» Articles » PMID: 18391198

Language Universals in Human Brains

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2008 Apr 9
PMID 18391198
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Do speakers know universal restrictions on linguistic elements that are absent from their language? We report an experimental test of this question. Our case study concerns the universal restrictions on initial consonant sequences, onset clusters (e.g., bl in block). Across languages, certain onset clusters (e.g., lb) are dispreferred (e.g., systematically under-represented) relative to others (e.g., bl). We demonstrate such preferences among Korean speakers, whose language lacks initial C(1)C(2) clusters altogether. Our demonstration exploits speakers' well known tendency to misperceive ill-formed clusters. We show that universally dispreferred onset clusters are more frequently misperceived than universally preferred ones, indicating that Korean speakers consider the former cluster-type more ill-formed. The misperception of universally ill-formed clusters is unlikely to be due to a simple auditory failure. Likewise, the aversion of universally dispreferred onsets by Korean speakers is not explained by English proficiency or by several phonetic and phonological properties of Korean. We conclude that language universals are neither relics of language change nor are they artifacts of generic limitations on auditory perception and motor control-they reflect universal linguistic knowledge, active in speakers' brains.

Citing Articles

Sensitivity to the sonority sequencing principle in rats (Rattus norvegicus).

Santolin C, Crespo-Bojorque P, Sebastian-Galles N, Toro J Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):17036.

PMID: 37813950 PMC: 10562444. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44081-y.


Phonetic categorization relies on motor simulation, but combinatorial phonological computations are abstract.

Berent I, Fried P, Theodore R, Manning D, Pascual-Leone A Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):874.

PMID: 36650234 PMC: 9845317. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-28099-w.


How the hand has shaped sign languages.

Miozzo M, Peressotti F Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):11980.

PMID: 35831441 PMC: 9279340. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-15699-1.


Is Phonology Embodied? Evidence from Mechanical Stimulation.

Berent I, Platt M J Psycholinguist Res. 2022; 51(3):597-626.

PMID: 35366747 PMC: 8976511. DOI: 10.1007/s10936-022-09871-x.


Sonority as a Phonological Cue in Early Perception of Written Syllables in French.

Tossonian M, Ferrand L, Lucas O, Berthon M, Maionchi-Pino N Front Psychol. 2020; 11:558443.

PMID: 33178067 PMC: 7593649. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.558443.


References
1.
Berent I, Steriade D, Lennertz T, Vaknin V . What we know about what we have never heard: evidence from perceptual illusions. Cognition. 2006; 104(3):591-630. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.015. View

2.
Pinker S, Jackendoff R . The faculty of language: what's special about it?. Cognition. 2005; 95(2):201-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.004. View

3.
Hauser M, Chomsky N, Fitch W . The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?. Science. 2002; 298(5598):1569-79. DOI: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1569. View

4.
McClelland J, Patterson K . Rules or connections in past-tense inflections: what does the evidence rule out?. Trends Cogn Sci. 2002; 6(11):465-472. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01993-9. View

5.
Prince A, Smolensky P . Optimality: from neural networks to universal grammar. Science. 1997; 275(5306):1604-10. DOI: 10.1126/science.275.5306.1604. View