MIT CogNet, The Brain Sciences ConnectionFrom the MIT Press, Link to Online Catalog
SPARC Communities
Subscriber : Stanford University Libraries » LOG IN

space

Powered By Google 
Advanced Search

 

Who do you love, your mother or your horse? Tone processing in Mandarin Chinese: An Event-Related Brain Potential Analysis

 Sarah Brown-Schmidt and Enriqueta Canseco-Gonzalez
  
 

Abstract:
One of the best described brain potentials related to language processing is the N400 component. The N400 reflects a word's expectancy and degree of association with its context. Presentation of any word will generally elicit an N400, but less associated and less expected words tend to elicit N400s with larger amplitudes (e.g. Kutas, 1993; Kutas & Hillyard, 1984). Some authors have proposed that N400 can be elicited by factors other than semantic expectation. For example, presentation of the second word of a non-rhyming pair (in contrast with a rhyming word) elicits a late negative component termed N450 (Rugg, 1984). Rugg concludes that the N450 belongs to the same family as N400 but instead reflects processing at the phonological level. Importantly, deviations in familiar melodies, and physical or grammatical anomalies fail to produce the N400 effect (Besson, Maacar, & Pynte, 1984; Kutas, Neville & Holcomb,1987).

In Mandarin Chinese, the lexical tones with which words are pronounced influence word meaning: changing the tone changes the meaning. The present research investigates the processing of tonal information by observing the brain responses elicited by the presentation of erroneous tones in otherwise perfectly grammatical Chinese sentences. ERPs were obtained from twenty-five speakers of Mandarin Chinese during auditory presentation of sentences with normal and anomalous sentence endings. Three different types of semantic anomalies were created by manipulating the tone, syllable, or both tone and syllable of the sentence final words. We hypothesized an N400 effect for all three types of semantic anomalies, and that changing both the tone and the syllable of the expected ending word would elicit the largest negativity. Consistent with previous findings, we found an N400 effect elicited by the three types of semantically anomalous words. The earliest effect had an onset of 200ms post-stimulus and continued through 1000ms in some areas. An analysis of the large 150-1000ms latency window revealed a significant area by condition interaction. Particularly interesting were the effects over Broca's area: contrary to our expectations, the double-anomaly condition elicited responses comparable to the negativity elicited by the tone condition and only slightly more negative than the control condition (p= .0509). Furthermore, this negativity was significantly smaller than that elicited by the syllable anomaly. Smaller N400 effects for the tone condition are not alarming, considering that tone errors are not always noticed (see Cutler, 1997). Although the smaller N400 effect for the double anomaly was somewhat surprising, a possible account for this finding is that the N400 effect may be a reflection of a differential expectancy developed for each type of anomaly based on the amount of word-initial phonological and semantic information. More specifically, in the tone and the syllable conditions, the final (anomalous) word shared at least one feature (tone or syllable) with the expected word. In contrast, in the double-anomaly condition, the final (anomalous) word had no information in common with the expected ending. If semantic integration takes place in an incremental manner (Van Petten et. al. 1999), then the initial acoustic information provided by the tone and the syllable conditions may have increased the semantic expectation for the correct ending. The double-anomaly condition in contrast would not benefit from any of this shared acoustic information. The net result would be a smaller N400 effect. This proposal based on phonological activation is discussed in terms of a spreading-activation model such as the one outlined in Dell (1986).

 
 


© 2010 The MIT Press
MIT Logo