Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:35:35.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological encoding in German children's language production: evidence from event-related brain potentials*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2016

ANNA JESSEN ,
ELISABETH FLEISCHHAUER  and
HARALD CLAHSEN
ANNA JESSEN
Affiliation:
Potsdam Research Institute for Multilingualism (PRIM), University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
ELISABETH FLEISCHHAUER
Affiliation:
Potsdam Research Institute for Multilingualism (PRIM), University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
HARALD CLAHSEN*
Affiliation:
Potsdam Research Institute for Multilingualism (PRIM), University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
*
Address for correspondence: Harald Clahsen, University of Potsdam, Potsdam Research Institute for Multilingualism, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24–25, 14476 Potsdam, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study reports developmental changes in morphological encoding across late childhood. We examined event-related brain potentials (ERPs) during the silent production of regularly vs. irregularly inflected verb forms (viz. -t vs. -n participles of German) in groups of eight- to ten-year-olds, eleven- to thirteen-year-olds, and adults. The adult data revealed an enhanced (right-frontal) negativity 300–450 ms after cue onset for the (silent) production of -t relative to -n past participle forms (e.g. geplant vs. gehauen ‘planned’ vs. ‘hit’). For the eleven- to thirteen-year-olds, the same enhanced negativity was found, with a more posterior distribution and a longer duration (=300–550 ms). The eight- to ten-year-olds also showed this negativity, again with a posterior distribution, but with a considerably delayed onset (800–1,000 ms). We suggest that this negativity reflects combinatorial processing required for producing -t participles in both children and adults and that the spatial and temporal modulations of this ERP effect across the three participant groups are due to developmental changes of the brain networks involved in processing morphologically complex words.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , March 2017 , pp. 427 - 456
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

[*]

The research reported here was supported by an Alexander-von-Humboldt-Professorship to HC and a Cusanuswerk studentship to EF. We are grateful to the members of the Potsdam Research Institute for Multilingualism for detailed and helpful comments on the present work.

References

REFERENCES

Bates, D., Sarkar, D., Bates, M. D. & Matrix, L. (2007). The lme4 package. R package version 2(1). Online: <ftp://ftp.uni-bayreuth.de/pub/math/statlib/R/CRAN/doc/packages/lme4.pdf>.Google Scholar
Blakemore, S. J. (2012). Imaging brain development: the adolescent brain. NeuroImage 61, 397–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Budd, M.-J., Paulmann, S., Barry, C. & Clahsen, H. (2013). Brain potentials during language production in children and adults: an ERP study of the English past tense. Brain and Language 127, 345–55.Google Scholar
Budd, M.-J., Paulmann, S., Barry, C. & Clahsen, H. (2015). Producing morphologically complex words: an ERP study with children and adults. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 12, 51–60.Google Scholar
Casey, B., Galvan, A. & Hare, T. A. (2005). Changes in cerebral functional organization during cognitive development. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 15, 239–44.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. (1997). The representation of participles in the German mental lexicon: evidence for the dual-mechanism model. In Booij, G. & Van Marle, J. (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996, 73–95. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., Hadler, M. & Weyerts, H. (2004). Speeded production of inflected words in children and adults. Journal of Child Language 31, 683–712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H., Lück, M. & Hahne, A. (2007). How children process over-regularizations: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Child Language 34, 601–22.Google Scholar
Dell, G. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 93, 283–321.Google Scholar
Elsen, H. (1998). The acquisition of past participles: one or two mechanisms. In Fabri, R., Ortmann, A. & Parodi, T. (eds), Models of inflection, 134–51. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everts, R., Lidzba, K., Wilke, M., Kiefer, C., Mordasini, M., Schroth, G. & Steinlin, M. (2009). Strengthening of laterality of verbal and visuospatial functions during childhood and adolescence. Human Brain Mapping 30, 473–83.Google Scholar
Festman, J. & Clahsen, H. (2016). How Germans prepare for the English past tense: silent production of inflected words during EEG. Applied Psycholinguistics 37, 487–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleischhauer, E. (2014). Morphological processing in children: an experimental study on German past participles. Doctoral dissertation, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany. Online: <urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-70581>..>Google Scholar
Fleischhauer, E. & Clahsen, H. (2012). Generating inflected word forms in real time: evaluating the role of age, frequency, and working memory In Biller, A., Chung, E. & Kimball, A. (eds), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol. 1, 164–76. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Indefrey, P. & Levelt, W. J. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition 92, 101–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansma, B. M., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Möller, J. & Münte, T. F. (2004). Electrophysiological studies of speech production. In Pechmann, T. & Habel, C. (eds), Multidisciplinary approaches to language production (pp. 361–395). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Janssen, D. P., Roelofs, A. & Levelt, W. J. (2002). Inflectional frames in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes 17, 209–36.Google Scholar
Kappenman, E. S. & Luck, S. J. (2010). The effects of electrode impedance on data quality and statistical significance in ERP recordings. Psychophysiology 47, 888–904.Google Scholar
Koester, D. & Schiller, N. O. (2008). Morphological priming in overt language production: electrophysiological evidence from Dutch. Neuroimage 42, 1622–30.Google Scholar
Laganaro, M., Tzieropoulos, H., Frauenfelder, U. H. & Zesiger, P. (2015). Functional and time-course changes in single word production from childhood to adulthood. NeuroImage 111, 204–14.Google Scholar
Lavric, A., Pizzagalli, D., Forstmeier, S. & Rippon, G. (2001). A double-dissociation of English past-tense production revealed by event-related potentials and low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (LORETA). Clinical Neurophysiology 112, 1833–49.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: from intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1999). Models of word production. Trends in Cognitive Science 3, 223–323.Google Scholar
Lidzba, K., Schwilling, E., Grodd, W., Krägeloh-Mann, I. & Wilke, M. (2011). Language comprehension vs. language production: age effects on fMRI activation. Brain and Language 119, 6–15.Google Scholar
Lindner, K. (1998). Overgeneralization revisited: the case of German past participles. In Fabri, R., Ortmann, A. & Parodi, T. (eds), Models of inflection, 152–74. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Lück, M., Hahne, A. & Clahsen, H. (2006). Brain potentials to morphologically complex words during listening. Brain Research 1077, 144–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penke, M., Weyerts, H., Gross, M., Zander, E., Münte, T. F. & Clahsen, H. (1997). How the brain processes complex words: an event-related potential study of German verb inflections. Cognitive Brain Research 6, 37–52.Google Scholar
Prado, E. L. & Ullman, M. T. (2009). Can imageability help us draw the line between storage and composition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35, 849–66.Google ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Online: <http://www.R-project.org/>..>Google Scholar
Rahman, R. A., Van Turennout, M. & Levelt, W. J. (2003). Phonological encoding is not contingent on semantic feature retrieval: an electrophysiological study on object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29, 850–60.Google Scholar
Sahin, N. T., Pinker, S., Cash, S. S., Schomer, D. & Halgren, E. (2009). Sequential processing of lexical, grammatical, and phonological information within Broca's area. Science 326, 445–9.Google Scholar
Schmidt, T., Dickgießer, S. & Gasch, J. (2013). Die Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch-DGD2. Online: <http://ids-pub.bsz-bw.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/1274>..>Google Scholar
Schmitt, B. M., Münte, T. F. & Kutas, M. (2000). Electrophysiological estimates of the time course of semantic and phonological encoding during implicit picture naming. Psychophysiology 37, 473–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schroeder, S., Würzner, K. M., Heister, J., Geyken, A. & Kliegl, R. (2015). childLex: a lexical database of German read by children. Behavior Research Methods 47, 1085–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strijkers, K., Holcomb, P. J. & Costa, A. (2011). Conscious intention to speak proactively facilitates lexical access during overt object naming. Journal of Memory and Language 65, 345–62.Google Scholar
Szagun, G. (2011). Regular/irregular is not the whole story: the role of frequency and generalization in the acquisition of German past participle inflection. Journal of Child Language 38, 731–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weyerts, H. & Clahsen, H. (1994). Netzwerke und symbolische Regeln im Spracherwerb: experimentelle Ergebnisse zur Entwicklung der Flexionsmorphologie. Linguistische Berichte 154, 430–60.Google Scholar