@article{NousairKlassertWellmann2020, author = {Nousair, Iman and Klassert, Annegret and Wellmann, Caroline}, title = {Phonologieerwerb in der Erstsprache Arabisch}, series = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, journal = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, number = {12}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-479-1}, issn = {1866-9085}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-46960}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-469600}, pages = {197 -- 209}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @article{vanOmmenBollAvetisyanLarrazaetal.2020, author = {van Ommen, Sandrien and Boll-Avetisyan, Natalie and Larraza, Saioa and Wellmann, Caroline and Bijeljac-Babic, Ranka and H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Nazzi, Thierry}, title = {Language-specific prosodic acquisition}, series = {Journal of memory and language: JML}, volume = {112}, journal = {Journal of memory and language: JML}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0749-596X}, doi = {10.1016/j.jml.2020.104108}, pages = {16}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This study compares the development of prosodic processing in French- and German-learning infants. The emergence of language-specific perception of phrase boundaries was directly tested using the same stimuli across these two languages. French-learning (Experiment 1, 2) and German-learning 6- and 8-month-olds (Experiment 3) listened to the same French noun sequences with or without major prosodic boundaries ([Loulou et Manou] [et Nina]; [Loulou et Manou et Nina], respectively). The boundaries were either naturally cued (Experiment 1), or cued exclusively by pitch and duration (Experiment 2, 3). French-learning 6- and 8-month-olds both perceived the natural boundary, but neither perceived the boundary when only two cues were present. In contrast, German-learning infants develop from not perceiving the two-cue boundary at 6 months to perceiving it at 8 months, just like German-learning 8-month-olds listening to German (Wellmann, Holzgrefe, Truckenbrodt, Wartenburger, \& Hohle, 2012). In a control experiment (Experiment 4), we found little difference between German and French adult listeners, suggesting that later, French listeners catch up with German listeners. Taken together, these cross-linguistic differences in the perception of identical stimuli provide direct evidence for language-specific development of prosodic boundary perception.}, language = {en} } @article{WellmannHolzgrefeLangTruckenbrodtetal.2012, author = {Wellmann, Caroline and Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Truckenbrodt, Hubert and Wartenburger, Isabell and H{\"o}hle, Barbara}, title = {How each prosodic boundary cue matters evidence from German infants}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {3}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00580}, pages = {13}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Previous studies have revealed that infants aged 6-10 months are able to use the acoustic correlates of major prosodic boundaries, that is, pitch change, preboundary lengthening, and pause, for the segmentation of the continuous speech signal. Moreover, investigations with American-English- and Dutch-learning infants suggest that processing prosodic boundary markings involves a weighting of these cues. This weighting seems to develop with increasing exposure to the native language and to underlie crosslinguistic variation. In the following, we report the results of four experiments using the headturn preference procedure to explore the perception of prosodic boundary cues in German infants. We presented 8-month-old infants with a sequence of names in two different prosodic groupings, with or without boundary markers. Infants discriminated both sequences when the boundary was marked by all three cues (Experiment 1) and when it was marked by a pitch change and preboundary lengthening in combination (Experiment 2). The presence of a pitch change (Experiment 3) or preboundary lengthening (Experiment 4) as single cues did not lead to a successful discrimination. Our results indicate that pause is not a necessary cue for German infants. Pitch change and preboundary lengthening in combination, but not as single cues, are sufficient. Hence, by 8 months infants only rely on a convergence of boundary markers. Comparisons with adults' performance on the same stimulus materials suggest that the pattern observed with the 8-month-olds is already consistent with that of adults. We discuss our findings with respect to crosslinguistic variation and the development of a language-specific prosodic cue weighting.}, language = {en} } @article{HolzgrefeLangWellmannPetroneetal.2013, author = {Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Wellmann, Caroline and Petrone, Caterina and Truckenbrodt, Hubert and H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Wartenburger, Isabell}, title = {Brain response to prosodic boundary cues depends on boundary position}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {4}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, number = {28}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00421}, pages = {14}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Prosodic information is crucial for spoken language comprehension and especially for syntactic parsing, because prosodic cues guide the hearer's syntactic analysis. The time course and mechanisms of this interplay of prosody and syntax are not yet well-understood. In particular, there is an ongoing debate whether local prosodic cues are taken into account automatically or whether they are processed in relation to the global prosodic context in which they appear. The present study explores whether the perception of a prosodic boundary is affected by its position within an utterance. In an event-related potential (PRP) study we tested if the brain response evoked by the prosodic boundary differs when the boundary occurs early in a list of three names connected by conjunctions (i.e., after the first name) as compared to later in the utterance (i.e., after the second name). A closure positive shift (CPS)-marking the processing of a prosodic phrase boundary-was elicited for stimuli with a late boundary, but not for stimuli with an early boundary. This result is further evidence for an immediate integration of prosodic information into the parsing of an utterance. In addition, it shows that the processing of prosodic boundary cues depends on the previously processed information from the preceding prosodic context.}, language = {en} } @misc{IvenHansenAndersetal.2020, author = {Iven, Claudia and Hansen, Bernd and Anders, Kristina and Starke, Andreas and Richardt, Kirsten and Pr{\"u}ß, Holger and El Meskioui, Martina and Haase, Tobias and Mahlberg, Lea and Wiehe, Lea and de Beer, Carola and Niepelt Karampamapa, Rebekka and Hofmann, Andrea and Stadie, Nicole and Hanne, Sandra and Thomson, Jenny and Sch{\"a}fer, Blanca and Huttenlauch, Clara and Wartenburger, Isabell and Weiland, Katharina and Wirsam, Anke and Hartung, Julia and Wahl, Michael and Unger, Julia and Buschmann, Anke and Seefeld, Martin and Bethge, Anita and Fieder, Nora and Rahman, Rasha Abdel and Nousair, Iman and Klassert, Annegret and Wellmann, Caroline and Verbree, Rahel and van Rij, Jacolien and Sprenger, Simone and M{\"a}hl, Anna Luisa and Schneider, Kathleen and Kutz, Anne and Kaps, Hella and Frank, Ulrike and Brekeller, Sophie and Ryll, Katja}, title = {Spektrum Patholinguistik Band 12. Schwerpunktthema: Weg(e) mit dem Stottern: Therapie und Selbsthilfe f{\"u}r Kinder und Erwachsene}, series = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, journal = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, number = {12}, editor = {Breitenstein, Sarah and Burmester, Juliane and Yetim, {\"O}zlem and Fritzsche, Tom}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-479-1}, issn = {1866-9085}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43700}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-437002}, pages = {viii, 257}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Das 12. Herbsttreffen Patholinguistik mit dem Schwerpunktthema »Weg(e) mit dem Stottern: Therapie und Selbsthilfe f{\"u}r Kinder und Erwachsene« fand am 24.11.2018 in Potsdam statt. Das Herbsttreffen wird seit 2007 j{\"a}hrlich vom Verband f{\"u}r Patholinguistik e.V. (vpl) durchgef{\"u}hrt. Der vorliegende Tagungsband beinhaltet die Vortr{\"a}ge zum Schwerpunktthema sowie Beitr{\"a}ge der Posterpr{\"a}sentationen zu weiteren Themen aus der sprachtherapeutischen Forschung und Praxis.}, language = {de} } @article{HolzgrefeLangWellmannPetroneetal.2016, author = {Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Wellmann, Caroline and Petrone, Caterina and Raeling, Romy and Truckenbrodt, Hubert and H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Wartenburger, Isabell}, title = {How pitch change and final lengthening cue boundary perception in German: converging evidence from ERPs and prosodic judgements}, series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, volume = {31}, journal = {Language, cognition and neuroscience}, publisher = {Begell House}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {2327-3798}, doi = {10.1080/23273798.2016.1157195}, pages = {904 -- 920}, year = {2016}, abstract = {This study examines the role of pitch and final lengthening in German intonation phrase boundary (IPB) perception. Since a prosody-related event-related potential (ERP) component termed Closure Positive Shift reflects the processing of major prosodic boundaries, we combined ERP and behavioural measures (i.e. a prosodic judgement task) to systematically test the impact of sole and combined cue occurrences on IPB perception. In two experiments we investigated whether adult listeners perceived an IPB in acoustically manipulated speech material that contained none, one, or two of the prosodic boundary cues. Both ERP and behavioural results suggest that pitch and final lengthening cues have to occur in combination to trigger IPB perception. Hence, the combination of behavioural and electrophysiological measures provides a comprehensive insight into prosodic boundary cue perception in German and leads to an argument in favour of interrelated cues from the frequency (i.e. pitch change) and the time (i.e. final lengthening) domain.}, language = {en} } @article{PetroneTruckenbrodtWellmannetal.2017, author = {Petrone, Caterina and Truckenbrodt, Hubert and Wellmann, Caroline and Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Wartenburger, Isabell and H{\"o}hle, Barbara}, title = {Prosodic boundary cues in German}, series = {Journal of phonetics}, volume = {61}, journal = {Journal of phonetics}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {London}, issn = {0095-4470}, doi = {10.1016/j.wocn.2017.01.002}, pages = {71 -- 92}, year = {2017}, abstract = {This study investigates prosodic phrasing of bracketed lists in German. We analyze variation in pauses, phrase-final lengthening and f0 in speech production and how these cues affect boundary perception. In line with the literature, it was found that pauses are often used to signal intonation phrase boundaries, while final lengthening and f0 are employed across different levels of the prosodic hierarchy. Deviations from expectations based on the standard syntax-prosody mapping are interpreted in terms of task-specific effects. That is, we argue that speakers add/delete prosodic boundaries to enhance the phonological contrast between different bracketings in the experimental task. In perception, three experiments were run, in which we tested only single cues (but temporally distributed at different locations of the sentences). Results from identification tasks and reaction time measurements indicate that pauses lead to a more abrupt shift in listeners׳ prosodic judgments, while f0 and final lengthening are exploited in a more gradient manner. Hence, pauses, final lengthening and f0 have an impact on boundary perception, though listeners show different sensitivity to the three acoustic cues.}, language = {en} } @article{HolzgrefeLangWellmannHoehleetal.2018, author = {Holzgrefe-Lang, Julia and Wellmann, Caroline and H{\"o}hle, Barbara and Wartenburger, Isabell}, title = {Infants' Processing of Prosodic Cues}, series = {Language and speech}, volume = {61}, journal = {Language and speech}, number = {1}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0023-8309}, doi = {10.1177/0023830917730590}, pages = {153 -- 169}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Infants as young as six months are sensitive to prosodic phrase boundaries marked by three acoustic cues: pitch change, final lengthening, and pause. Behavioral studies suggest that a language-specific weighting of these cues develops during the first year of life; recent work on German revealed that eight-month-olds, unlike six-month-olds, are capable of perceiving a prosodic boundary on the basis of pitch change and final lengthening only. The present study uses Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) to investigate the neuro-cognitive development of prosodic cue perception in German-learning infants. In adults' ERPs, prosodic boundary perception is clearly reflected by the so-called Closure Positive Shift (CPS). To date, there is mixed evidence on whether an infant CPS exists that signals early prosodic cue perception, or whether the CPS emerges only later—the latter implying that infantile brain responses to prosodic boundaries reflect acoustic, low-level pause detection. We presented six- and eight-month-olds with stimuli containing either no boundary cues, only a pitch cue, or a combination of both pitch change and final lengthening. For both age groups, responses to the former two conditions did not differ, while brain responses to prosodic boundaries cued by pitch change and final lengthening showed a positivity that we interpret as a CPS-like infant ERP component. This hints at an early sensitivity to prosodic boundaries that cannot exclusively be based on pause detection. Instead, infants' brain responses indicate an early ability to exploit subtle, relational prosodic cues in speech perception—presumably even earlier than could be concluded from previous behavioral results.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Wellmann2023, author = {Wellmann, Caroline}, title = {Early sensitivity to prosodic phrase boundary cues: Behavioral evidence from German-learning infants}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-57393}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-573937}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xii, 136}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This dissertation seeks to shed light on the relation of phrasal prosody and developmental speech perception in German-learning infants. Three independent empirical studies explore the role of acoustic correlates of major prosodic boundaries, specifically pitch change, final lengthening, and pause, in infant boundary perception. Moreover, it was examined whether the sensitivity to prosodic phrase boundary markings changes during the first year of life as a result of perceptual attunement to the ambient language (Aslin \& Pisoni, 1980). Using the headturn preference procedure six- and eight-month-old monolingual German-learning infants were tested on their discrimination of two different prosodic groupings of the same list of coordinated names either with or without an internal IPB after the second name, that is, [Moni und Lilli] [und Manu] or [Moni und Lilli und Manu]. The boundary marking was systematically varied with respect to single prosodic cues or specific cue combinations. Results revealed that six- and eight-month-old German-learning infants successfully detect the internal prosodic boundary when it is signaled by all the three main boundary cues pitch change, final lengthening, and pause. For eight-, but not for six-month-olds, the combination of pitch change and final lengthening, without the occurrence of a pause, is sufficient. This mirrors an adult-like perception by eight-months (Holzgrefe-Lang et al., 2016). Six-month-olds detect a prosodic phrase boundary signaled by final lengthening and pause. The findings suggest a developmental change in German prosodic boundary cue perception from a strong reliance on the pause cue at six months to a differentiated sensitivity to the more subtle cues pitch change and final lengthening at eight months. Neither for six- nor for eight-month-olds the occurrence of pitch change or final lengthening as single cues is sufficient, similar to what has been observed for adult speakers of German (Holzgrefe-Lang et al., 2016). The present dissertation provides new scientific knowledge on infants' sensitivity to individual prosodic phrase boundary cues in the first year of life. Methodologically, the studies are pathbreaking since they used exactly the same stimulus materials - phonologically thoroughly controlled lists of names - that have also been used with adults (Holzgrefe-Lang et al., 2016) and with infants in a neurophysiological paradigm (Holzgrefe-Lang, Wellmann, H{\"o}hle, \& Wartenburger, 2018), allowing for comparisons across age (six/ eight months and adults) and method (behavioral vs. neurophysiological methods). Moreover, materials are suited to be transferred to other languages allowing for a crosslinguistic comparison. Taken together with a study with similar French materials (van Ommen et al., 2020) the observed change in sensitivity in German-learning infants can be interpreted as a language-specific one, from an initial language-general processing mechanism that primarily focuses on the presence of pauses to a language-specific processing that takes into account prosodic properties available in the ambient language. The developmental pattern is discussed as an interplay of acoustic salience, prosodic typology (prosodic regularity) and cue reliability.}, language = {en} }