Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm Universityand between low and low rising tone in the contrast[ka1]-[ka4]. Although the two tonal contrastsmust be considered nonnative to Swedishinfants, non-Thai listeners in general seem torely on complex acoustic variables when tryingto discriminate tone (Burnham et al., 1996),which therefore makes it difficult to predict thediscrimination of tonal contrast change.After recording, all speech stimuli were presentedto an expert panel consisting of two Thainative speakers and one trained phonetician inorder to select the three best exemplars perstimulus type out of ten (see Table 1 for variationof utterance duration between the selectedexemplars).Table 1. The table shows utterance duration in msfor all selected exemplars per stimulus type andaverage duration in ms per stimulus type (Thai toneis demarcated by number).b̬ a0 ba0 p h a0 da0 d̬ a0 ta h 0 ka1 ka2 ka41 606 576 667 632 533 607 613 550 5352 626 525 646 634 484 528 558 502 5383 629 534 629 599 508 585 593 425 502M 620 545 647 622 508 573 588 492 525Within each trial, the first contrast of each pairwas repeated two to five times until the secondcontrast was presented twice after a brief interstimulusinterval of 300 ms. Each stimulus type(native consonantal, nonnative consonantal,nonnative tonal) was presented twelve timeswithin a block. Within each block, there were36 change trials and nine no-change trials. Achange trial repeated identical exemplars for thefirst contrast and then presented the identicalexemplar of the second contrast twice. A nochangetrial had identical first and secondsound exemplars, presented randomly betweenfour and seven times. A completed experimentconsisted of three blocks à 145 trials.EquipmentThe EEG recordings took place in a radiationinsulatednear-soundproof test chamber at thePhonetics Lab at Stockholm University.Infant brain activation was measured byEGI Geodesic Hydrocel GSN Sensor nets with124 electrodes on the infant net sizes. These nettypes permit EEG measurement without requiringgel application which makes them particularlycompatible with infant research; potassiumchloride and generic baby shampoo serveas conductive lubricants instead. All electrodeimpedances were kept below 50 kΩ at measurementonset. All EEG channel data was amplifiedwith an EGI NetAmps 300 amplifier andrecorded with a sampling rate of one sampleevery 4 ms. The program Netstation 4.2.1 wasused to record and analyse the ERPs.The stimuli were presented with KOSSloudspeakers, mounted at a distance of about100 cm in front of the child. The volume wasset to 55 dB at the source. The experiment wasprogrammed and controlled by the e-prime 1.2software.ProcedureAll infant participants were seated in their parent’slap, facing a TV screen on which silencedshort cartoon movie clips played during the experimentto entertain the infants and keep themas motionless as possible. The infants werepermitted to eat, breastfeed, sleep, as well assuck on dummies or other objects during stimulusexposure.Dependent on the randomisation of the firstcontrast between two and five repetitions, theduration of the entire experiment varied between10 and 13 min. Infant and parent behaviourwas monitored through an observer windowand the experiment was aborted in the caseof increasing infant fussiness - this happened inone case after 8 min of stimulus exposure.Data treatmentThe EEG recordings were filtered with a bandpassfilter of 0.3 to 50 Hz and clipped into 1000ms windows starting at the onset of the secondcontrast. These windows were then cleanedfrom all 10 ms segments during which the ERPcurve changed faster than 200 µV to removemeasurement artefacts caused by body movementand eye blinks. If more than 80% of thesegments of one single electrode were markedas artefacts, the entire data from that electrodewas not included in the average.ResultsIn accordance with other infant speech perceptionERP studies (e.g., Friederici et al., 2007),the international 10-20 electrode system wasselected to structure the EEG data. Within thissystem, the analysis focused on electrode T3,situated at the temporal lobe in the left hemisphere,as MMN in 8-month-old infants haspreviously been found to be largest in T3 (Panget al., 1998).132
Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityComparing native and nonnative consonantalcontrast change trials, the curve for [ba]-[p h a] and [da]-[t h a] that are contrastive both inThai and in Swedish shows a dip between 200and 350 ms (Figure 1).µVFigure 1. The graph compares the ERPs for the nativeand nonnative consonantal contrast change trialsduring 1000 ms after stimulus onset of the secondcontrast. The ERP for the native conditionshows mismatch negativity in µV between 200 and350 ms, typical for the discrimination of auditorychange. The ERP for the nonnative condition howeveronly shows a stable continuation of the curve.This negativity response is mismatch negativityand at the same time a sign that the 10-montholdsdiscriminated the contrast change. It peaksat 332 ms with -6.3 µV.µVFigure 2. The graph shows the ERPs for the nonnativetonal change and no-change trials in µV during1000 ms after stimulus onset of the second contrast(which is of course identical to the first in the nochangecondition). No mismatch negativity can beobserved in either condition.msmsHowever, the curve for [b̬ a]-[ba] and [d̬ a]-[da]that are contrastive in Thai, but not in Swedish,shows no negativity response. The infants werenot able to detect the contrast change in thenonnative consonantal condition, as the flatgraph indicates. The two curves differ significantlybetween 200 and 350 ms (p
Page 1 and 2:
Department of LinguisticsProceeding
Page 3 and 4:
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 127 and 128: Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 131: Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227:
Department of LinguisticsPhonetics
show all

Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?