Phoneme and syllable frequency effects in the errors of aphasic patients:
Syllables are structures not 'chunks'
-
1
Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, United Kingdom
-
2
Fondazione Santa Lucia, i.r.c.s.s., Italy
-
3
University of Plymouth, School of Psychology, United Kingdom
Background
The importance of syllables for speech production is recognized, but what kind of units syllables are is controversial. Some argue that they are content units or chunks, with each syllable having its own independent representations (e.g., Ferrand et al., 1997; Levelt et al., 1999), others that they are only structural units (e.g., Romani et al., 2011). Effects of syllable frequency have been used to argue for the first position, but results have been inconsistent because of the difficulty of separating syllable and phoneme frequency (e.g., Cholin et al., 2006; Laganaro, 2008).
Method
We looked at phoneme and syllable frequency in a corpus of errors made by aphasic patients in word repetition, word reading and picture naming. The patients were subdivided into an apraxic (N=11) and a phonological group (N=10), based on a number of characteristics including high rates of phonetic errors and phonological simplifications in the apraxic group, but not in the phonological group (e.g., Galluzzi et al., 2015).
We considered: 1. average phoneme and syllable frequency of target words and corresponding errors; 2. number of errors which increased vs. decreased frequency; 3. frequency of real errors compared to frequency of pseudo-errors obtained by recombining consonant phonemes produced in errors --across the whole group of patients-- with new targets.
Results
The apraxic group showed positive effects of phoneme frequency. Errors had a higher frequency than their targets (see Table 1) and more errors increased than decreased frequency (1353 vs. 954; 2=35.2; p<.001). The real errors had significant higher phoneme frequency than the pseudo-errors. Effects of syllable frequency, instead, were absent or in the wrong direction (N errors increasing vs. decreasing frequency 1062 vs. 1248; 2=7.5; p<.001).
The phonological group showed positive effects of phoneme frequency, but paradoxical effects of syllable frequency. When we only considered single consonant substitutions, errors had a significant lower syllable frequency in repetition and reading (see Table 1). When all types of errors were considered, this effect was significant across all tasks. Fewer errors increased rather than decreased syllable frequency (across all tasks: 410 vs. 570; 2=13.2; p<.001). Real errors had significant lower syllable frequency than the pseudo-errors.
Across groups, pseudo-errors showed evidence of decreasing syllable frequency compared to targets.
Conclusions
Positive effects of phoneme frequency in apraxic patients are expected. Frequent phonemes will be more practised and easier to articulate. In contrast, there were no or paradoxical effects of syllable frequency, especially in the phonological group (see also Stemberger, 1991). This likely due to two facts: 1. the phonological patients had no preference to produce phonemes of higher frequency; 2.when phonemes are semi-randomly substituted, the outcome is likely to be of lower frequency because real words will use relatively frequent syllables. These results do not support the hypothesis that syllable units are stored and strung together in production. If this were the case, syllables of higher frequency should be produced in error more often than syllables of lower frequency, which we did not find.
References
Cholin, J., Levelt, WJM, & Schiller, NO (2011). Effects of syllable frequency in speech production, Cognition, 99,2, 205-235.
Galluzzi, C., Bureca, I., Guariglia, C., and Romani, C. (2015). Phonological simplifications, apraxia of speech and the interaction between phonological and phonetic processing. Neuropsychologia, 71, 64-83.
Laganaro, M. (2008). Is there a syllable frequency effect in aphasia or in apraxia of speech or both? Aphasiology, 22(11), 1191-1200.
Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75.
Romani C., Galluzzi C., Bureca I., and Olson, A. (2011). Effects of syllable structure in aphasic errors: Implications for a new model of speech production. Cognitive Psychology, 62, 151-192.
Stemberger, J. P. (1991). Apparent anti-frequency effects in language production: The addition bias and phonological underspecification. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 161-185.
Keywords:
Syllable frequency,
Phoneme frequency,
Error analyses,
conduction aphasia,
apraxia of speech
Conference:
54th Annual Academy of Aphasia Meeting, Llandudno, United Kingdom, 16 Oct - 18 Oct, 2016.
Presentation Type:
Platform Sessions
Topic:
Academy of Aphasia
Citation:
Romani
C,
Galluzzi
C and
Goslin
J
(2016). Phoneme and syllable frequency effects in the errors of aphasic patients:
Syllables are structures not 'chunks'.
Front. Psychol.
Conference Abstract:
54th Annual Academy of Aphasia Meeting.
doi: 10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2016.68.00111
Copyright:
The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers.
They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.
The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.
Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.
For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.
Received:
30 Apr 2016;
Published Online:
15 Aug 2016.
*
Correspondence:
Dr. Cristina Romani, Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom, C.Romani@aston.ac.uk