» Articles » PMID: 18395705

Does Language Guide Event Perception? Evidence from Eye Movements

Overview
Journal Cognition
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Psychology
Date 2008 Apr 9
PMID 18395705
Citations 35
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Languages differ in how they encode motion. When describing bounded motion, English speakers typically use verbs that convey information about manner (e.g., slide, skip, walk) rather than path (e.g., approach, ascend), whereas Greek speakers do the opposite. We investigated whether this strong cross-language difference influences how people allocate attention during motion perception. We compared eye movements from Greek and English speakers as they viewed motion events while (a) preparing verbal descriptions or (b) memorizing the events. During the verbal description task, speakers' eyes rapidly focused on the event components typically encoded in their native language, generating significant cross-language differences even during the first second of motion onset. However, when freely inspecting ongoing events, as in the memorization task, people allocated attention similarly regardless of the language they speak. Differences between language groups arose only after the motion stopped, such that participants spontaneously studied those aspects of the scene that their language does not routinely encode in verbs. These findings offer a novel perspective on the relation between language and perceptual/cognitive processes. They indicate that attention allocation during event perception is not affected by the perceiver's native language; effects of language arise only when linguistic forms are recruited to achieve the task, such as when committing facts to memory.

Citing Articles

Humans and great apes visually track event roles in similar ways.

Wilson V, Sauppe S, Brocard S, Ringen E, Daum M, Wermelinger S PLoS Biol. 2024; 22(11):e3002857.

PMID: 39591401 PMC: 11593759. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002857.


Culture shapes how we describe facial expressions.

Wnuk E, Wodowski J Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):21589.

PMID: 39284841 PMC: 11405906. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-72432-w.


Asymmetries in encoding event roles: Evidence from language and cognition.

Unal E, Wilson F, Trueswell J, Papafragou A Cognition. 2024; 250:105868.

PMID: 38959638 PMC: 11358469. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105868.


Does pain hurt more in Spanish? The neurobiology of pain among Spanish-English bilingual adults.

Gianola M, Llabre M, Reynolds Losin E Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2023; 19(1).

PMID: 38102223 PMC: 10868134. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsad074.


The Language Network Is Recruited but Not Required for Nonverbal Event Semantics.

Ivanova A, Mineroff Z, Zimmerer V, Kanwisher N, Varley R, Fedorenko E Neurobiol Lang (Camb). 2023; 2(2):176-201.

PMID: 37216147 PMC: 10158592. DOI: 10.1162/nol_a_00030.


References
1.
Allen S, Ozyurek A, Kita S, Brown A, Furman R, Ishizuka T . Language-specific and universal influences in children's syntactic packaging of Manner and Path: a comparison of English, Japanese, and Turkish. Cognition. 2006; 102(1):16-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.12.006. View

2.
Gleitman L, January D, Nappa R, Trueswell J . On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. J Mem Lang. 2008; 57(4):544-569. PMC: 2151743. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.007. View

3.
Conrad R, Hull A . INFORMATION, ACOUSTIC CONFUSION AND MEMORY SPAN. Br J Psychol. 1964; 55:429-32. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1964.tb00928.x. View

4.
Griffin Z . Gaze durations during speech reflect word selection and phonological encoding. Cognition. 2001; 82(1):B1-14. PMC: 5130081. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00138-x. View

5.
Meyer A, Sleiderink A, Levelt W . Viewing and naming objects: eye movements during noun phrase production. Cognition. 1998; 66(2):B25-33. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00009-2. View