Language Research

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Journal Metrics

Cooperation with the institution or association

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

Sample Persian work

English work sample

Publication cost

Guide for Authors

orcid_help

Registration guide in Pablones

referee

The original form of the work

Conflict of interest form

Electrophysiological Evidence of Neurological Representations of the Phonological and Phonetic Properties of Persian Vowels in the Auditory Cortex

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph. D Candidate of Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

How the brain encodes the speech acoustic signal into phonological representations is a fundamental question for the neurobiology of language. The following paper is aimed to investigate the relationship between the phonological and phonetic properties of Persian simple vowels and neurophysiological events corresponding to them. To achieve such goal, we employed electroencephalography to map the Persian vowel system onto cortical sources using the N1 auditory evoked component. We found evidence that the N1 is characterized by asymmetrical indexes in the auditory areas of the cortex, structuring vowel representations. Properties of these ERPs were analyzed and modelled on one hand by the landmarks in the spectral window of their respective stimulus (such as F1, F2 and F2-F1) and on the other hand by the phonological distinctive features categorizing them (namely, height and place). The results revealed that the responses contain at least two distinguishable modulations of N1 components: a symmetric N1a which peaked between 113 to 149 milliseconds after the onset of the stimulus and a heavily left-leaning N1b which peaked between 149 to 170 milliseconds thereafter. Both N1a and N1b subcomponents showed strong correlations with a variety of parameters of both phonological and acoustic nature of the respective stimuli. However, N1a was significantly better modelled by acoustic factors while N1b displayed a better fit to a model based on phonetic factors. Based on such results, this paper argues that firstly the perceptual procedure of vowel categorization is a gradient process starting from demarcation of the stimulus signal according to acoustic landmarks which is done almost symmetrically then the processing load shifts significantly to the left hemisphere for the categorization of the input based on its perceived distinctive features. And secondly, that such information can be exploited to draft a ‘tonochronic’ map of such perceptual processes and define a perceptual field for every vowel and distinctive feature in the tonochronic space.

Keywords

References
Ahlfors, S. P., J. Han, J.W. Belliveau and M. S. Hamalainen. 2010. Sensitivity of MEG and EEG to source orientation. Brain Topography, 23:227-232.
Baillet, S. 2017. Magnetoencephalography for brain electrophysiology and imaging. Nature Neuroscience, 20:327-339.
Bijankhan, M. 2005. Phonology: Optimality Theory, Tehran: SAMT. [in Persian].
Boersma, P., and D. Weenink 2011. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Computer program), Version 5.2.
Campbell, T., I. Winkler and T. Kujala 2007. N1 and the mismatch negativity are spatiotemporally distinct erp components: disruption of immediate memory by auditory distraction can be related to N1. Psychiphysiology, 44:530-540
DeWitt, I. and J. P. Rauschecker. 2012. Phoneme and word recognition in the auditory ventral stream. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences United States of America, 109:505-514.
Diesch, E., C. Eulitz, S. Hampson and B. Ross. 1996. The neurotopography of vowels as mirrored by evoked magnetic field measurements. Brain Language, 53:143-168.
Diesch, E., and T. Luce. 1997. Magnetic fields elicited by tones and vowel formants reveal tonotopy and nonlinear summation of cortical activation. Psychophysiology, 34: 501-510.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــ. 2000.Topographic and temporal indices of vowel spectral envelope extraction in the human auditory cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12: 878–893.
Embick, D. and D. Poeppel. 2015. Towards a computational(ist) neurobiology of language: Correlational, integrated, and explanatory neurolinguistics. Language and Cognitive Neuroscience, 30:357-366.
Eulitz, C., J. Obleser, and A. Lahiri. 2004. Intra-subject replication of brain magnetic activity during the processing of speech sounds. Cognitive brain research 19:82-91.
Gage, N., D. Poeppel, T. Roberts and G. Hickok. 1998. Auditory evoked M100 reflects onset acoustics of speech sounds. Brain Research 814: 236-239.
Gage, N., T. Roberts and G. Hickok. 2006. Temporal resolution properties of human auditory cortex: reflections in the neuromagnetic auditory evoked M100 component. Brain Research 1069:166-171.
Grimaldi, M. 2012. Toward a neural theory of language: Old issues and new perspectives. Journal of Neurolingusitics, 25:304-327.
Grimaldy, M., F. Sigona and F. di Russo. 2016. Electroencephalographic evidence of vowels computation and representation in human auditory cortex, In A.M. di Sciullo (Ed.) Biolinguistic Investigations on the Language Faculty (79-100), Amesterdam: John Benjamins.
Halle, M. 2002. From memory to speech and back: papers on phonetics and phonology 1954–2002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hickok, G., and D. Poeppel. 2004. Dorsal and ventral streams: a framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language. Cognition, 92:67-99.
ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ. 2007. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8:393-402.
Hoonhorst, L., C. Collin, E. Markessis, M. Radeau, P. Deltenre and W. Sernicales. 2009. The N100 component: an electrophysiological cure of voicing perception, In S. Fuchs, H. loevenbruck, D. pape and P. Perrier (Eds.) Some aspects of speech in brain (5-34) Bern: Peter Lang Verlagsgruppe.
Kaas, J.H., and T.A. Hackett. 2000. Subdivisions of auditory cortex and processing streams in primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97: 11793-11799.
Ladefoged, P. 2006. a course in phonetics (5th Ed.) Thomson Wadsworth: Belmont, CA.
Mäkelä, A.M., P. Alku, and H. Tiitinen. 2003. The auditory N1m reveals the left-hemispheric representation of vowel identity in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 353:111-114.
Manca A.D., F. Di Russo, F. Sigona and M. Grimaldi. 2019. Electrophysiological evidence of phonemotopic representations of vowels in the primary and secondary auditory cortex,Cortex, 121:385-398.
Manca, A. D., and M. Grimaldi. 2016. Vowels and consonants in the brain: Evidence from magnetoencephalographic studies on the N1m in normal-hearing listeners. Frontiers in Psychology, 7:1413.
May, P.J.C., and H. Tiitinen. 2010. Mismatch negativity (MMN), the deviance-elicited auditory deflection, explained. Psychophysiology, 47:66–122.
Mesgarani, N., C. Cheung, K. Johnson and E.F. Chang. 2014.Phonetic feature encoding in human superior temporal gyrus. Science, 343:1006-1010.
Näätänen, R. and T. Picton. 1987.  The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: A review and analysis of the component structure. Journal of Psychophysiology, 24: 375-425.
Obleser, J., T. Elbert, A. Lahiri and C. Eulitz. 2003a. Cortical representation of vowels reflects acoustic dissimilarity determined by formant frequencies. Cognitive Brain Research, 15: 207-213.
Obleser, J., A. Lahiri and C. Eulitz. 2003b. Auditory-evoked magnetic field codes place of articulation in timing and topography around 100 milliseconds post syllable onset. Neuroimage, 20: 1839-1847.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ. 2004a. Intra-subject replication of brain activity during the processing of speech sounds. Cognitive Brain Research, 19:82-91.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ. 2004b. Magnetic brain response mirrors extraction of phonological features from spoken vowels. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16:31-39.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ. 2006. Now You Hear It, Now You Don’t: Transient Traces of Consonants and their Non-Speech Analogues in the Human Brain. Cerebral Cortex, 16:1069-1076.
Obleser, J. and F. Eisner. 2009. Pre-lexical abstraction of speech in the auditory cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13:14-19.
Ohl, F.W. and H. Scheich. 1997. Orderly cortical representation of vowels based on formant interaction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A. 94: 9440-9444.
Oldfield, R.C. 1971. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9:97–113.
Pantev, C., O. Bertrand, C. Eulitz, C. Verkindt, S. Hampson, G. Schuierer and T. Elbert. 1995. Specific tonotopic organizations of different areas of the human auditory cortex revealed by simultaneous magnetic and electric recordings. Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology, 94:26-40.
Poeppel, D., C. Phillips, E. Yellin, H.A. Rowley, T.P.L. Roberts and A. Marantz. 1997. Processing of vowels in supratemporal auditory cortex. Neuroscience Letters, 221: 145-148.
Rauschecker, J.P. and S.K. Scott. 2009. Maps and streams in the auditory cortex: Nonhuman primates illuminate human speech processing. Nature Neuroscience, 12:718-724.
Romani, G.L., S.J. Williamson and L.Kaufman. 1982. Tonotopic organization of the human auditory cortex. Science, 216:1339-1340.
Roberts, T.P.L. and D. Poeppel. 1996. Latency of auditory evoked M100 as a function of tone frequency. NeuroReport ,7:1138-1140.
Roberts, T.P.L., P. Ferrari and D. Poeppel. 1998. Latency of evoked neuromagnetic M100 reflects perceptual and acoustic stimulus attributes. NeuroReport, 9:3265-3269.
Roberts, T.P.L., P. Ferrari, S.M. Stufflebe, and D. Poeppel. 2000. Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components: stimulus dependence and insights toward perception. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 17:114-129.
Roberts, T.P.L., E.J. Flagg and N.M. Gage. 2004. Vowel categorization induces departure of M100 latency from acoustic prediction. NeuroReport 15:1679-1682.
Saenz, M. and D.R.M Langers. 2014. Tonotopic mapping of human auditory cortex. Hearing Research, 307: 42-52.
Scharinger, M., W.J. Idsardi, and S.Poe. 2011. A Comprehensive Three-dimensional Cortical Map of Vowel Space. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23:3972-3982.
Scott, S.K., and I.S. Johnsrude. 2003. The neuroanatomical and functional organization of speech perception. Trends in Neurosciences, 26: 100-107.
Scott, S.K and C. McGettigan. 2013. Do temporal processes underlie left hemisphere dominance in speech perception? Brain and Language, 127:36-45.
Shestakova, A., E. Brattico, A. Soloviev, V. Klucharev and M. Huotilainen. 2004. Orderly cortical representation of vowel categories presented by multiple exemplars. Cognitive Brain Research, 21:342-350.
Stevens, K.N. 2002. Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 111:1872-1891.
Talavage, T.M., M.I. Sereno, J.R. Melcher, P.J. Ledden, B.R. Rosen, and A.M. Dale. 2004. Tonotopic organization in human auditory cortex revealed by progressions of frequency sensitivity. Journal of neurophysiology, 91:1282-1296.
Woods, D.L. 1995. The component structure of N1 wave of the human auditory evoked potential. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 44:102-109.
Language Research
Volume 11, Issue 2
February 2021
Pages 223-245
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 15 November 2020
  • Revise Date: 16 February 2021
  • Accept Date: 16 January 2021
Share
How to cite
Statistics