortex, Neuroscience, 269, 3: 791-799.

Posner, M. I., and C. R. R. Snyder. 1975.Attention and cognitive control, In Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (55-85).

Price, C. J. and T. J. Delvin. 2003. The myth of the visual word form area, NeuroImage, 19: 473-481.

Qiao, E. et al. 2010. Unconsciously deciphering handwriting: subliminal invariance for handwritten words in the visual word form area, Neuroimage, 49: 1786–1799.

Quillian, M. R. 1967. Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities, Behavioral science, 12, 5: 410-430.

Rubenstein, H., S. S. Lewis, and M. A. Rubenstein. 1971. Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word recognition, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10: 645– 657.

Sternberg, R. J. and K. Sternberg. 2012. Cognitive Psychology (6th ed.), USA, Wadsworth.

Vanderwart, M. 1984. Priming by pictures in lexical decision, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 1: 67-83.

Vinckier, F. et al. 2007. Hierarchical coding of letter strings in the ventral stream: dissecting the inner organization of the visual word form system, Neuron, 55: 143–156.

Wheeldon, L.R. and S. Monsell. 1992. The locus of repetition priming of spoken word production, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44: 723–761.