Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- speech (2) (remove)
Institute
Language and music share many rhythmic properties, such as variations in intensity and duration leading to repeating patterns. Perception of rhythmic properties may rely on cognitive networks that are shared between the two domains. If so, then variability in speech rhythm perception may relate to individual differences in musicality. To examine this possibility, the present study focuses on rhythmic grouping, which is assumed to be guided by a domain-general principle, the Iambic/Trochaic law, stating that sounds alternating in intensity are grouped as strong-weak, and sounds alternating in duration are grouped as weak-strong. German listeners completed a grouping task: They heard streams of syllables alternating in intensity, duration, or neither, and had to indicate whether they perceived a strong-weak or weak-strong pattern. Moreover, their music perception abilities were measured, and they filled out a questionnaire reporting their productive musical experience. Results showed that better musical rhythm perception - ability was associated with more consistent rhythmic grouping of speech, while melody perception - ability and productive musical experience were not. This suggests shared cognitive procedures in the perception of rhythm in music and speech. Also, the results highlight the relevance of - considering individual differences in musicality when aiming to explain variability in prosody perception.
Is there an ideal time window for language acquisition after which nativelike
representation and processing are unattainable? Although this question has
been heavily debated, no consensus has been reached. Here, we present
evidence for a sensitive period in language development and show that it is
specific to grammar. We conducted a masked priming task with a group of
Turkish-German bilinguals and examined age of acquisition (AoA) effects on
the processing of complex words. We compared a subtle but meaningful
linguistic contrast, that between grammatical inflection and lexical-based
derivation. The results showed a highly selective AoA effect on inflectional
(but not derivational) priming. In addition, the effect displayed a discontinuity
indicative of a sensitive period: Priming from inflected forms was nativelike
when acquisition started before the age of 5 but declined with increasing
AoA. We conclude that the acquisition of morphological rules expressing
morphosyntactic properties is constrained by maturational factors.