The Event Related Potential Profiling of Consonants and Vowels Across Rule Learning Task Through Auditory Stimuli

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2457650/v1

Download PDF

Article

The Event Related Potential Profiling of Consonants and Vowels Across Rule Learning Task Through Auditory Stimuli

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2457650/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

The hypotheses that “consonants are preferentially used during lexical access” and “vowels trigger a response associated with learning rules of abstraction during the neural processing of language in a rule learning task” were evaluated and assessed by analysing patterned Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) [of early component(P50), mismatched negativity (MMN) and N400 waveforms] on presentation of trisyllabic auditory non-sense word stimuli of three consonant-vowel transitions (CVCVCV) rule in an oddball paradigm. The three stimuli engaged in the present study included standard stimuli of ABB rule (applicable on vowels in vowel condition and on consonants in consonant condition) and two deviant stimuli types were constructed of novel phonemes namely, phoneme deviant with same ABB rule but different phonemes and rule deviant of ABA exemplar along with different phonemes. The ERP response triggered by violation of rule implemented over consonants (across phoneme and rule deviant stimuli archetypal linguistics constructions) exhibited significant change in ERP profiling in amplitude and latency, when evaluated comparatively with that of standard stimuli and vowel condition generated significant ERP changes in both amplitude and latency only on rule deviant epitome (vis-à-vis standard stimuli). Such a selective and differential neural dynamical response in ERP profiles posits the fundamental underpinnings of unitary primal signatural constituents of neurolinguistics namely, vowels and consonants, with vowels initiating the process of abstraction of principle rule associated with neural processing of language and consonants commencing the process of lexicon access.

Biological sciences/Neuroscience

Biological sciences/Physiology

Health sciences/Medical research

Event related potential

Vowels

Consonants

Language processing

Rule abstraction

Language intrinsically has seemingly volved in human across quantal genesis of phonemes and syllables through the use of unitary building blocks of vowels and consonants. Syllables are smallest unit of spoken language and vowels act as a nucleus/nidus/seeding stimulus with or without the presence of a consonant, and are primarily responsible for generation of a meaningful word. Phonemes represent range of sounds, abstracted from continuous stream of speech that are characteristically distinct from one another with the distinctive role of distinguishing and singularizing one word from the other word¹. The ontogenetic evolution of language characterises appearance of vowels on the human mind landscape with their vocalization early in infancy followed by the developmental façade of consonants, since more complex neural mechanisms (inclusive of sensorial, mirror neuronal system and motor neuronal system) are employed for production of consonants sounds as compared to that of vowels².

Consonants and vowels are two different phonological categorical entities requiring distinctive articulatory and neurophysiological mechanistic qualia. The neural dynamical response to the appearance of consonants on the stochastic trajectorial phase-space of human mind is early and is differentially placed along the categorical consonants (fricatives, nasals, plosives, affricates, nasals) as compared to the neural dynamics of vowels and the nuclear vowels brush the words with qualia of rhythm and prosody. The neuropsychological and neurophysiological evidences support the premise of differential neuronal loci within the human brain dedicated to underlying neural processes responsible for genesis of consonants and vowels^3–7.

Several speech processing theories posit the presence and involvement of multiple modular discrete and dedicated neuronal pools subserving the neurophysiological precept of speech and language comprehension, inclusive of both the frontal and temporal lobes of both cerebral hemispheres. The two important and primary areas involved in language processing and speech production are Wernicke’s area for comprehension of language through audition and, Broca’s area for tangible and synthesised neural algorithm of language production through the motor mechanisms of vocal apparatus which receives the mirror neural inputs from the interfacial mirror neuron system (MNS), that is primarily responsible for inscription of the mirror neural image of the algorithmic motor response⁸. The complex intricate operations of working human brain seem to be primarily performed in the left hemisphere region and usually the right auditory area predominantly processes linguistic accents in right-handed adults while syllable difference involving vowel and consonants are processed in the left auditory area. Such a singular lateralization has been termed as “functional hemispheric lateralization”⁹. The other cortical structures involved in speech perceptions include the penumbra areas surrounding primary area of auditory cortex. It has been demonstrated by various researchers that anterior and lateral parts of superior temporal gyrus (STG) and superior temporal sulcus (STS) are activated more rigorously by meaningful speech sounds than by non-speech noise or pseudo-speech of a similar acoustic^10–13, an observation that suggest the presence of an extant primate filtering fine-tuned neural mechanism of betrothed and bootstrapped on-centre/off-surround and off-centre/on-surround phenomenology. However, the specific cerebral area of said anterior–lateral areas that are neural representative of abstract and categorical representations of speech sounds need further evaluation wherein Okada et al in 2010¹⁴ proposed that neuronal pools subservient primarily to posterior STG/STS seem to represent the neurophysiological precept of phonetic– phonological processing, though others propose the presence of a distributed network of neuronal pools that seems to cross-talk across space and time (the network theory) working along the framework of modular neural architectonics. Such a model of distributed dynamically evolving neuronal network seemingly is robust facilitating cognitive abilities of an individual¹⁵. The Mirror Neuron System (MNS) and synaptic neuroplasticity is observed to play a pivotal role in evolving the mechanism of spoken and written languages in the model of distributed neuronal pools wherein, MNS plays an interface between the qualia of sensorium and motor system of the intricately woven Human Mind and MNS activation initiates neural image formation across virtual stochastic trajectorial phase-space of the human mind so evolved by baseline reverberating chaotic neural dynamics, through neurophysiological precept of memory¹⁵. It has been documented that dysfunctional Mirror Neuron System induces disorders of social intelligence and interference in neural process of language acquisition^15,16. Obleser & Kotz (2010)¹⁷ hypothesized that local activation patterns providing segregation of acoustic–phonetic features occur most frequently in higher areas of auditory cortex¹⁸. Though the emergence of advanced in vivo neuroimaging methods has also redefined the understanding of brain function with a shift from traditional localizationist exclusive models of Wernicke and Broca to more complex and widely distributed complex neural networks, providing new insight into cortical neural dynamics of human language¹⁹. Furthermore, the data from brain stimulation studies have also challenged the modular view of neural basis of language and has proposed a parallel segregated but interconnected large-scale cortico-subcortical dynamical neural networks underlying semantic, phonological and syntactic of language processing being served by distinct neural sub-circuitry giving way to anatomic boundary constraints. This model explains the double dissociation during processing different aspects of language as in different phonemic categories (vowels and consonants), semantics versus phonemic paraphasias and syntactic versus naming disturbances²⁰. Reviewing insights gained from intraoperative direct electrostimulation mapping and real-time behavioral monitoring combined with perioperative neuropsychological and neuroimaging techniques have highlighted the interplay within and between neural network circuitry conceptualising meta- network paradigm (network of network fractals) and have emphasized that neuroplasticity is in fact limited by subcortical connectivity and white-matter anatomy. Adapting this meta- networking model involving heteromodal cortices and/or the white matter connectivity offers a better appreciation of behavioral and more complex cognitive functions of human brain²⁰.

While understanding processing of language with respect to different phonetic classes, several neuropsychological studies through inputs from functional magnetic resonance imaging suggest differential functional involvement of varied distributed neuronal pool systems, spread across space and time, while processing consonants and vowels, the unitary primal essence and building blocks in any language. This neural processing is conceptually distinct and not inter-dependent in such a way that while representation of one is damaged, the other remains intact^3,21. Other behavioural and electrophysiological studies have also investigated whether the processing of vowel and consonant are differently expressed and abled during neuronal activation pattern or whether they are modulated by task and observations have indeed exemplified the presence of the phenomenology of double dissociation between consonants and vowels.

The analysis of several languages of several different origin suggests that consonants tend to outnumber vowels, making them more important at the lexical level, especially given that vowels also tend to lose the qualia to be distinctive (in unstressed positions, and through the phenomenon of harmony). Therefore, consonants are distinguished predominantly by their quanta, while vowels are distinguished mainly through their respective qualia, as vowels carry much of the prosody/rhythm and subsequently varied languages across the globe got segregated and classified based on the percentage of vowels in the speech stream and the regularity/pattern with which vocalic intervals occur into different rhythmic groups²². The lexical roots, in any language, are formed exclusively by consonants, whereas insertion of vowels define and categorise morphological patterns^23,24,25.

Although previous neuropsychological, electrophysiological and behavioral studies have provided various considerable evidences of the presence of an inherent double, dissociative and distinctive neural processing requirements of and for consonants and vowels, wherein consonantal information are relatively important for lexical processing and vowels are involved in abstraction principles of rule learning processes, most of the studies are designed to focus on the visual paradigms and need a further elaboration with the limitation of delineating the precise structure-function relationships correlates from currently available neuropsychological and electrophysiological investigative tools. However, the initial proposal was mostly concerned with speech, the primary media for language processing and acquisition²⁶. Evidence from the auditory modality in adult experiments is so far mostly indirect²⁷. Moreover, differential consonant and vowel neural processing could more likely be appreciated through paradigms that differentially weight lexico-semantic and phonological/prosodic processing during speech perception and production tasks since both tasks of speech perception and production seem to proceed along similar time correlates. Therefore, current study is designed to provide an insight about the role of vowels and consonants at the phonological level in adults through a rule learning task by auditory stimuli while a trisyllabic auditory non-sense word stimuli with three consonant-vowel transitions (CVCVCV) rule were presented across the oddball paradigm.

The present cross sectional observational comparative study was conducted at Department of Physiology, S.M.S. Medical College and Attached Group of Hospitals, Jaipur, India after obtaining the desired clearance from Institutional Research Review Board and Ethics Committee of the Institution. 60 apparently healthy individuals in the age range of 18 to 35 years from the universe of S.M.S. Medical College and Attached Hospitals, Jaipur participated in the study and were segregated equally into two groups, 30 individuals in the vowel condition (22 males and 8 females, with a mean age of 23.5 years) and 30 individuals in consonant condition (21 males and 9 females with a mean age of 22.96 years). All the methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. All the participants were informed about the procedure before the test and the informed consent was obtained.

Stimuli

The target syllable “ke”, “ku”, “fa”, “fi”, “fe”, “fu”, “la”, “lo”, “li”, “lu”, “ma”, “mo”, “mi”, “mu”, “ra”, “ro” and “ri” were recorded in female voice that is produced with a neutral intonation following the stress syllable “pa”. Moreover, it has been documented that female voice, with inherent advantage of portraying urgency and exigency, is more effective in resolution of sentence recognition and segregation as compared to that of male voice, the distributed amygdaloid-hypothalamic-hippocampal neuronal circuitry (the esoteric limbic system) spicing and flavoring additionally the neural inputs, fine-tuning for the observed better precision and resolution^28,29. The target syllables are extracted and normalized to equate for duration and intensity. Each target syllable is of 330ms duration and each phoneme of the syllable has a fundamental frequency of 240Hz. These target syllables are then combined to construct trisyllabic CVCVCV non-sense words according to the two conditions “Vowel Condition” and “Consonant Condition”, respectively.

Stimuli of Vowel Condition

For the vowel condition, 16 nonsense words were used as standard stimuli that were created by combining the phonemes /k/, /f/, /e/, /u/. The standard stimuli had an ABB rule implemented over the vowels and implementation of such a rule across vowels in the present experimental set-up mandated that the second vowel was repeated while the first one was different, though consonants were ordered randomly. The Deviant Stimuli (324 nonsense words in total) were created by combining phonemes that were not used in standard words namely, /l/, /m/, /r/, /a/, /o/, /i/. Half of the words used as deviant stimuli were Phoneme Deviants and other half were Rule Deviants. The Phoneme Deviants differed from standard stimuli only in their phonemes. As in standard stimuli, vowels were organized following the same rule of ABB in phoneme deviants, while consonants varied randomly placed. Rule deviants differed from standard stimuli in both their phonemes as well as the rule used to organize the vowels. Vowels in the rule deviant stimuli were combined using an ABA rule, such that the first and third vowels were same, while the vowel in the middle were different and consonants varied randomly.

For the behavioural test, 16 test stimuli had been created with the phonemes /f/, /l/, /m/, /a/, /u/, /i/. In half of the test stimuli the vowels followed the standard ABB rule. In the other half, all the vowels were different within a word, thus having an ABC structure that was never presented before. As vowels were arranged following a repetitive structure in standard words, non-repeating vowels within a word presented a good contrasting pattern for the test. None of the test words were used as standard or deviant stimuli during the experiment. The test pairs were chosen such that the only difference between the two items was in their respective vowels.

Stimuli of Consonant Condition

In the Consonant condition, 16 nonsense words were used as standards that were composed by the phonemes /k/, /f/, /e/, /u/ (the same as in the vowel condition). In contrast to the vowel condition, the ABB rule was implemented over the consonants, so the second and third consonants were the same and the first consonant was different, while vowels varied randomly. As in the vowel condition, two types of deviant stimuli were created using the new phonemes /l/, /m/, /r/, /a/, /o/, /i. Half of the deviant stimuli were Phoneme Deviants that had consonants organized in the same ABB rule as standard stimuli. The other half of deviant stimuli were organized such that they follow an ABA rule constituting Rule Deviants applied on consonants in consonant condition.

For the behavioural test, 16 test stimuli were created with phonemes /f/, /l/, /m/, /a/, /u/, /i/. Consonants in half of the test stimuli followed the standard ABB rule while in the other half the consonants were not repeated within a word and thus followed an ABC rule that was never presented during the recording phase. None of the test words was used as standard or deviant stimuli during the experiment and test pairs were chosen such that the only difference between the two items was in their consonants.

In both the condition (Consonant and Vowel condition), stimuli were presented in two blocks, each block having a total of 808 nonsense words. Out of which 608 were standard words and 100 words each belonging to two different classes of deviants that were the Rule Deviant and the Phoneme Deviant respectively. All the 16 standard words of both the conditions were randomly repeated 38 times avoiding immediate repetitions. The deviant probability was set at 0.12 and a deviant stimulus was presented after a minimum of five standard stimuli. The order of presentation of the words was balanced with stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) set at 1500ms.

Procedure

All eligible participant subjects sat comfortably on a wooden chair in a soundproof and a dimly light room as the recording protocol started, while nonsense words were presented through a pair of loudspeakers. The participants were instructed to keep their eyes open with minimal eye blinks and all other motor movement throughout the presentation of stimulus blocks. The stimuli were presented in two blocks with a 2 minutes break between the first and second block. A total of 1616 nonsense words were presented to each subject that is, 808 nonsense words in each block. The deviant probability was set to 0.12. The deviant stimuli were presented after a minimum of five standard stimuli, with duration for each word being 990ms and the following word was presented after a time-gap of 510 ms. Each block had a stimulation time of approximately 21 minutes. The whole experimental session inclusive of electrode mounting and removal extended to around 55 minutes.

After presentation of the two blocks, a two alternatives forced-choice behavioural test was conducted, during which participants had to choose a word from a pairs of novel test words. 8 such pairs were presented depending on the condition namely, consonant or vowel condition. In each trial, the participant subjects were asked to choose which of them is more similar to the stimuli presented during the previous ERP.

The ERP data was recorded using BESS (Brain Electro Scan System) software version 4.0 (Axxonet Systems Technologies Ltd, India). Ag/AgCl surface electrodes soaked in saline water 24 hours prior to the experiment were used to record data. The electrodes were secured on the scalp of participants using a silicon bracket scalp cap according to known anatomical landmarks. 24 Electrodes channels were placed on F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F4, F2, FC2, FC4, C1, C3, CP1, CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4, P1, P3, P5, PO3, P2, P4, P6, and PO4 regions of the scalp according to the International 10/20 System. The reference electrode was applied on the left earlobe and ground electrode was placed at the forehead.

The electrode impedances were fixed at 10 kΩ and electrical activities were amplified using an amplifier. A band pass filter of 0.1 to 30 Hz & notch filters of 50 Hz and 60 Hz were applied in order to remove the electrical line noise and for smoothening of the waveform respectively. The EEG recordings were digitized at a sampling rate of 500 Hz. All the EEG recordings were preceded with running a baseline EEG for few minutes to ensure clean data acquisition. Once the EEG waves stabilized, the stimulus protocol was loaded and the data acquisition was started using the predefined stimulus protocol. Eye blink and other artefacts were manually removed based on visual inspection.

The ERP data was analysed with BESS (Brain Electro Scan System) software version 4.0 (Axxonet Systems Technologies Ltd, India). Epochs of 800 milliseconds duration were extracted from the continuous EEG record for ERP analysis. The trigger points for the epochs were selected in a manner that the trigger point, set to the start of the coded event, triggers marked the onset of each stimulus (i.e.,100 ms before the start of the syllable stimuli). The epochs were baselined by means of voltage averaging of the period amongst the syllable start and the prior 100 milliseconds. Visual artefacts in the ERP epochs were manually removed. The ERPs were then averaged across the both the conditions namely Vowel and the Consonant conditions conferring to the predefined bins, differently for the standard stimuli, the phoneme deviant stimuli and the rule deviant stimuli respectively for both the conditions. Group averages were then created by averaging across the participants and the data was statistically analysed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) v.25 software for windows. Amplitude and latency data were analysed using student’s paired ‘t’ test and p value < 0.05 was taken as statistically significant.

Sixty subjects (N= 60) were divided and assigned equally to the two conditions; 30 subjects in Vowel condition and 30 in Consonant condition. Obtained data were analysed with a mean age of 23.5 years (SD = 4.47) in Vowel Condition and male to female ratio in Vowel condition is 2.75:1. In Consonant Condition mean age is 22.96 years (SD = 3.48) and male to female ratio of 2.34:1 with audio stimulus of CVCVCV trisyllabic non-words.

Behavior Test

Table No. 1: Comparing the percentage of correct response across Vowel and Consonant Condition

CONDITION	PERCENTAGE CORRECT RESPONSE	STANDARD DEVIATATION
VOWEL CONDITION	61.250%	11.536
CONSONANT CONDITION	60.416%	12.319

On applying the student’s ‘t’ test and there was no significant difference observed between the behaviour test across Vowel and Consonant Condition, having a T value of 0.273 and P value of 0.787 (refer Table No.1).

In vowel condition

Comparison of amplitude and latency of P50 (early component), MMN and N400 variates of ERP in the experimental design representing vowel condition, across the stream of standard stimuli with that of two deviant stimuli.

Table No. 2: The EEG Leads Exhibiting Significant Changes in Amplitude of Respective ERP Waveforms When Compared Across Different Stimuli in Vowel Condition

Comparison	ERP Waveform	Significant Change in Amplitude of ERP Waveform in EEG Leads (p < 0.05)
Comparison		Anterior	Central	Posterior
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	Early Component	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	Early Component	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, CP1, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P1, P3, P5, PO3, P4, P6, PO4
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	MMN	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	MMN	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F2, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, C3, CP1, CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P1, P3, P5, PO3, P2, P4, P6, PO4
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	N400	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	N400	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F2, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, C3, CP1, CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P1, P3, P5, PO3, P2, P4, P6, PO4

While comparing the ERP profiles of early component (around 45 millisecond), MMN and N400 in terms of amplitude, significant increase in the amplitude of waveform were observed when rule deviant stimuli were presented in an oddball paradigm in a continuous stream of standard stimuli while no such effect was observed on presentation of phoneme deviant stimuli. This increase in the amplitude of three observed waveform on presentation of rule deviant stimuli was seen globally across anterior, central and posterior EEG leads (refer Table No.2).

Table No. 3: The EEG Leads Exhibiting Significant Changes in Latency of Respective ERP Waveforms When Compared Across Different Stimuli in Vowel Condition

Comparison	ERP Waveform	Significant Change in Latency of ERP Waveform in EEG Leads (p < 0.05)
Comparison		Anterior	Central	Posterior
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	Early Component	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	Early Component	FC3	CP1, CP3	P5, P6
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	MMN	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	MMN	FC2, FC4	C1, C3,	P3, PO3,
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	N400	-	-	-
Standard vs Rule Deviant	N400	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F2, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, C3, CP1, CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P1, P5, PO3, P2, P6, PO4

While comparing the ERP profiles of early component (around 45 millisecond), MMN and N400 in terms of latency a significant difference was observed when rule deviant stimuli were presented in an oddball paradigm in a continuous stream of standard stimuli while no such effect was observed on presentation of phoneme deviant stimuli. This difference was in terms of decrease in the latency of waveform in the timeline of early component of ERP and MMN, and increase in the latency of N400 waveform while presenting the rule deviant stimuli (refer Table No.3). When rule implemented on the non-word stimuli is violated with respect to the standard stimuli, a decrease in the latency was observed, wherein latency for standard stimuli was between 47ms to 50ms and the latency of rule deviant stimuli was about 43ms to 46ms in early component. In MMN component observed average latency of standard stimuli was 150ms to 158ms whereas latency of rule deviant stimuli was about 135ms to 148ms. The latency of N400 component of ERP at different electrode site was observed to be 375ms to 396ms for standard stimuli whereas it was 400ms to 415ms for rule deviant stimuli.

In Consonant condition

Comparison of amplitude and latency of P50 (early component), MMN and N400 variates of ERP in the experimental design representing Consonant condition, across the stream of standard stimuli with that of two deviant stimuli.

Table No. 4: The EEG Leads Exhibiting Significant Changes in Amplitude of Respective ERP Waveforms When Compared Across Different Stimuli in Consonant Condition

Comparison	ERP Waveform	Significant Change in Amplitude of ERP Waveform in EEG Leads (p < 0.05)
Comparison	ERP Waveform	Anterior	Central	Posterior
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	Early Component	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F2, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, CP1, CP2, CP4	P1, P3, PO3, P2, P4, P6, PO4
Standard vs Rule Deviant	Early Component	-	-	P1
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	MMN	F1, F3, FC1, FC3, F2, F4, FC2, FC4	C1, C3, CP1, CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P1, P3, P5, PO3, P2, P4, P6, PO4
Standard vs Rule Deviant	MMN	F4	CP1, CP2	P3, P5, PO3, P2
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	N400	F2, FC2	C3, CP1, CP3, C2, CP2, CP4	P1, P6, PO4
Standard vs Rule Deviant	N400	-	CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P3, PO3, P6

While comparing the ERP profiles of early component (around 45 millisecond), MMN and N400 in terms of amplitude, significant increase in the amplitude of waveform were observed with oddball presentation of both type of deviant stimuli in a continuous stream of standard stimuli. This increase in the amplitude of said waveforms on presenting phoneme deviant stimuli was globally observed in anterior, central and posterior EEG leads while on presenting rule deviant stimuli such effect was observed in the selected central and posterior EEG leads (refer Table No.4).

Table No. 5: The EEG Leads Exhibiting Significant Changes in Latency of Respective ERP Waveforms When Compared Across Different Stimuli in Consonant Condition

Comparison	ERP Waveform	Significant Change in Latency of ERP Waveform in EEG Leads (p < 0.05)
Comparison		Anterior	Central	Posterior
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	Early Component	FC2, FC4	C3, CP3, C2	P5, PO3, P2
Standard vs Rule Deviant	Early Component	-	-	-
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	MMN	F1, FC1, F3, F4, FC2, FC4	C2, CP4,	PO3, P2, P4, PO4
Standard vs Rule Deviant	MMN	F1	-	P2
Standard vs Phoneme Deviant	N400	-	CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4	P3, PO3, P6
Standard vs Rule Deviant	N400	F1	-	-

When comparing the Latency of early component, MMN and N400 of ERP components in the consonant condition, it was observed that there was significant effect when comparing the standard stimuli with phoneme deviant and also when comparing standard stimuli with rule deviant stimuli in selected electrodes only. This effect in consonant condition is mostly central and posteriorly localised suggesting involvement of central and posterior regions of brain in processing the phonemic information and lexical access of a particular language (refer Table No.5). When comparing the latency of standard stimuli to phoneme deviant stimuli and rule deviant stimuli, latency of standard stimuli was ranging from 53ms to 62ms and phoneme deviant stimuli latency was about 47ms to 55ms at different electrode side in the time scale of early component of ERP; when comparing standard stimuli to phoneme deviant stimuli latency in MMN component window, latency of standard stimuli was 180ms to 198ms whereas phoneme deviant stimuli latency was 175ms to 184ms and in N400 component standard stimuli latency was 385ms to 407ms whereas phoneme deviant stimuli latency was 393ms to 420ms at different electrode sites. While comparing the latency of standard stimuli which was 53ms to 62ms to that of rule deviant stimuli that is 51ms to 60ms at different electrode sites and hence no significant effect was noticed in the early component latencies; when comparing latencies of MMN at different electrode site standard stimuli latency was 180ms to 198ms whereas for rule deviant stimuli it was observed to be 178ms to 187ms; in N400 component standard stimuli latency was found to be 385ms to 407ms whereas it was 385ms to 412ms for rule deviant stimuli at different electrode sites.

Such a selective and differential neural dynamical response of ERPs namely, P50 and MMN and N400 in vowel condition while presenting rule deviant paradigm only (and not in phoneme deviant epitome) across the linguistic coordinates of vowels, the primal representative edifice of neural language, implicates a neural dynamical sensorial and associative response suggestive of associative (syntactic) learning wherein vowels seemingly initiates the rule learning task of abstraction. In contrast to these significant changes in ERP profiles while comparing the standard stimuli with phoneme deviant globally across anterior, central and posterior EEG leads as well as with presentation of rule deviant stimuli across selected EEG leads only underscores the salience of consonants in datamining of lexicon access and recognition, admixed with associative abstraction as well, from the pre-formed neural linguistic forest in a rule learning task across select distributed neuronal pools. While comparing the amplitude cross both the condition, significant results were obtained only in MMN window with respect to standard stimuli, although while comparing the phoneme deviant and rule deviant stimuli respectively across both the condition significant difference was observed across various electrode sites. Whereas while comparing the latencies of different ERP profile across both the condition vowel and consonant, the latency in vowel condition where rule was applied to the vowels and consonants are randomly placed in a trisyllabic non word stimuli, the observed latency was less than that of respective stimuli of consonant condition. Hence suggesting a better use of vowel in rule abstraction task than consonants though it was evinced by behavioral test as well that participants learn the rule independently of whether it was implemented over consonants or vowel in a rule learning task.

Figure 1 and 2 shows the head maps of the two conditions, the vowel condition and the consonant condition when different stimuli e.g., standard, Phoneme deviant and rule deviant stimuli are presented in a string of stimuli.

The present study was an attempt to evaluate the Gestalt Paradigm wherein Consonants incidentally happen to be the triggering fulcrum lexicon access entities i.e., word mining, word hunting and retrieval from the lowland marshmallow of words so acquired and learnt and Vowels are harbinger elements that augur the abstraction principle (principle/rule of abstraction), the basic dictum that tends to reduce redundancy and duplication, forming the qualia of language. The underlying neural dynamics of lexicon access through consonants (quanta) and abstraction principle through vowels (qualia), were acquired and digitally processed and evaluated to appreciate the primal neural mechanism responsible for salience of learning of a means of communication that is alien and structured, language, across the landscape of electroencephalographic (EEG) and event-related potentials (ERPs) waveform patterning.

The Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) correlates of early waveforms, MMN and N400 entities namely, amplitude and latency, were analysed at scalp areas of left anterior region (F1, F3, FC1, FC3), right anterior region (F2, F4, FC2, FC4), left central region (C1, C3, CP1, CP3), right central region (C2, C4, CP2, CP4), left posterior region (P1, P3, P5, PO3) and right posterior region (P2, P4, P6, PO4). These regions were chosen in order to assess and explore the effect of rule abstraction task of the Working Human Mind in real-time at the said targeted area as the underlying specific areas of human brain have been proposed to be the nidus seeding zones responsible for neural dynamical processing antecedent to abstract regularities that incidentally happens to the singular and primal neurophysiological event, quintessential to learning of the so-called structured means of communication known as language. In the present study, the patterning of amplitude and latency components of ERP early waveforms, MMN, N400 in response to different events/stimuli of standard stimuli, phoneme deviant stimuli and rule deviant stimuli were comparatively assessed across proviso of both consonant and vowel condition, i.e., when the rules were applied and run-on on vowels in a three syllabic CVCVCV non-word and on the three-syllabic consonants non-word. The comparison was made within the condition amongst different stimuli classes and also across the vowel and consonant conditions.

Behavioural Test

When after the long exposure of the test stimuli, participants underwent a 2-alternative forced choice test, where 8 pairs of novel test non- word were created, out of which one word has the same rule as standard stimuli ABB rule while the other word has ABC rule implemented according to the condition (on vowel in vowel condition and on consonants in consonant condition). The percentage of correct response were than compared against the chance (being chance of 50%). In vowel condition participants performed above the chance level (mean = 61.25%, SD of 11.536). Participants performed above chance in the consonant condition as well (mean = 60.416%, SD of 12.319) (refer Table No.1). When comparing both the condition no significant difference was appreciated between the consonant and vowel condition suggesting that participants learn the rule independently of whether it was implemented over consonants or vowel in a rule learning task. However previous studies have found a significant difference between rule processing over consonants and vowels, where participants found it difficult to learn rules over consonant in a non-word stimulus, though the exposure of participants to the implemented rule was of 5mins duration, whereas it was 45mins in the current experiment. Similar response was observed when participants were presented with tokens instantiating the rule during approximately 30 minutes³⁰. This suggests that the lengthy exposure to the words with abstract pattern should have given participants enough time to identify the rules over both consonants and vowel.

In the vowel condition when a standard auditory stimuli is presented repeatedly to the participant subject with infrequent deviant stimuli (either the rule deviant or phoneme deviant) in vowel condition, no significant difference could be appreciated across any of the said component during presentation of phoneme deviant stimuli, whereas rule deviant stimuli over vowel condition evoked and set in motion an appreciably significant difference in amplitude (i.e., a significantly increased amplitude on rule deviant stimuli presentation) globally, across the anterior, central and posterior EEG leads. The deviant rule stimuli of ABA (vis-à-vis ABB rule) evinces a significantly heightened ERP amplitude [epitomizes neuronal pools firing in synchrony of Event-Related Synchrony (ERS)] across P50 early component, MMN and N400 waveforms along vowel axes, represents inherent neural dynamical response to novel stimuli of ABA rule deviant phenomenology amidst sequential ABB prototype. It has been documented that neural dynamical phenomenon of ERS exemplifies the distinctive featured response of distributed neuronal pools to a novel stimulus, that was replicated in the present research paradigm in the singular prototype of rule deviant stimuli across vowels entities. Such an archetypal response characterizes the rule/principle abstraction qualia of vowels, that sets in motion the “abstraction principle”, the distinguishing neurophysiological feature (feature detector) of vowels.

Such a singular observation further substantiates the rule abstraction paradigmatic role of vowels (vis-à-vis lexicon access), while neural dynamically processing a novel non-meaningful word (non-sense word). This phenomenology/singular event of rule abstraction (abstraction principle) seemingly is an innate inherent paradigmatic originating maxim of language making its appearance early on the neural dynamic landscape of ERP waveforms, the early component. This observed change in early component at 45 milliseconds (ms) has been appreciated by change in the acoustic stimuli and has been proposed to reflect the arousal level of the participant subjects listening to the speech arrayed sequences³¹. Morris et al. in 2016³² documented similar findings with P50 dynamics after subtle variations on the quality of synthesized diphthongs that was further replicated by Monte-Ordoño and Toro in 2017³⁰ after the onset of last syllable at around 50 ms. The MMN ERP waveform has been observed after the presentation of deviant and novel auditory stimuli, including speech^33,34. Even though N400 component has been traditionally associated with lexical processes, some studies have observed that N400 waveform is related to abstract structure processing in a rule learning task³⁵. N400 has also been observed during abstract grammar processing³⁶ and with non-members in a categorization task³⁷ that further substantiates the role of N400 ERP waveform in rule deviant stimuli across vowel condition.

Another interesting observation is the appreciation of the underlying neural dynamical processes involved across categorical stimuli of standard, phoneme and rule deviant protocols. The spiking and an enhanced amplitude across rule deviant stimuli represents the neural conception of a novel stimulus (vis-à-vis rule deviant) that needs to be learnt and consolidated as memory across the interfacial neuronal system of Mirror Neuron System (MNS) through the self-iterating neural mechanisms transforming the singularity of Event-Related Synchrony (ERS) into open neural gates of Event-Related Desynchrony (ERD), facilitating flow of information that is tangible, reproducible and learnt³⁸.

The observation in terms of latency of early component, MMN and N400 of ERP variables in vowel condition displayed no significant change in latency across the said ERP waveforms when the same were comparatively evaluated across the façade of standard stimuli and phoneme deviant stimuli. However, a significant difference in latency of respective ERP waveforms could be appreciated globally across the anterior, central and posterior EEG leads when assessed comparatively along the two experimental conditions of standard stimuli and rule deviant (refer Table No.3). Such differential latency profile could be observed more acutely in N400 component of ERP waveform equally along both the right and left hemispheres. However, a statistically appreciable difference in latency (a quantal decrease) across early component and MMN variable of ERP waveform was more profound along left hemispheric EEG Lead as compared to that observed along right hemispheric EEG leads. Significantly longer latency in early components with attention condition than divert condition was observed by Morris, Steinmetzger & Tøndering, 2016³². Although significant difference is found only with rule deviant in terms of decreased latency in the present study, such a decrease in latency with deviant stimuli were observed while deviating the phonemic category, duration and loudness when semi-synthetic vowel stimuli were presented in an oddball paradigm³⁹.

It is interesting to observe that vowels, one of the primary elements of language, initiate an innate rule/principle abstraction principle during neuronal processing and on violation, elicits a patterned response in form of statistically significant increased amplitude globally in ERP waveforms of early component, MMN and N400 with a decreased latency in appearance of early component and MMN waveforms with antecedent enhanced timeline for N400 waveform. The gate in form of an enhanced amplitude (the exotic gate of ERS) and decreased latency in exogenous component with increased endogenous N400 latency is the basic neuronal effect so observed here and such an event, incidentally, is contributing to the underlying parametric principle of language superimposed with constraints of time.

In consonant condition significant increase in the amplitude of early component, P50 (at around 53 ms) could be appreciated on presentation of phoneme deviant globally across anterior, central and posterior electrode sites whereas similar comparative increase in amplitude could be appreciated locally and singularly across posterior parietal EEG electrode site of P50 only, on presentation of rule deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis averaged amplitude graphic on standard stimuli presentation). Such a comprehensive and unqualified ERP waveform amplitude peaking across phoneme deviant stimuli presages and proclaims the discriminatory lexicon access function of consonants, as had been documented by previous studies as well^27,40.

However, the amplitude variability pattern across MMN and N400 ERP waveforms across varied EEG electrode sites was different. A significantly increase in ERP waveforms amplitude in the phoneme deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis standard stimuli in MMN waveform at around 180 ms) could be appreciated globally across all EEG electrode sites, though the rule deviant stimuli paradigm could also elicit significant increase in amplitude of the waveform across select frontal, central and posterior EEG electrode sites of F4, C1, C2, P3, P5, PO3 and P2. A similar observation could also be appreciated across N400 ERP waveform response to the paradigmatic research protocol wherein a global amplitude increase on presentation of phoneme deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis standard stimuli) could be appreciated, though a localized amplitude increase could be appreciated on presentation of rule deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis standard stimuli) across select central and posterior EEG electrode sites namely CP3, C2, C4, CP2, CP4 and P3, PO3, P6, respectively (refer Table No.4). This is an interesting observation in across the premise that consonants, in their pristine edifice, are primally involved in lexicon access and such a dual divergent profiling across both phoneme and rule deviants gives an ambivalent spectrum and flavour to the entity of consonants, underscoring the fact that consonants (so conscripted in the present research design) on voicing essentially need the spousal support and patronage of vowels. Moreover, as highlighted earlier, the primacy and novelty of a stimulus is singularly etched on the stochastic trajectorial phase-space of human mind as ERS (Event-Related Synchrony), the distributed neuronal pools firing in phase and synchrony in response to a perceivable and legitimate neural stimulus that with the timeline and time frame of neurophysiological cellular and molecular correlates of memory and learning is morphed and transformed into ERD (Event-Related Desynchrony)^41,42.

It would be worthwhile to mention that such a patterned reinforced neural dynamical global response to the trisyllabic syllable of CVCVCV being manipulated experimentally across phoneme axis in consonant condition underscores the fact that presentation of novel consonant phoneme acoustic (through phoneme deviant stimuli) recruits dedicated neuronal pools across the cortical hemispheres to evolve the archetypal peaking neural response of an unlearnt behaviour (metamorphosed into blunting decreased amplitude response of a learnt behaviour)^42,43. The heightened ERP waveforms (Event-Related Synchrony, ERS) are neural dynamical closed system gates of mesoscopic scale that transmuted and translated through the molecular neurophysiological synaptic mechanism of memory into neural dynamical open system gates of Event-Related Desynchrony (ERD)⁴⁴, the neural dynamical response at mesoscopic level narrating appearance of a learnt memory of the event on the horizon of human mind stochastic trajectorial phase-space reflective of underlying ongoing cellular neurophysiological process of successful flow of neural information. ERS, on the other hand, represents the neural dynamical response to a novel event with closed neural gates wherein, flow of neural information taking place only on successful acquisition of learnt memory neural molecular synaptic correlates^45,46, being represented mesoscopically through open neural gates of ERD.

Nevertheless, it is interesting to note the ambivalent ERP character response in consonant condition across the two deviant stimuli of phoneme and rule precept, as could be distinguished from the singular response in rule deviant stimuli when executed through vowel preceptorial landscape highlighting abstraction principle of salience of vowels. It further corroborates the admixed qualia of consonants in assessing lexicon from the available and learnt lexical repertoire through their specific neural signature pool and the associative abstraction role of consonant that essentially need to be admixed with vowel (for voicing) from the pre-formed neural linguistic plasma/sea in a rule learning task across select distributed neuronal pools⁴⁷. The increased amplitude of early component of ERP suggests the processing of a novel syllable transitions present within the deviant stimuli. Such processing likely involves online updating of the incongruent information present in the deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis the standard stimuli)³⁰. The increased amplitude with respect to MMN component after presentation of both phoneme and rule deviant stimuli have been reported typically due to the by local, physical changes in the auditory input⁴⁹, the association of N400 ERP waveform with the lexical search need further elaboration^49,50 and observations of the present research protocol that exemplifies a significant dual response in both deviant stimuli conditions (rule and phoneme) further substantiates the reliance of consonants on vowels, the logical and mutual betrothal, for making their appearance on the horizon of the neurolinguistic plane⁵¹. In consonant condition significant difference could be appreciated in the latency of novel phoneme deviant stimuli (vis-à-vis standard stimuli) in the early component of ERP and MMN, P50 globally in anterior, central and posterior electrode sites. Though with rule deviant stimuli a localised response was appreciated in latency of MMN in select anterior and posterior EEG electrode sites. On the other hand, the latency correlate of N400 endogenous (representing associative cognitive neural processing) ERP waveform increased in phoneme and rule deviant stimuli protocols. This response with the phoneme deviant stimuli profiled a more generalized response across central and posterior EEG electrode sites with rule deviant stimuli registering a significant response at only at select anterior EEG electrode sites (F1 EEG lead).

Such responses demonstrate different neural electrophysiological responses on violation of abstract rules over distinct phonetic categories of vowel and consonants in a task involved in pattern generalization and lexical decision, with such a distinctive characteristic across neural feature detectors of vowels and consonants appears early on the stochastic trajectorial phase-space of Human Mind as could be appreciated along both exogenous and endogenous variates of ERP waveforms. The differential changing consonant patterning initiates neural dynamical processes of lexicon access and mining, the sematic learning, with enhanced MMN and N400 ERP waveform response on variation and deviation of phonemes and variable vowel abstraction rule patterning initiates neural dynamics that give rise to the singularity of syntactic learning.

Such an inferential undermines the neural categorical connectomes of vowels and consonants in rule/principle abstraction and lexicon recognition and access that go on to form constructs for syntax and semantics, respectively.

The differential neural dynamic responses as exemplified by categorical representation in form of significant decrease in latency and or increase in amplitude suggest and support the modular fractal functioning of the human mind, where the fractals of latency and amplitude iterate and self-iterate that tend to form a pattern, reproducible and validated, specific for unitary and replete language constituents of vowels and consonants. The increased amplitude of ERP waveform exemplifies Event-Related Synchrony (ERS) of neuronal pools firing in phase and archetypal of innate neural processing of information consolidation and representation of the arrival of the novel stimulus on the stochastic trajectorial horizon of Human Mind that is subsequently transformed through saturation of the self-iterative neural processing into memory and learning exemplified on the mesoscopic scale as Event-Related Desynchrony (ERD), the harbinger to open neural gate system facilitating flow of information for further processing and association. The global response along categorial comparative analysis of deviant and standard stimuli within and across consonants and vowels conditions further necessitates the presence of an interfacial neuronal system, Mirror Neuron System (MNS), that uphold the primacy of neural dynamics of ERS and ERD, the gateway for facilitation of flow of tangible, adequate and reproducible neural information essential for association and cognitive processing.

The results of the present study add to a growing literature demonstrating that vowels and consonants trigger different neural responses, as exemplified during abstract rule learning wherein early ERP components, MMN and N400 waveforms could form potential candidates for detection of the neural signature of vowel and consonant profiles in the field of neurolinguistics, that could act as the platform for development of the hierarchical fractal algorithm needed in the domain of Brain-Computer Interface [BCI], an offshoot of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. The segregation and categorisation of constituent letters of any language into vowels and consonants (during its evolution and growth through phonemic environment) on the basis of the different articulatory mechanistic seem to profile the constituent letters [vowels and consonants], phonemes, syllables, words, phrase and sentence and determine their orderly placement giving rise to a meaningful word, and hence evolving a definite means of communication which is viable in the present scenario and is tend to be valid and reproducible in the future and hence supporting the argument that the architecture of the mind is more pervasively modular.

Limitations of the Present Study:

This study had the following limitations:

The Ag/AgCl surface electrodes might have caused errors during recoding because of movement of electrodes on scalp causing poor signal quality (more noise, poor contact).
The room was sound attenuated but not perfectly quiet so it might have assed additional distraction to the subject.
In the present study, Electrooculogram recordings were not taken and therefore if eye blinks artefacts might have occurred.
The head movement during the recording might have affected the results by causing small variation to the distance between eyes and monitor. A head rest could have solved this problem.

Future perspectives:

ERP waveform such as Early component at around 40 to 75ms, MMN and N400 can be studies for the detection of the neural signature of the vowels and Consonants described by the linguists in a non-invasive fashion which can further explore the vast field of brain computer interface and possible implication of neural signature of spoken language. The phonological processing of vowel and consonants through the amplitude and latency of said waveform may provide some useful insight. Also, to reveal the underlying neural mechanism we can also combine other ERP components in the generation of the different neuronal patterns of phonological processing of phonemes and abstraction of rule applied to a word in a language during a rule learning task. Moreover, rule abstraction principles on different phonemic classes of consonants and vowels need further analysis through ERP components to get a better insight of the language processing and comprehension.

Data Availability:

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, [Minal Kachhawa]. The data are not publicly available due to the privacy restrictions of the participants.

The present cross sectional observational comparative study was conducted at Department of Physiology, S.M.S. Medical College and Attached Group of Hospitals, Jaipur, India after obtaining the desired clearance from Institutional Research Review Board and Ethics Committee of the S.M.S Medical College and Hospital and is a result of self-initiated research undertaken in the domain of Biological Signal Processing and Human Mind Modelling with no financial (intramural and/or extramural) support from any funding agency. We attest to the fact that all Authors listed on the title page have contributed significantly to the work, have read the manuscript, attest to the validity and legitimacy of the data and its interpretation, and agree to its submission.

De Jong PF, Van der Leij A. Developmental changes in the manifestation of a phonological deficit in dyslexic children learning to read a regular orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2003 Mar;95(1):22.
Stark RE. Stages of speech development in the first year of life. InChild phonology 1980 Jan 1 (pp. 73–92). Academic Press.
Caramazza A, Chialant D, Capasso R, Miceli G. Separable processing of consonants and vowels. Nature. 2000 Jan;403(6768):428–30.
Ferreres AR, López CV, China NN. Phonological alexia with vowel–consonant dissociation in non-word reading. Brain and Language. 2003 Mar 1;84(3):399–413.
Carreiras M, Price CJ. Brain activation for consonants and vowels. Cerebral Cortex. 2008 Jul 1;18(7):1727-35.
Carreiras M, Vergara M, Perea M. ERP correlates of transposed-letter priming effects: The role of vowels versus consonants. Psychophysiology. 2009 Jan;46(1):34–42.
Vergara-Martínez M, Perea M, Marín A, Carreiras M. The processing of consonants and vowels during letter identity and letter position assignment in visual-word recognition: An ERP study. Brain and language. 2011 Sep 1;118(3):105 – 17.
Hickok G, Poeppel D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature reviews neuroscience. 2007 May;8(5):393–402.
Spironelli C, Angrilli A. Developmental aspects of automatic word processing: language lateralization of early ERP components in children, young adults and middle-aged subjects. Biological psychology. 2009 Jan 1;80(1):35–45.
Binder JR, Frost JA, Hammeke TA, Bellgowan PS, Springer JA, Kaufman JN, Possing ET. Human temporal lobe activation by speech and nonspeech sounds. Cerebral cortex. 2000 May 1;10(5):512 – 28.
Scott SK, Blank CC, Rosen S, Wise RJ. Identification of a pathway for intelligible speech in the left temporal lobe. Brain. 2000 Dec 1;123(12):2400-6.
Davis MH, Johnsrude IS. Hierarchical processing in spoken language comprehension. Journal of Neuroscience. 2003 Apr 15;23(8):3423–31.
Liebenthal E, Binder JR, Spitzer SM, Possing ET, Medler DA. Neural substrates of phonemic perception. Cerebral cortex. 2005 Oct 1;15(10):1621-31.
Okada K, Rong F, Venezia J, Matchin W, Hsieh IH, Saberi K, Serences JT, Hickok G. Hierarchical organization of human auditory cortex: evidence from acoustic invariance in the response to intelligible speech. Cerebral Cortex. 2010 Oct 1;20(10):2486-95.
Dube A, Kumar U, Gupta K, Gupta J, Patel B, Singhal SK, Yadav K, Jetaji L, Dube S. Language as the Working Model of Human Mind. InBrain-Computer Interface 2021 Sep 12. IntechOpen.
Oberman LM, Ramachandran VS. The simulating social mind: the role of the mirror neuron system and simulation in the social and communicative deficits of autism spectrum disorders. Psychological bulletin. 2007 Mar;133(2):310.
Obleser J, Kotz SA. Expectancy constraints in degraded speech modulate the language comprehension network. Cerebral cortex. 2010 Mar 1;20(3):633 – 40.
Tian B, Reser D, Durham A, Kustov A, Rauschecker JP. Functional specialization in rhesus monkey auditory cortex. Science. 2001 Apr 13;292(5515):290-3.
Middlebrooks JC, Simon JZ, Popper AN, Fay RR, editors. The auditory system at the cocktail party. New York:: Springer; 2017 Mar 19.
Duffau H, Moritz-Gasser S, Mandonnet E. A re-examination of neural basis of language processing: proposal of a dynamic hodotopical model from data provided by brain stimulation mapping during picture naming. Brain and language. 2014 Apr 1;131:1 – 0.
Cotelli M, Abutalebi J, Zorzi M, Cappa SF. Vowels in the buffer: A case study of acquired dysgraphia with selective vowel substitutions. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 2003 Mar 1;20(2):99–114.
Ramus F, Nespor M, Mehler J. Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition. 1999 Dec 17;73(3):265–92.
McCarthy G, Wood CC. Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: an ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section. 1985 May 1;62(3):203-8.
Bonatti LL, Pena M, Nespor M, Mehler J. Linguistic constraints on statistical computations: The role of consonants and vowels in continuous speech processing. Psychological Science. 2005 Jun;16(6):451–9.
Bonatti LL, Pena M, Nespor M, Mehler J. On consonants, vowels, chickens, and eggs. Psychological Science. 2007 Oct;18(10):924–5.
Nespor M, Peńa M, Mehler J. On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition. Lingue e linguaggio. 2003;2(2):203–30.
Cutler A, Sebastián-Gallés N, Soler-Vilageliu O, Van Ooijen B. Constraints of vowels and consonants on lexical selection: Cross-linguistic comparisons. Memory & cognition. 2000 Sep;28(5):746–55.
Edworthy J, Hellier E, Walters K, Clift-Mathews W, Crowther M. Acoustic, semantic and phonetic influences in spoken warning signal words. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 2003 Dec;17(8):915–33.
Song H, Kim M, Park D, Shin Y, Lee JG. Learning from noisy labels with deep neural networks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems. 2022 Mar 7.
Monte-Ordoño J, Toro JM. Different ERP profiles for learning rules over consonants and vowels. Neuropsychologia. 2017 Mar 1;97:104 – 11.
Key AP, Dove GO, Maguire MJ. Linking brainwaves to the brain: an ERP primer. Developmental neuropsychology. 2005 Apr 1;27(2):183–215.
Morris DJ, Steinmetzger K, Tøndering J. Auditory event-related responses to diphthongs in different attention conditions. Neuroscience letters. 2016 Jul 28;626:158–63.
Escera C, Yago E, Polo MD, Grau C. The individual replicability of mismatch negativity at short and long inter-stimulus intervals. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2000 Mar 1;111(3):546 – 51.
Pulvermüller F, Shtyrov Y. Automatic processing of grammar in the human brain as revealed by the mismatch negativity. Neuroimage. 2003 Sep 1;20(1):159–72.
Mueller JL, Friederici AD, Männel C. Auditory perception at the root of language learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012 Sep 25;109(39):15953-8.
Choudhary KK, Schlesewsky M, Roehm D, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I. The N400 as a correlate of interpretively relevant linguistic rules: Evidence from Hindi. Neuropsychologia. 2009 Nov 1;47(13):3012-22.
Núñez-Peña MI, Honrubia-Serrano ML. N400 and category exemplar associative strength. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2005 Apr 1;56(1):45–54.
Muthukumaraswamy SD, Singh KD. Modulation of the human mirror neuron system during cognitive activity. Psychophysiology. 2008 Nov;45(6):896–905.
Pakarinen S, Teinonen T, Shestakova A, Kwon MS, Kujala T, Hämäläinen H, Näätänen R, Huotilainen M. Fast parametric evaluation of central speech-sound processing with mismatch negativity (MMN). International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2013 Jan 1;87(1):103 – 10.
Pons F, Toro JM. Structural generalizations over consonants and vowels in 11-month-old infants. Cognition. 2010 Sep 1;116(3):361-7.
Krause CM. Cognition-and memory-related ERD/ERS responses in the auditory stimulus modality. Progress in brain research. 2006 Jan 1;159:197–207.
Gomarus HK, Althaus M, Wijers AA, Minderaa RB. The effects of memory load and stimulus relevance on the EEG during a visual selective memory search task: an ERP and ERD/ERS study. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2006 Apr 1;117(4):871 – 84.
Dong S, Reder LM, Yao Y, Liu Y, Chen F. Individual differences in working memory capacity are reflected in different ERP and EEG patterns to task difficulty. Brain research. 2015 Aug 7;1616:146–56.
Pfurtscheller G, Da Silva FL. Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles. Clinical neurophysiology. 1999 Nov 1;110(11):1842-57.
Rossi S, Pasqualetti P, Zito G, Vecchio F, Cappa SF, Miniussi C, Babiloni C, Rossini PM. Prefrontal and parietal cortex in human episodic memory: an interference study by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. European Journal of Neuroscience. 2006 Feb;23(3):793–800.
Marblestone AH, Wayne G, Kording KP. Toward an integration of deep learning and neuroscience. Frontiers in computational neuroscience. 2016:94.
Mann V. Use of vocalic cues to consonant voicing and native language background: The influence of experimental design. Perception & Psychophysics. 1994 Sep;55(5):513–25.
Bekinschtein TA, Dehaene S, Rohaut B, Tadel F, Cohen L, Naccache L. Neural signature of the conscious processing of auditory regularities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2009 Feb 3;106(5):1672-7.
Kutas M, Federmeier KD. Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2000 Dec 1;4(12):463 – 70.
Lau EF, Phillips C, Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics:(de) constructing the N400. Nature reviews neuroscience. 2008 Dec;9(12):920–33.
Sandoval M, Gomez RL. The development of nonadjacent dependency learning in natural and artificial languages. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. 2013 Sep;4(5):511–22.

No competing interests reported.

DataChart.xlsx

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

The Event Related Potential Profiling of Consonants and Vowels Across Rule Learning Task Through Auditory Stimuli

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Stimuli

Stimuli of Vowel Condition

Stimuli of Consonant Condition

Procedure

Results

Discussion

Behavioural Test

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1