Predictability Associated With Reduction in Phonetic Signals Without Semantics-The Case of Glossolalia

Overview

Journal Lang Speech

Specialty Otorhinolaryngology

Date 2023 Apr 18

PMID 37070153

Authors

Samantha Link

Fabian Tomaschek

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Glossolalia can be regarded as an instance of speech production in which practitioners produce syllables in seemingly random sequences. However, a closer inspection of glossalalia's statistical properties reveals that sequences show a Zipfian pattern similar to natural languages, with some syllables being more probable than others. It is well established that statistical properties of sequences are implicitly learned, and that these statistical properties correlate with changes in kinematic and speech behavior. For speech, this means that more predictable items are phonetically shorter. Accordingly, we hypothesized for glossolalia that if practitioners have learned a serial pattern in glossolalia in the same manner as in natural languages, its statistical properties should correlate with its phonetic characteristics. Our hypothesis was supported. We find significantly shorter syllables associated with higher syllable probabilities in glossolalia. We discuss this finding in relation to theories about the sources of probability-related changes in the speech signal.

References

Roelofs A . The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production. Cognition. 1998; 64(3):249-84. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(97)00027-9. View

Arnold D, Tomaschek F, Sering K, Lopez F, Baayen R . Words from spontaneous conversational speech can be recognized with human-like accuracy by an error-driven learning algorithm that discriminates between meanings straight from smart acoustic features, bypassing the phoneme as recognition unit. PLoS One. 2017; 12(4):e0174623. PMC: 5386243. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174623. View

Newberg A, Wintering N, Morgan D, Waldman M . The measurement of regional cerebral blood flow during glossolalia: a preliminary SPECT study. Psychiatry Res. 2006; 148(1):67-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2006.07.001. View

Samarin W . Glossolalia as regressive speech. Lang Speech. 1973; 16(1):77-89. DOI: 10.1177/002383097301600108. View

Jaeger T . Redundancy and reduction: speakers manage syntactic information density. Cogn Psychol. 2010; 61(1):23-62. PMC: 2896231. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.02.002. View

Falkauskas K, Kuperman V . When experience meets language statistics: Individual variability in processing English compound words. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2015; 41(6):1607-27. PMC: 4630144. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000132. View

Casillas J . Phonetic Category Formation is Perceptually Driven During the Early Stages of Adult L2 Development. Lang Speech. 2019; 63(3):550-581. DOI: 10.1177/0023830919866225. View

Tomaschek F, Arnold D, Sering K, Tucker B, van Rij J, Ramscar M . Articulatory Variability is Reduced by Repetition and Predictability. Lang Speech. 2020; 64(3):654-680. DOI: 10.1177/0023830920948552. View

Gay T . Effect of speaking rate on vowel formant movements. J Acoust Soc Am. 1978; 63(1):223-30. DOI: 10.1121/1.381717. View

10.

Saffran J, Aslin R, Newport E . Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science. 1996; 274(5294):1926-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.274.5294.1926. View

11.

Wright C . Duration differences between rare and common words and their implications for the interpretation of word frequency effects. Mem Cognit. 1979; 7(6):411-9. DOI: 10.3758/bf03198257. View

12.

HOWARD Jr J, Mutter S, Howard D . Serial pattern learning by event observation. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992; 18(5):1029-39. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.18.5.1029. View

13.

Burki A, Pellet Cheneval P, Laganaro M . Do speakers have access to a mental syllabary? ERP comparison of high frequency and novel syllable production. Brain Lang. 2015; 150:90-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2015.08.006. View

14.

Levelt W, Roelofs A, Meyer A . A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behav Brain Sci. 2001; 22(1):1-38; discussion 38-75. DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x99001776. View

15.

Linke M, Ramscar M . How the Probabilistic Structure of Grammatical Context Shapes Speech. Entropy (Basel). 2020; 22(1). PMC: 7516525. DOI: 10.3390/e22010090. View

16.

Cholin J, Levelt W, Schiller N . Effects of syllable frequency in speech production. Cognition. 2005; 99(2):205-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.009. View

17.

Dell G . A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychol Rev. 1986; 93(3):283-321. View

18.

Lebedev S, Tsui W, Van Gelder P . Drawing Movements as an Outcome of the Principle of Least Action. J Math Psychol. 2001; 45(1):43-52. DOI: 10.1006/jmps.1999.1287. View

19.

Keri S, Kallai I, Csigo K . Enhanced Verbal Statistical Learning in Glossolalia. Cogn Sci. 2020; 44(7):e12865. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12865. View

20.

Gay T . Articulatory movements in VCV sequences. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977; 62(1):183-93. DOI: 10.1121/1.381480. View