Abstract
The temporal dynamics by which linguistic information becomes available is one of the key properties to understand how language is organized in the brain. An unresolved debate between different brain language models is whether words, the building blocks of language, are activated in a sequential or parallel manner. In this study, we approached this issue from a novel perspective by directly comparing the time course of word component activation in speech production versus perception. In an overt object naming task and a passive listening task, we analyzed with mixed linear models at the single-trial level the event-related brain potentials elicited by the same lexico-semantic and phonological word knowledge in the two language modalities. Results revealed that both word components manifested simultaneously as early as 75 ms after stimulus onset in production and perception; differences between the language modalities only became apparent after 300 ms of processing. The data provide evidence for ultra-rapid parallel dynamics of language processing and are interpreted within a neural assembly framework where words recruit the same integrated cell assemblies across production and perception. These word assemblies ignite early on in parallel and only later on reverberate in a behavior-specific manner.
Highlights
Language behavior concerns a complex, multi-component process where different linguistic representations need to be retrieved and merged together in order to produce and perceive communicative signals
Including “language modality” as variable to assess the cortical activation time course of different linguistic components has a marked advantage compared to prior spatiotemporal research in word production and perception done in isolation: It allows us to assess time course from a different perspective, which removes both the problem of physical variance and the conceptual problem of whether “fast” equals “parallel.” This is because the relevant dimension for testing the hypotheses becomes the “relative” time course of the sequence of events between the language modalities, rather than the exact, absolute value of when a linguistic component becomes active within each behavior. This feature of our design is crucial in order to reliably compare two different language modalities, which rely on two different inputs: 1) by contrasting “effects” between modalities, rather than modalities per se, we reduce physical variance between the modalities; 2) the relevant contrast for testing the hypotheses in this experiment between sequential and parallel dynamics is whether the two manipulated word components display the same or a different temporal structure between modalities, regardless of when that temporal structure emerges within each modality
high word frequency (HWF) items were responded to descriptively faster than low word frequency (LWF) items (Mhigh = 964.81, SD = 368.1; Mlow = 1032.67, SD = 401.2), whereas there was no difference between high phonotactic frequency (HPF) and low phonotactic frequency (LPF) items (Mhigh = 997.67, SD = 391.4; Mlow = 996.89, SD = 379.7)
Summary
Language behavior concerns a complex, multi-component process where different linguistic representations (semantic, lexical, syntactic, and phonological knowledge) need to be retrieved and merged together in order to produce and perceive communicative signals. Though, the debate concerning the temporal dynamics in brain language models exists both for speech production and speech perception, even though traditionally these modalities have been studied separately (Price 2012) This shared debate (but separated approach) is interesting because directly contrasting the time course of language processing between the production and perception of words could circumvent the abovementioned conceptual problems and provide novel and more explicit insights into how our brain computes language in time. This is because a sequential model predicts the reverse temporal dynamics between the production and perception of words, while a parallel model predicts the same, simultaneous onset of word components across the language modalities. In the current study, we systematically contrasted the event-related brain potentials (ERPs) elicited at the single-trial level by lexicosemantic and phonological word knowledge in both production and perception
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
