PSY 369 Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension Some of the

  • Slides: 69
Download presentation
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension

Some of the big questions Production “the horse raced past the barn” How do

Some of the big questions Production “the horse raced past the barn” How do we turn our thoughts into a spoken or written output?

Some of the big questions Production Comprehension “the horse raced past the barn” How

Some of the big questions Production Comprehension “the horse raced past the barn” How do we turn our thoughts into a spoken or written output? How do we understand language that we hear/see?

Some of the big questions n n n Comprehension Production Representation n n How

Some of the big questions n n n Comprehension Production Representation n n How do we store linguistic information? How do we retrieve that information? Conceptualizer Thought Formulator Grammatical Encoding Phonological Encoding Articulator Semantic Analysis Lexicon Syntactic Analysis Word Recognition Letter/phoneme Recognition

Conceptualizer Thought Semantic Analysis Formulator Grammatical Encoding Phonological Encoding Articulator Lexicon Syntactic Analysis Word

Conceptualizer Thought Semantic Analysis Formulator Grammatical Encoding Phonological Encoding Articulator Lexicon Syntactic Analysis Word Recognition Letter/phoneme Recognition

Overview of comprehension Input The cat chased the rat. Language perception Word recognition c

Overview of comprehension Input The cat chased the rat. Language perception Word recognition c a t /k/ /ae/ /t/ cat dog cap wolf tree yarn cat claw fur hat Syntactic Semantic & pragmatic analysis S NP VP the cat V NP chased the rat

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning

The Comprehender’s Problem n Different signals n Reading and listening are very different If

The Comprehender’s Problem n Different signals n Reading and listening are very different If reading were like listening whereareyougoing Where are you going? n n Different speakers speak differently Lots of differences in written/printed language

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning The cat chased the rat.

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning Oronyms I scream for ice scream The stuffy nose can lead to problems. The stuff he knows can lead to problems. Why don’t you take a nice cold shower? Why don’t you take an ice cold shower? See here for more oronyms

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning Groucho Marx shot an elephant in his pajamas Good shot How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning “Oh no, Lois has been hypnotized and is jumping off the bank!” Money “bank” River “bank”

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or

The Comprehender’s Problem n Ambiguity n Must take a potentially ambiguous serial acoustic (or visual) input, and recover the intended meaning “Uncle Bob kicked the bucket last night” “Can you pass the salt” “Sure as soon as I’m done using it. ” “Nope, somebody glued it to the table. ”

Overview of comprehension Input The cat chased the rat. Language perception c a t

Overview of comprehension Input The cat chased the rat. Language perception c a t /k/ /ae/ /t/ Word recognition cat dog cap wolf tree yarn cat claw fur hat Syntactic Semantic & pragmatic analysis S NP VP the cat V NP chased the rat Lexical Access

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n n n How is the information organized/stored? What factors are involved in retrieving information from the lexicon? Models of lexical access

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n n n How is the information organized/stored? What factors are involved in retrieving information from the lexicon? Models of lexical access

Storing linguistic information n Tale of the tape: n n High capacity: 40, 000

Storing linguistic information n Tale of the tape: n n High capacity: 40, 000 – 60, 000 words Fast: Recognition in as little as 200 ms (often before word ends) n How do we search that many, that fast!? – suggests that there is a high amount of organization n Or something much more complex “The world’s largest data bank of examples in context is dwarfed by the collection we all carry around subconsciously in our heads. ” E. Lenneberg (1967) Excellent reading: Words in the Mind, Aitchison (1987, 2003)

Storing linguistic information n Interesting questions: n How are words stored? What are they

Storing linguistic information n Interesting questions: n How are words stored? What are they made up of? How are words related to each other? How do we use them? n Some vocabulary n n n Mental lexicon The representation of words in long term memory Lexical Access: How do we access words and their the meanings (and other properties)?

Theoretical Metaphors: Access vs. Recognition n Often used interchangeably, but sometimes a distinction is

Theoretical Metaphors: Access vs. Recognition n Often used interchangeably, but sometimes a distinction is made n Recognition - finding the representation Search for a match Select word dog cat cap wolf cat tree yarn cat cat claw fur hat Here it is The magic moment Balota (1990)

Theoretical Metaphors: Access vs. Recognition n Often used interchangeably, but sometimes a distinction is

Theoretical Metaphors: Access vs. Recognition n Often used interchangeably, but sometimes a distinction is made n n Recognition - finding the representation Access - getting information from the representation Search for a match Select word dog cap wolf tree yarn cat cat claw fur hat Access lexical information Cat noun Animal, pet, Meows, furry, Purrs, etc. Open it up and see what’s inside

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n n n How is the information organized/stored? What factors are involved in retrieving information from the lexicon? Models of lexical access

Studying Lexical Access n Generally people ask: what makes word identification easy or difficult?

Studying Lexical Access n Generally people ask: what makes word identification easy or difficult? n The assumption: n n Measures of identification time are usually indirect Time spent identifying a word can be a measure of difficulty

Common methodologies n n Measure how long people take to say a string of

Common methodologies n n Measure how long people take to say a string of letters is (or is not) a word (lexical decision) Measure how long people take to categorize a word (“apple” is a fruit) Measure how long people take to start saying a word (naming or pronunciation time) Measure how long people actually spend looking at a word when reading n n n Word by word reading Line by line reading Using eye movement monitoring techniques

Lexical access Factors affecting lexical access Morphological structure n Role of prior context n

Lexical access Factors affecting lexical access Morphological structure n Role of prior context n Lexical ambiguity n Phonological structure n Concretness/abstractne n Grammatical class ss n Imageability n Frequency Some ofpriming these may reflex the structure nn Semantic n n of the lexicon Some may reflect the processes of access from the lexicon

Words or morphemes? n Word primitives n n n horse n barns Need a

Words or morphemes? n Word primitives n n n horse n barns Need a lot of representations Fast retrieval Morpheme primitives n horses horse -s Economical - fewer representations Slow retrieval - some assembly required n n Decomposition during comprehension Composition during production barn

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task (e. g. , Taft, 1981) n n

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task (e. g. , Taft, 1981) n n See a string of letters As fast as you can determine if it is a real English word or not n n n “yes” if it is “no” if it isn’t Typically speed and accuracy are the dependent measures

table

table

vanue

vanue

daughter

daughter

tasp

tasp

cofef

cofef

hunter

hunter

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task table vanue daughter tasp cofef hunter Yes

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task table vanue daughter tasp cofef hunter Yes No No Yes

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task daughter hunter

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task daughter hunter

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task n This evidence supports the morphemes as

Words or morphemes? n Lexical Decision task n This evidence supports the morphemes as primitives view daughter Pseudo-suffixed daught -er Takes longer hunter Multimorphemic hunt -er

Words or morphemes? n May depend on other factors n What kind of morpheme

Words or morphemes? n May depend on other factors n What kind of morpheme n n n Inflectional (e. g. , singular/plural, past/present tense) Derivational (e. g. , drink --> drinkable, infect --> disinfect) Frequency of usage n High frequency multimorphemic (in particular if derivational morphology) may get represented as a single unit n n e. g. , impossible vs. imperceptible Compound words n Semantically transparent n n Buttonhole Semantically opaque n butterfly

Phonology n Words that sound alike may be stored “close together” n Brown and

Phonology n Words that sound alike may be stored “close together” n Brown and Mc. Neill (1966) Tip of the tongue phenomenon (TOT) What word means to formally renounce throne? abdicate Look at what words they think of but aren’t right e. g, “abstract, ” “abide, ” “truncate”

Phonology Words that sound alike may be stored “close together” n Brown and Mc.

Phonology Words that sound alike may be stored “close together” n Brown and Mc. Neill (1966) Tip of the tongue phenomenon (TOT) % of matches n 50 Similar-sounding words 40 30 Similar-meaning words 20 10 1 Letters at n n 2 3 Word beginning 3 2 1 Word end More likely to approximate target words with similar sounding words than similar meanings The “Bathtub Effect” - Sounds at the beginnings and ends of words are remembered best (Aitchison, 2003)

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Try to imagine each word Umbrella Lantern Freedom Apple

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Try to imagine each word Umbrella Lantern Freedom Apple Knowledge Evil

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Try to imagine each word How do you imagine

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Try to imagine each word How do you imagine these? Umbrella Lantern Freedom Apple Knowledge Evil

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Umbrella Lantern Freedom Apple Knowledge Evil n n More

Imageability n Imageability, concreteness, abstractness Umbrella Lantern Freedom Apple Knowledge Evil n n More easily remembered More easily accessed

Frequency n Lexical Decision Task: Gambastya Revery Voitle Chard Wefe Cratily Decoy Puldow Raflot

Frequency n Lexical Decision Task: Gambastya Revery Voitle Chard Wefe Cratily Decoy Puldow Raflot Oriole Vuluble Chalt Awry Signet Trave Crock Cryptic Ewe Mulvow Governor Bless Tuglety Gare Relief Ruftily History Pindle Develop Gardot Busy Effort Garvola Match Sard Pleasant Coin

Frequency n Typically the more common a word, the faster (and more accurately) it

Frequency n Typically the more common a word, the faster (and more accurately) it is named and recognized n n Typical interpretation: easier to access (or recognize) Lexical Decision Task: Low frequency Gambastya Revery Voitle Chard Wefe Cratily Decoy Puldow Raflot Oriole Vuluble Chalt Awry Signet Trave Crock Cryptic Ewe High(er) frequency Mulvow Governor Bless Tuglety Gare Relief Ruftily History Pindle Develop Gardot Busy Effort Garvola Match Sard Pleasant Coin

Frequency n Typically the more common a word, the faster (and more accurately) it

Frequency n Typically the more common a word, the faster (and more accurately) it is named and recognized n n Typical interpretation: easier to access (or recognize) However, Balota and Chumbley (1984) n Frequency effects depend on task n n n Lexical decision - big effect Naming - small effect Category verification - no effect n A canary is a bird. T/F

Semantics n Free associations n n Most associates are semantically related (rather than phonologically

Semantics n Free associations n n Most associates are semantically related (rather than phonologically for example) Semantic Priming task n Meyer & Schvaneveldt (1971) n Tasp Nurse Doctor Fract Slithest Shoes Doctor no yes no no yes For the following letter strings, decide whether it is or is not an English word Related nurse doctor 855 msecs Unrelated shoes doctor 940 msecs Responded to faster “Priming effect” Evidence that associative relations influence lexical access

Role of prior context Cross Modal Priming Task: Listen to short paragraph. At some

Role of prior context Cross Modal Priming Task: Listen to short paragraph. At some point during the paragraph a string of letters will appear on the screen. Decide if it is an English word or not. Say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ as quickly as you can.

Role of prior context “Rumor had it that, for years, the government building has

Role of prior context “Rumor had it that, for years, the government building has been plagued with problems. The man was not surprised bugsand in the corner of his when he found several spiders, roaches other room. ” ant

Role of prior context n Swinney (1979) “Rumor had it that, for years, the

Role of prior context n Swinney (1979) “Rumor had it that, for years, the government building has been plagued with problems. The man was not surprised bugsand in the corner of his when he found several spiders, roaches other room. ” n Lexical Decision task Context related: Context inappropriate: Context unrelated: n ant spy sew Results and conclusions n n Within 400 msecs of hearing "bugs", both ant and spy are primed After 700 msecs, only ant is primed

Lexical ambiguity n Hogaboam and Pefetti (1975) n n Words can have multiple interpretations

Lexical ambiguity n Hogaboam and Pefetti (1975) n n Words can have multiple interpretations The role of frequency of meaning n Task, is the last word ambiguous? n The jealous husband read the letter (dominant meaning) n The antique typewriter was missing a letter (subordinate meaning) n Results: Participants are faster on the second sentence. n The results may seem counterintuitive n n The task is the key, “is the final word ambiguous” In the first sentence, the meaning is dominant and the context strongly biases that meaning. So the second meaning may not be around, which in turn makes the it harder to make the ambiguity judgment in the first sentence

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n

Lexical access n How do we retrieve the linguistic information from Long-term memory? n n n How is the information organized/stored? What factors are involved in retrieving information from the lexicon? Models of lexical access

Models of lexical access n Serial comparison models n n Parallel comparison models n

Models of lexical access n Serial comparison models n n Parallel comparison models n n n Search model (Forster, 1976, 1979, 1987, 1989) Logogen model (Morton, 1969) Cohort model (Marslen-Wilson, 1987, 1990) Connectionist models n Interactive Activation Model (Mc. Clelland Rumelhart, 1981)

Logogen model (Morton 1969) Context system Auditory stimuli Visual stimuli Auditory analysis Visual analysis

Logogen model (Morton 1969) Context system Auditory stimuli Visual stimuli Auditory analysis Visual analysis Semantic Attributes Logogen system Available Responses Output buffer Responses

Logogen model n n n The lexical entry for each word comes with a

Logogen model n n n The lexical entry for each word comes with a logogen The lexical entry only becomes available once the logogen ‘fires’ When does a logogen fire? n When you read/hear the word

Think of a logogen as being like a ‘strength-o-meter’ at a fairground When the

Think of a logogen as being like a ‘strength-o-meter’ at a fairground When the bell rings, the logogen has ‘fired’

‘cat’ [kæt] • What makes the logogen fire? – seeing/hearing the word • What

‘cat’ [kæt] • What makes the logogen fire? – seeing/hearing the word • What happens once the logogen has fired? – access to lexical entry!

‘cat’ [kæt] • So how does this help us to explain the frequency effect?

‘cat’ [kæt] • So how does this help us to explain the frequency effect? – High frequency words have a lower threshold for firing –e. g. , cat vs. cot ‘cot’ [kot] Low freq takes longer

‘doctor’ [doktə] • Spreading activation from doctor lowers the threshold for nurse to fire

‘doctor’ [doktə] • Spreading activation from doctor lowers the threshold for nurse to fire – So nurse take less time to fire doctor ‘nurse’ [nə: s] Spreading activation network doctor nurse

Search model Visual input Pointers Decreasing frequency Entries in order of Access codes Auditory

Search model Visual input Pointers Decreasing frequency Entries in order of Access codes Auditory input /kat/ cat Mental lexicon mat cat mouse

Cohort model n Specifically for auditory word recognition (covered in chapter 9 of textbook)

Cohort model n Specifically for auditory word recognition (covered in chapter 9 of textbook) n Speakers can recognize a word very rapidly n n n Usually within 200 -250 msec Recognition point (uniqueness point) - point at which a word is unambiguously different from other words and can be recognized Three stages of word recognition 1) activate a set of possible candidates 2) narrow the search to one candidate 3) integrate single candidate into semantic and syntactic context

Cohort model n Prior context: “I took the car for a …” /s/ /sp/

Cohort model n Prior context: “I took the car for a …” /s/ /sp/ … soap spinach psychologist spin spit sun spank … spinach spin spit spank … time /spi/ spinach spin spit … /spin/ spin

Interactive Activation Model (IAM) Previous models posed a bottom-up flow of information (from features

Interactive Activation Model (IAM) Previous models posed a bottom-up flow of information (from features to letters to words). IAM also poses a topdown flows of information Nodes: • (visual) feature Mc. Clelland Rumelhart, (1981) • (positional) letter • word detectors • Inhibitory and excitatory connections between them.

Interactive Activation Model (IAM) n Inhibitory connections within levels n n If the first

Interactive Activation Model (IAM) n Inhibitory connections within levels n n If the first letter of a word is “a”, it isn’t “b” or “c” or … Inhibitory and excitatory connections between levels (bottom-up and top-down) n n If the first letter is “a” the word could be “apple” or “ant” or …. , but not “book” or “church” or…… If there is growing evidence that the word is “apple” that evidence confirms that the first letter is “a”, and not “b”…. .

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) + Until the participant hits some start key

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) + Until the participant hits some start key

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) COURSE Presented briefly … say 25 ms

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) COURSE Presented briefly … say 25 ms

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) U &&&&& A Mask presented with alternatives above and

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) U &&&&& A Mask presented with alternatives above and below the target letter … participants must pick one as the letter they believe was presented in that position.

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) + + E KLANE E & T Letter only

The Word-Superiority Effect (Reicher, 1969) + + E KLANE E & T Letter only Say 60% + PLANE E &&&&& T Letter in Nonword Say 65% Letter in Word Say 80% Why is identification better when a letter is presented in a word?

IAM & the word superiority effect n We are processing at the word and

IAM & the word superiority effect n We are processing at the word and letter levels simultaneously n n Letters in words benefit from bottom-up and topdown activation But letters alone receive only bottom-up activation.

Comparing the models n Each model can account for major findings (e. g. ,

Comparing the models n Each model can account for major findings (e. g. , frequency, semantic priming, context), but they do so in different ways. n Search model is serial and bottom-up n Logogen is parallel and interactive (information flows up and down) n Cohort is bottom-up but parallel initially, but then interactive at a later stage n AIM is both bottom-up and top-down, uses facilitation and inhibition