The curse of knowledge: First language knowledge impairs adult learners’ use of novel statistics for word segmentation

We investigated whether adult learners' knowledge of phonotactic restrictions on word forms from their first language impacts their ability to use statistical information to segment words in a novel language. Adults were exposed to a speech stream where English phonotactics and phoneme co-occurrence information conflicted. A control where these did not conflict was also run. Participants chose between words defined by novel statistics and words that are phonotactically possible in English, but had much lower phoneme contingencies. Control participants selected words defined by statistics while experimental participants did not. This result held up with increases in exposure and when segmentation was aided by telling participants a word prior to exposure. It was not the case that participants simply preferred English-sounding words, however, when the stimuli contained very short pauses, participants were able to learn the novel words despite the fact that they violated English phonotactics. Results suggest that prior linguistic knowledge can interfere with learners' abilities to segment words from running speech using purely statistical cues at initial exposure.

[1]  E. Newport,et al.  Learning at a distance I. Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  B. Scholl,et al.  The Automaticity of Visual Statistical Learning Statistical Learning , 2005 .

[3]  K. Stevens,et al.  Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. , 1992, Science.

[4]  D B Pisoni,et al.  Discrimination of voice onset time by human infants: new findings and implications for the effects of early experience. , 1981, Child development.

[5]  K. M. Dallenbach,et al.  Obliviscence During Sleep and Waking. , 1924 .

[6]  R. Stickgold,et al.  Memory consolidation and reconsolidation: what is the role of sleep? , 2005, Trends in Neurosciences.

[7]  M. Linden,et al.  Associative chunk strength in artificial grammar learning. , 1997 .

[8]  A. Weber,et al.  First-language phonotactics in second-language listening. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Modality-constrained statistical learning of tactile, visual, and auditory sequences. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[10]  Peter D. Eimas,et al.  Organization in the Perception of Speech by Young Infants , 1992 .

[11]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  Does Grammar Start Where Statistics Stop? , 2002, Science.

[12]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  Learning to Learn: Infants’ Acquisition of Stress-Based Strategies for Word Segmentation , 2007 .

[13]  H. Heinze,et al.  Brain potential and functional MRI evidence for how to handle two languages with one brain , 2002, Nature.

[14]  M. Brent,et al.  The role of exposure to isolated words in early vocabulary development , 2001, Cognition.

[15]  M. Hauser,et al.  Segmentation of the speech stream in a non-human primate: statistical learning in cotton-top tamarins , 2001, Cognition.

[16]  G. Dell,et al.  Speech errors, phonotactic constraints, and implicit learning: a study of the role of experience in language production. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[17]  J. Werker,et al.  Phonemic and phonetic factors in adult cross-language speech perception. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  Rebecca L. Gómez,et al.  Naps Promote Abstraction in Language-Learning Infants , 2006, Psychological science.

[19]  Gary S Dell,et al.  Speech errors reflect newly learned phonotactic constraints. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Visual statistical learning in infancy: evidence for a domain general learning mechanism , 2002, Cognition.

[21]  Antoni Rodríguez-Fornells,et al.  Second Language Interferes with Word Production in Fluent Bilinguals: Brain Potential and Functional Imaging Evidence , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  When cues collide: use of stress and statistical cues to word boundaries by 7- to 9-month-old infants. , 2003, Developmental psychology.

[23]  M. Goldsmith,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996 .

[24]  P. Kuhl.  Early language acquisition: cracking the speech code , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[25]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  Phonotactic and Prosodic Effects on Word Segmentation in Infants , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[26]  Z. Dienes,et al.  UNCONSCIOUS KNOWLEDGE OF ARTIFICIAL GRAMMARS IS APPLIED STRATEGICALLY , 1995 .

[27]  A. Allport,et al.  Bilingual Language Switching in Naming: Asymmetrical Costs of Language Selection , 1999 .

[28]  P. Perruchet,et al.  Implicit learning and statistical learning: one phenomenon, two approaches , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[29]  M. H. Kelly,et al.  Stress in time. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  Stephen A. Hockema,et al.  Finding Words in Speech: An Investigation of American English , 2006 .

[31]  J. Mehler,et al.  Linguistic Constraints on Statistical Computations , 2005, Psychological science.

[32]  E. Newport,et al.  WORD SEGMENTATION : THE ROLE OF DISTRIBUTIONAL CUES , 1996 .

[33]  Eugene Buckley,et al.  On the Learning of Arbitrary Phonological Rules , 2005 .

[34]  J. Werker,et al.  Speech perception as a window for understanding plasticity and commitment in language systems of the brain. , 2005, Developmental psychobiology.

[35]  Janet F. Werker,et al.  Cross-Language Speech Perception : Initial Capabilities and Developmental Change , 2001 .

[36]  Charles D. Yang.  Universal Grammar, statistics or both? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[37]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Cross Talk Between Native and Second Languages: Partial Activation of an Irrelevant Lexicon , 1999 .

[38]  Elissa L. Newport,et al.  Statistical Learning of Syntax: The Role of Transitional Probability , 2007 .

[39]  Janet F. Werker,et al.  Infant speech perception bootstraps word learning , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  C. Fisher,et al.  Learning phonotactic constraints from brief auditory experience , 2002, Cognition.

[41]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults , 1999, Cognition.

[42]  Scott Sinnett,et al.  Speech segmentation by statistical learning depends on attention , 2005, Cognition.

[43]  Roger W. Brown,et al.  A First Language: The Early Stages , 1974 .

[44]  J. Werker,et al.  Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life , 1984 .

[45]  J. Born,et al.  Effects of early and late nocturnal sleep on priming and spatial memory. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[46]  Mary R. Newsome,et al.  The Beginnings of Word Segmentation in English-Learning Infants , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[47]  Jean Berko Gleason,et al.  What's the magic word: Learning language through politeness routines∗ , 1984 .

[48]  J. Morgan,et al.  Mommy and Me , 2005, Psychological science.

[49]  J. B. Trobalon,et al.  Statistical computations over a speech stream in a rodent , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[50]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  Changing Structures in Midstream: Learning Along the Statistical Garden Path , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[51]  R. Gómez.  Variability and Detection of Invariant Structure , 2002, Psychological science.

[52]  Håkan Ringbom,et al.  Language transfer. Cross-linguistic influence in language learning , 1990 .

[53]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Word Segmentation by 8-Month-Olds: When Speech Cues Count More Than Statistics , 2001 .

[54]  J. Saffran.  Constraints on Statistical Language Learning , 2002 .

[55]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition , 2003, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.

[56]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Speech Perception in Infants , 1971, Science.

[57]  P. Maquet,et al.  Be caught napping: you're doing more than resting your eyes , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[58]  R. Peereman,et al.  Learning Nonadjacent Dependencies: No Need for Algebraic-like Computations Is It Possible to Learn the Relation between 2 Nonadjacent Events? , 2004 .

[59]  A. Kinder,et al.  Learning artificial grammars: No evidence for the acquisition of rules , 2000, Memory & cognition.