An official website of the United States government
Motor planning forms a critical bridge between psycholinguistic and motoric models of word production. While syllables are often considered the core planning unit in speech, growing evidence hints at supra-syllabic planning, but without firm empirical support. Here, we use differential adaptation to altered auditory feedback to provide novel, straightforward evidence for word-level planning. By introducing opposing perturbations to shared segmental content (e.g., raising the first vowel formant of “sev” in “seven” while lowering it in “sever”), we assess whether participants can use the larger word context to separately oppose the two perturbations. Critically, limb control research shows that such differential learning is possible only when the shared movement forms part of separate motor plans. We found differential adaptation in multisyllabic words, but of smaller size relative to monosyllabic words. These results strongly suggest speech relies on an interactive motor planning process encompassing both syllables and words.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on March 1, 2026
Monitoring, control and repair in word production
Word production is the process of turning a thought into motor movements that produce a spoken word. This process has traditionally been studied using two approaches — the psycholinguistic approach and the motor speech approach — that focus on dierent stages of the production process. In this Perspective, I highlight the strengths of these two approaches and merge them with broader frameworks and theories of action and cognition to open new directions for language production research. I discuss proposed models for how speakers assess whether production is going smoothly (monitoring), adjust to diculties (control) and x errors (repair). Each proposal combines language production research with insights from other areas of cognition to demonstrate the utility and necessity of a closer integration of broader cognitive frameworks into models of word production.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2317121
- PAR ID:
- 10618354
- Publisher / Repository:
- Nature
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Nature Reviews Psychology
- Volume:
- 4
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2731-0574
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 222 to 238
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- language production, monitoring, repair, cognitive control
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Clinical diagnosis of stuttering requires an assessment by a licensed speech-language pathologist. However, this process is time-consuming and requires clinicians with training and experience in stuttering and fluency disorders. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of speech-language pathologists report being comfortable working with individuals who stutter, which is inadequate to accommodate for the 80 million individuals who stutter worldwide. Developing machine learning models for detecting stuttered speech would enable universal and automated screening for stuttering, enabling speech pathologists to identify and follow up with patients who are most likely to be diagnosed with a stuttering speech disorder. Previous research in this area has predominantly focused on utterance-level detection, which is not sufficient for clinical settings where word-level annotation of stuttering is the norm. In this study, we curated a stuttered speech dataset with word-level annotations and introduced a word-level stuttering speech detection model leveraging self-supervised speech models. Our evaluation demonstrates that our model surpasses previous approaches in word-level stuttering speech detection. Additionally, we conducted an extensive ablation analysis of our method, providing insight into the most important aspects of adapting self-supervised speech models for stuttered speech detection.more » « less
-
This review examines research on environmental impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from a systems-oriented sustainability perspective, focusing on three areas: air quality and human health, climate change, and production and consumption. The review assesses whether and how this COVID-19–focused research (i) examines components of an integrated system; (ii) accounts for interactions including complex, adaptive dynamics; and (iii) is oriented to informing action. It finds that this research to date has not comprehensively accounted for complex, coupled interactions, especially involving societal factors, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions and hampering efforts to draw broader insights across sustainability-relevant domains. Lack of systems perspective in COVID-19 research reflects a broader challenge in environmental research, which often neglects societal feedbacks. Practical steps through which researchers can better incorporate systems perspectives include using analytical frameworks to identify important components and interactions, connecting frameworks to models and methods, and advancing sustainability science theory and methodology.more » « less
-
In standard models of language production or comprehension, the elements which are retrieved from memory and combined into a syntactic structure are “lemmas” or “lexical items.” Such models implicitly take a “lexicalist” approach, which assumes that lexical items store meaning, syntax, and form together, that syntactic and lexical processes are distinct, and that syntactic structure does not extend below the word level. Across the last several decades, linguistic research examining a typologically diverse set of languages has provided strong evidence against this approach. These findings suggest that syntactic processes apply both above and below the “word” level, and that both meaning and form are partially determined by the syntactic context. This has significant implications for psychological and neurological models of language processing as well as for the way that we understand different types of aphasia and other language disorders. As a consequence of the lexicalist assumptions of these models, many kinds of sentences that speakers produce and comprehend—in a variety of languages, including English—are challenging for them to account for. Here we focus on language production as a case study. In order to move away from lexicalism in psycho- and neuro-linguistics, it is not enough to simply update the syntactic representations of words or phrases; the processing algorithms involved in language production are constrained by the lexicalist representations that they operate on, and thus also need to be reimagined. We provide an overview of the arguments against lexicalism, discuss how lexicalist assumptions are represented in models of language production, and examine the types of phenomena that they struggle to account for as a consequence. We also outline what a non-lexicalist alternative might look like, as a model that does not rely on a lemma representation, but instead represents that knowledge as separate mappings between (a) meaning and syntax and (b) syntax and form, with a single integrated stage for the retrieval and assembly of syntactic structure. By moving away from lexicalist assumptions, this kind of model provides better cross-linguistic coverage and aligns better with contemporary syntactic theory.more » « less
-
We survey a current, heated debate in the artificial intelligence (AI) research community on whether large pretrained language models can be said to understand language—and the physical and social situations language encodes—in any humanlike sense. We describe arguments that have been made for and against such understanding and key questions for the broader sciences of intelligence that have arisen in light of these arguments. We contend that an extended science of intelligence can be developed that will provide insight into distinct modes of understanding, their strengths and limitations, and the challenge of integrating diverse forms of cognition.more » « less
