Cover not available
Part of
Biolinguistic Investigations on the Language Faculty
Edited by Anna Maria Di Sciullo
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 235] 2016
► pp. 79–100

Electroencephalographic evidence of vowels computation and representation in human auditory cortex

 | Centro di Ricerca Interdisciplinare sul Linguaggio (CRIL) x University of Salento, Lecce, ItalyDepartment of Human Movement, Social and Health Sciences, University of Rome “Foro Italico”, Rome, ItalyIRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome Italy
 | Centro di Ricerca Interdisciplinare sul Linguaggio (CRIL) x University of Salento, Lecce, ItalyDepartment of Human Movement, Social and Health Sciences, University of Rome “Foro Italico”, Rome, ItalyIRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome Italy
 | Centro di Ricerca Interdisciplinare sul Linguaggio (CRIL) x University of Salento, Lecce, ItalyDepartment of Human Movement, Social and Health Sciences, University of Rome “Foro Italico”, Rome, ItalyIRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome Italy
By exploiting the N1 component of the auditory event related potentials we aimed to measure and localize the processing involving the spectro-temporal and the abstract featural representation. We investigated the electroencephalography patterns of 11 Salento Italian speakers discriminating their native five stressed vowels [i, ε, a, ɔ, u]. Findings showed two distinct N1 sub-components: the N1a peaking at 125–135 ms, localized in the bilateral primary auditory cortex (BA41), and the N1b peaking at 145–155 ms, localized in the superior temporal gyrus (BA22) with a strong leftward lateralization. Crucially, while high vowels elicited higher amplitudes than non-high vowels both in the N1a and N1b, back vowels generated later responses than non-back vowels in the N1b only. Overall, these findings suggest a hierarchical processing where from the N1a to the N1b the acoustic analysis shift progressively toward the computation and representation of phonological features.
Published online: 24 November 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.235.04gri
References (63)
References
Biermann, S. & Heil, P. 2000. Parallels between timing of onset responses of single neurons in cat and of evoked magnetic fields in human auditory cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 84(5): 2426-2439.Google Scholar
Böcker, K.B.E, Brunia, C.H.M. & van den Berg-Lenssen, M.M.C. 1994. A spatiotemporal dipole model of the stimulus preceding negativity prior to feedback stimuli. Brain Topography 7(1): 71-88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. 2010. Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer [Computer program], Version 5.2. < [URL]>Google Scholar
Calabrese, A. 2011. Metaphony in Romance. In The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Vol. 5, M. van Oostendorp, C.J. Ewen, E. Hume & K. Rice (eds), 2631-2661. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chang, E.F., Rieger, J.W, Johnson, K., Berger, M.S., Barbaro, N.M., Knight, R.T., 2010. Categorical Speech Representation in Human Superior Temporal Gyrus. Nature 13(11): 1428–1432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diesch, E., Eulitz, C., Hampson, S. & Ross, B. 1996. The neurotopography of vowels as mirrored by evoked magnetic field measurements. Brain Language 53: 143-168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diesch, E. & Luce, T. 1997. Magnetic fields elicited by tones and vowel formants reveal tonotopy and nonlinear summation of cortical activation. Psychophysiology 34: 501-510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Topographic and temporal indices of vowel spectral envelope extraction in the human auditory cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12: 878–893. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eulitz, C., Diesch, E., Pantev, C., Hampson, S. & Elbert, T. 1995. Magnetic and electric brain activity evoked by the processing of tone and vowel stimuli. Journal of Neuroscience 15: 2748-2755.Google Scholar
Eulitz, C., Eulitz, H. & Elbert, T. 1997. Differential outcomes from magneto-and electroencephalography for the analysis of human cognition. Neuroscience Letters 227(3): 185-188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eulitz, C., Obleser, J. & Lahiri, A. 2004. Intra-subject replication of brain magnetic activity during the processing of speech sounds. Cognitive brain research 19(1): 82-91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrero, F.E., Magno-Caldognetto, E., Vagges, K. & Lavagnoli, C. 1978. Some acoustic characteristics of the Italian vowels. Journal of Italian Linguistics 3(1): 87-96.Google Scholar
Gage, N., Poeppel, D., Roberts, T.P.L. & Hickok, G. 1998. Auditory evoked M100 reflects onset acoustics of speech sounds. Brain Research 814(1): 236-239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gage, N., Roberts, T.P.L & Hickok, G. 2006. Temporal resolution properties of human auditory cortex: Reflections in the neuromagnetic auditory evoked M100 component. Brain Research 1069(1): 166-171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimaldi, M. 2003. Nuove ricerche sul vocalismo tonico del Salento meridionale. Analisi acustica e trattamento fonologico dei dati. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
. 2009. Acoustic correlates of phonological microvariations. The case of unsuspected highly diversified metaphonetic processes in a small area of Southern Salento (Apulia). In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2006. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’, Amsterdam 7-9 December 2006 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 303], D. Torck & W.L. Wetzels (eds), 89-109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, M. 2002. From Memory to Speech and Back: Papers on Phonetics and Phonology 1954–2002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hickok, G. & Poeppel, D. 2004. Dorsal and ventral streams: A framework for understanding aspects of the functional anatomy of language. Cognition 92(1): 67-99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8(5): 393-402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Inui, K., Okamoto, H., Miki, K., Gunji, A. & Kakigi, R. 2006. Serial and parallel processing in the human auditory cortex: A magnetoencephalographic study. Cerebral Cortex 16(1): 18-30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaas, J.H. & Hackett, T.A. 2000. Subdivisions of auditory cortex and processing streams in primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97(22): 11793-11799. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kodera, K., Hink, R.F., Yamada, O. & Suzuki, J.-I. 1979. Effects of rise time on simultaneously recorded auditory-evoked potentials from the early, middle and late ranges. International Journal of Audiology 18: 395-402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, I. & Precoda, K. 1990. Updating upsid. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 74: 104-111.Google Scholar
Manca, A.D., Di Russo, F., Sigona, F. & Grimaldi, M. Submitted. Electrical brain responses mirror tonochrony, phonemotopic and hierarchical organization of auditory cortex.
Manca A.D., Di Russo F. & Grimaldi M. In press. Orderly organization of vowels in the auditory brain: The neuronal correlates of the Italian vowels. In Proceedings of the XI Convegno Nazionale Associazione Italiana Scienze della Voce, AISV . Il farsi e il disfarsi del linguaggio. Bologna.
Malmivuo, J., Suihko, V. & Eskola, H. 1997. Sensitivity distributions of EEG and MEG measurements. IEEE Transactions of Biomedical Engineering 44: 196-208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mäkelä, A.M., Alku, P. & Tiitinen, H. 2003. The auditory N1m reveals the left-hemispheric representation of vowel identity in humans. Neuroscience Letters 353: 111-114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
May, P.J.C. & Tiitinen, H. 2010. Mismatch negativity (MMN), the deviance‐elicited auditory deflection, explained. Psychophysiology 47(1): 66–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mcdonald, J.J., Teder-Sälejärvi, W.A., Di Russo, F. & Hillyard, S.A. 2003. Neural substrates of perceptual enhancement by crossmodal spatial attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15(1): 10-19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Näätänen, R. & Picton, T. 1987. The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: A review and analysis of the component structure. Psychophysiology 24: 375-425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Näätänen, R. 1990. The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by the event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function‖. Behavioural Brain Science 13: 201–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obleser, J., Elbert, T., Lahiri, A. & Eulitz, C. 2003a. Cortical representation of vowels reflects acoustic dissimilarity determined by formant frequencies. Cognitive Brain Research 15(3): 207-213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obleser, J., Lahiri, A. & Eulitz, C. 2003b. Auditory-evoked magnetic field codes place of articulation in timing and topography around 100 milliseconds post syllable onset. Neuroimage 20(3): 1839-1847. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004a. Intra-subject replication of brain activity during the processing of speech sounds. Cognitive Brain Research 19: 82-91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004b. Magnetic brain response mirrors extraction of phonological features from spoken vowels. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16(8): 31-39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obleser, J., Scott, S.K. & Eulitz, C. 2006. Now you hear it, now you don’t: Transient traces of consonants and their nonspeech analogues in the human brain. Cerebral Cortex 16(8): 1069-1076. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Obleser, J. & Eisner, F. 2009. Pre-lexical abstraction of speech in the auditory cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(1): 14-19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohl, F.W. & Scheich, H. 1997. Orderly cortical representation of vowels based on formant interaction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A . 94: 9440-9444.
Pantev, C., Bertrand, O., Eulitz, C., Verkindt, C., Hampson, S., Schuierer, G. & Elbert, T. 1995. Specific tonotopic organizations of different areas of the human auditory cortex revealed by simultaneous magnetic and electric recordings. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 94(1): 26-40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Picton, T.W., Woods, D.L. & Proulx, G.B. 1978. Human auditory sustained potentials, I: The nature of the response. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 45(2): 186-197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poeppel, D., Phillips, C., Yellin, E., Rowley, H.A., Roberts, T.P.L & Marantz, A. 1997. Processing of vowels in supratemporal auditory cortex. Neuroscience Letters 221: 145-148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poeppel, D., Idsardi, W.J. & van Wassenhove, V. 2009. Speech perception at the interface of neurobiology and linguistics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363(1493): 1071-1086. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rauschecker, J.P. & Scott, S.K. 2009. Maps and streams in the auditory cortex: Nonhuman primates illuminate human speech processing. Nature Neuroscience 12(6): 718-724. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, T.P.L. & Poeppel, D. 1996. Latency of auditory evoked M100 as a function of tone frequency. NeuroReport 7: 1138-1140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, T.P.L., Ferrari, P. & Poeppel, D. 1998. Latency of evoked neuromagnetic M100 reflects perceptual and acoustic stimulus attributes. NeuroReport 9: 3265-3269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, T.P.L., Ferrari, P., Stufflebeam, S.M. & Poeppel, D. 2000. Latency of the auditory evoked neuromagnetic field components: Stimulus dependence and insights toward perception. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 17: 114-129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, T.P.L., Flagg, E.J. & Gage, N.M. 2004. Vowel categorization induces departure of M100 latency from acoustic prediction. NeuroReport 15: 1679-1682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romani, G.L., Williamson, S.J. & Kaufman, L. 1982. Tonotopic organization of the human auditory cortex. Science 216: 1339-1340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saenz, M. & Langers, D.R.M. 2014. Tonotopic mapping of human auditory cortex. Hearing Research 307: 42-52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scharinger, M., Idsardi, W.J. & Poe, S. 2011. A comprehensive three-dimensional cortical map of vowel space. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23(12): 3972-3982. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, S.K. & Johnsrude, I.S. 2003. The neuroanatomical and functional organization of speech perception. Trends in Neurosciences 26(2): 100-107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, S.K. & McGettigan, C. 2013. Do temporal processes underlie left hemisphere dominance in speech perception? Brain & Language 127: 36-45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shestakova, A., Brattico, E., Soloviev, A., Klucharev, V. & Huotilainen, M. 2004. Orderly cortical representation of vowel categories presented by multiple exemplars. Cognitive Brain Research 21: 342-350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, K.N. 2002. Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 111(4): 1872-1891. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talavage, T.M., Sereno, M.I., Melcher, J.R., Ledden, P.J., Rosen, B.R. & Dale, A.M. 2004. Tonotopic organization in human auditory cortex revealed by progressions of frequency sensitivity. Journal of neurophysiology 91(3): 1282-1296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teder-Sälejärvi, W.A., McDonald, J.J., Di Russo, F. & Hillyard, S.A. 2003. An analysis of audio-visual crossmodal integration by means of event related potential (ERP) recordings. Cognitive Brain Research 14(1): 106-114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teder-Sälejärvi, W., Di Russo, F., McDonald, J.J. & Hillyard, S.A. 2005. Effects of spatial congruity on audio-visual multimodal integration. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17(9): 1396-1409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vihla, M. & Eulitz, C. 2003. Topography of the auditory evoked potential in humans reflects differences between vowels embedded in pseudo-words. Neuroscience Letters 338(3): 189-192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Virtanen, J., Ahveninen, J., Ilmoniemi, R.J., Näätänen, R. & Pekkonen, E. 1998. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 108: 291-298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolpaw, J.R. & Kiffin Penry, J. 1975. A temporal component of the auditory evoked response. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 39: 609-620. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wood, C.C. & Wolpaw, J.R. 1982. Scalp distribution of human auditory evoked potentials. II. Evidence for overlapping sources and involvement of auditory cortex. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 54(1): 25-38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woods, D.L. 1995. The component structure of the N1 wave of the human auditory evoked potential. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology-Supplements Only 44: 102-109.Google Scholar
Woods, D.L., Herron, T., Kang, X., Cate, A.D. & William Yund, E. 2011. Phonological processing in human auditory cortical fields. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 5(00042): 1-15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Grimaldi, Mirko
2023. Neurocomputational Properties of Speech Sound Perception and Production. In Language Electrified [Neuromethods, 202], ► pp. 389 ff. DOI logo
Whitten, Allison, Alexandra P. Key, Antje S. Mefferd & James W. Bodfish
2020. Auditory event-related potentials index faster processing of natural speech but not synthetic speech over nonspeech analogs in children. Brain and Language 207 ► pp. 104825 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.