Incidental Visual Experience Affects Language Processing: An ERP Study

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf A. Zwaan ◽  
Leonora C. Coppens ◽  
Liselotte Gootjes
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Visual Experience

Previous visual experience affects aspects of later language processing

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Vandeberg ◽  
Wing Y. Tang ◽  
Rolf A. Zwaan
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Visual Experience

scholarly journals Modelling Form-Meaning Systematicity with Linguistic and Visual Features

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (05) ◽  
pp. 8870-8877
Author(s):  
Arie Soeteman ◽  
Dario Gutierrez ◽  
Elia Bruni ◽  
Ekaterina Shutova
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Visual Experience ◽  
Word Meaning ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Visual Features ◽  
Multimodal Approach ◽  
Word Form ◽  
Word Meanings ◽  
Textual Data ◽  
Existing Data

Several studies in linguistics and natural language processing (NLP) pointed out systematic correspondences between word form and meaning in language. A prominent example of such systematicity is iconicity, which occurs when the form of a word is motivated by some perceptual (e.g. visual) aspect of its referent. However, the existing data-driven approaches to form-meaning systematicity modelled word meanings relying on information extracted from textual data alone. In this paper, we investigate to what extent our visual experience explains some of the form-meaning systematicity found in language. We construct word meaning representations from linguistic as well as visual data and analyze the structure and significance of form-meaning systematicity found in English using these models. Our findings corroborate the existence of form-meaning systematicity and show that this systematicity is concentrated in localized clusters. Furthermore, applying a multimodal approach allows us to identify new patterns of systematicity that have not been previously identified with the text-based models.

Language processing is not a race against time

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giosuè Baggio ◽  
Carmelo M. Vicario
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Human Brain ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Functions ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Language System ◽  
Moderating Factors

AbstractWe agree with Christiansen & Chater (C&C) that language processing and acquisition are tightly constrained by the limits of sensory and memory systems. However, the human brain supports a range of cognitive functions that mitigate the effects of information processing bottlenecks. The language system is partly organised around these moderating factors, not just around restrictions on storage and computation.

Cognitive Processing of Miscommunication in Interactive Listening: An Evaluation of Listener Indecision and Cognitive Effort

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Roche ◽  
Arkady Zgonnikov ◽  
Laura M. Morett
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Mouse Tracking ◽  
Computer Mouse ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Computer Mouse Tracking ◽  
Listening Task ◽  
Processing Effort

Purpose The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the social and cognitive underpinnings of miscommunication during an interactive listening task. Method An eye and computer mouse–tracking visual-world paradigm was used to investigate how a listener's cognitive effort (local and global) and decision-making processes were affected by a speaker's use of ambiguity that led to a miscommunication. Results Experiments 1 and 2 found that an environmental cue that made a miscommunication more or less salient impacted listener language processing effort (eye-tracking). Experiment 2 also indicated that listeners may develop different processing heuristics dependent upon the speaker's use of ambiguity that led to a miscommunication, exerting a significant impact on cognition and decision making. We also found that perspective-taking effort and decision-making complexity metrics (computer mouse tracking) predict language processing effort, indicating that instances of miscommunication produced cognitive consequences of indecision, thinking, and cognitive pull. Conclusion Together, these results indicate that listeners behave both reciprocally and adaptively when miscommunications occur, but the way they respond is largely dependent upon the type of ambiguity and how often it is produced by the speaker.

Bayesian Speech and Language Processing

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Watanabe ◽  
Jen-Tzung Chien
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Speech And Language Processing

Miscellaneous Studies in Language Processing

1985 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-44
Author(s):  
J. Kathryn Bock
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing

In Search of a Human Language Processing System

1985 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 529-531
Author(s):  
Patrick Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Processing System ◽  
Human Language

Prediction during Situated Language Processing

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Joergensen ◽  
G. T. Altmann
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document