语言加工过程中的视听跨通道整合

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00475

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

日常生活中, 语言的使用往往出现在某个视觉情境里。大量认知科学研究表明, 视觉信息与语言信息加工模块并不是独立工作, 而是存在复杂的交互作用。本文以视觉信息对语言加工的影响为主线, 首先对视觉信息影响言语理解, 言语产生以及言语交流的相关研究进展进行了综述。其次, 重点对视觉信息影响语言加工的机制进行了探讨。最后介绍了关于视觉信息影响语言加工的计算模型, 并对未来的研究方向提出了展望。

关键词: 视觉信息, 语言加工, 言语理解, 言语产生, 言语交流

Abstract:

In daily life, the use of language often occurs in a visual context. A large number of cognitive science studies have shown that visual and linguistic information processing modules do not work independently, but have complex interactions. The present paper centers on the impact of visual information on language processing, and first reviews research progress on the impact of visual information on speech comprehension, speech production and verbal communication. Secondly, the mechanism of visual information affecting language processing is discussed. Finally, computational models of visually situated language processing are reviewed, and the future research directions are prospected.

Key words: visual information processing, language processing, speech comprehension, speech production, verbal communication

中图分类号:

B842

韩海宾, 许萍萍, 屈青青, 程茜, 李兴珊. (2019). 语言加工过程中的视听跨通道整合. 心理科学进展 , 27(3), 475-489.

HAN Haibin, XU Pingping, QU Qingqing, CHENG Xi, LI Xingshan. (2019). Cross-modal integration of audiovisual information in language processing. Advances in Psychological Science, 27(3), 475-489.

图/表 6

图1 Tanenhaus等(1995)使用的视觉刺激。左图为单表征物情境, 右图为双表征物情境, 被试在看图片的同时会听到局部歧义句“Put the apple on the towel in the box”。

图2 Chambers等(2004)使用的视觉刺激示例。左图为包含两个液体鸡蛋的双表征物情境, 右图为只包含一个液体鸡蛋的单表征物情境。

图3 Chambers和Juan (2008)的研究使用的视觉刺激示例。从方形到月亮位置标号依次为1~9。

图4 Knoeferle等(2005)使用的视觉刺激示例。共包含三个角色, 其中左侧为海盗, 中间为拿着水桶正在清洗海盗的公主, 右边为拿着画笔正在画公主的击剑者。

图5 Altmann和Kamide (2009)使用的视觉刺激示例

图6 模型组成以及模块间的交互作用(McCrae, 2009)。其中句法表征为语言模块, 语义表征为概念结构模块, 视觉背景为视觉感知模块。

参考文献 89

[1]	Allopenna P. D., Magnuson J. S., & Tanenhaus M. K . ( 1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38( 38), 419-439.
[2]	Altmann G. T.M . ( 2004). Language-mediated eye movements in the absence of a visual world: The “blank screen paradigm.” Cognition, 93( 2), 79-87.
[3]	Altmann G. T. M., Garnham A., & Dennis Y . ( 1992). Avoiding the garden path: Eye movements in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 31( 5), 685-712. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(92)90035-V URL
[4]	Altmann G. T.M., & Kamide Y. , ( 1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73( 3), 247-264. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00059-1 URL pmid: 10585516
[5]	Altmann G. T.M., & Kamide Y. , ( 2009). Discourse- mediation of the mapping between language and the visual world: Eye movements and mental representation. Cognition, 111( 1), 55-71.
[6]	Arias-Trejo N. & Plunkett K., ( 2009). Lexical-semantic priming effects during infancy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364( 1536), 3633-3647. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0146 URL pmid: 2846315
[7]	Baumgärtner C., Beuck N., & Menzel W . ( 2012). An architecture for incremental information fusion of cross- modal representations. IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems, 498-503. doi: 10.1109/MFI.2012.6343045 URL
[8]	Beauchamp M.S . ( 2016). Chapter 42-Audiovisual speech integration: Neural substrates and behavior. Neurobiology of Language, ( 2011), 515-526.
[9]	Binder J. R., Frost J. A., Hammeke T. A., Cox R. W., Rao S. M., & Prieto T . ( 1997). Human brain language areas identified by functional magnetic resonance imaging. The Journal of Neuroscience, 17( 1), 353-362. URL pmid: 8987760
[10]	Bobb S. C., Huettig F., & Mani N . ( 2016). Predicting visual information during sentence processing: Toddlers activate an object’s shape before it is mentioned. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 151, 51-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.11.002 URL pmid: 26687440
[11]	Brown-Schmidt S., & Tanenhaus M.K . ( 2008). Real-time investigation of referential domains in unscripted conversation: A targeted language game approach. Cognitive Science, 32(4), 643-684. doi: 10.1080/03640210802066816 URL pmid: 2771881
[12]	Bunger A., Skordos D., Trueswell J. C., & Papafragou A . ( 2016). How children and adults encode causative events cross-linguistically: Implications for language production and attention. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(8), 1015-1037. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1175649 URL
[13]	Carminati M.N., & Knoeferle P. , ( 2013). Effects of speaker emotional facial expression and listener age on incremental sentence processing. PLoS ONE, 8( 9), e72559. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072559 URL pmid: 3765193
[14]	Chambers C.G.,& Juan V.S . ( 2008). Perception and presupposition in real-time language comprehension: Insights from anticipatory processing. Cognition, 108( 1), 26-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.009 URL pmid: 18262509
[15]	Chambers C. G., Tanenhaus M. K., Eberhard K. M., Carlson G. N., & Filip H . ( 1998). Words and worlds: The construction of context for definite reference. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum(pp. 220-225).
[16]	Chambers C. G., Tanenhaus M. K., & Magnuson J. S . ( 2004). Actions and affordances in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30( 3), 687-696. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.687 URL pmid: 15099136
[17]	Chen P-H. & Tsai J-L., ( 2015). The influence of syntactic category and semantic constraints on lexical ambiguity resolution: An eye movement study of processing Chinese homographs. Language and Linguistics, 16(4), 555-586. doi: 10.1177/1606822x15583239 URL
[18]	Clark H.H., & Wilkes-gibbs D. , ( 1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22( 1), 1-39. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(86)90010-7 URL pmid: 3709088
[19]	Coco M.I., & Keller F. , ( 2009). The impact of visual information on reference assignment in sentence production. Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 274-279.
[20]	Coco M.I., & Keller F. , ( 2012). Scan patterns predict sentence production in the cross-modal processing of visual scenes. Cognitive Science, 36( 7), 1204-1223. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01246.x URL pmid: 22486717
[21]	Cooper R.M . ( 1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6( 1), 84-107.
[22]	De Groot F., Huettig F & Olivers C. N. L. .,( 2016). Revisiting the looking at nothing phenomenon: Visual and semantic biases in memory search. Visual Cognition, 24, 226-245. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2016.1221013 URL
[23]	Dilkina K., McClelland J. L., & Plaut D. C . ( 2010). Are there mental lexicons? The role of semantics in lexical decision. Brain Research, 1365, 66-81. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.09.057 URL pmid: 20869349
[24]	Elman J.L . ( 1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14( 2), 179-211.
[25]	Ferreira F., Foucart A., & Engelhardt P. E . ( 2013). Language processing in the visual world: Effects of preview, visual complexity, and prediction. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 165-182. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.06.001 URL
[26]	Findlay J. M. & Gilchrist I. D.. ,( 2003) . Active vision: The psychology of looking and seeing US: Oxford University Press The psychology of looking and seeing. US: Oxford University Press.
[27]	Fodor J.A . ( 1983). The modularity of mind. MIT press Cambridge.
[28]	Frazier L. & Rayner K., ( 1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178-210. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1 URL
[29]	Garoufi K., Staudte M., Koller A., & Crocker M. W . ( 2016). Exploiting listener gaze to improve situated communication in dynamic virtual environments. Cognitive Science, 40(7), 1671-1703. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12298 URL pmid: 26471391
[30]	Gleitman L. R., January D., Nappa R., & Trueswell J. C . ( 2007). On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57( 4), 544-569. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.007 URL pmid: 2151743
[31]	Griffin Z.M., & Bock K. ,( 2000). What the eyes say about speaking. Psychological Science, 11( 4), 274-279. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00255 URL pmid: 11273384
[32]	Grill-Spector K. & Malach R., ( 2004). The human visual cortex. Annual. Review. Neuroscience, 27, 649-677.
[33]	Hafri A., Trueswell J. C., & Strickland B . ( 2018). Extraction of event roles from visual scenes is rapid, automatic, and interacts with higher-level visual processing. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society(Vol. 73).
[34]	Hagoort P. ( 2005). On Broca, brain, and binding: A new framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(9), 416-423. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.07.004 URL
[35]	Hale J. ( 2001). A probabilistic Earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. In Proceedings of the second meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Language technologies(pp. 1-8). doi: 10.3115/1073336.1073357 URL
[36]	Heinrich S. & Wermter S., ( 2018). Interactive natural language acquisition in a multi-modal recurrent neural architecture . Connection Science, 30( 1), 99-133. doi: 10.1080/09540091.2017.1318357 URL
[37]	Hintz F., Meyer A. S., & Huettig F . ( 2017). Predictors of verb-mediated anticipatory eye movements in the visual world. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43( 9), 1352-1374. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000388. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000388 URL pmid: 28287762
[38]	Huang Y.T., & Snedeker J. , ( 2009). Semantic meaning and pragmatic interpretation in 5-year-olds: Evidence from real-time spoken language comprehension. Developmental Psychology, 45( 6), 1723-1739. doi: 10.1037/a0016704 URL pmid: 19899927
[39]	Huang Y.T., & Snedeker J. , ( 2011). Logic and conversation revisited: Evidence for a division between semantic and pragmatic content in real-time language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26( 8), 1161-1172. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2010.508641 URL
[40]	Huettig F. ( 2015). Four central questions about prediction in language processing. Brain Research, 1626, 118-135.
[41]	Huettig F., Gaskell M. G., & Quinlan P. T . ( 2004). How speech processing affects our attention to visually similar objects: Shape competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. In Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 607-612).
[42]	Huettig F., Olivers C. N. L., & Hartsuiker R. J . ( 2011). Looking, language, and memory: Bridging research from the visual world and visual search paradigms. Acta psychologica, 137( 2), 138-150. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.013 URL pmid: 20817134
[43]	Ito A., Pickering M. J., & Corley M . ( 2018). Investigating the time-course of phonological prediction in native and non-native speakers of English: A visual world eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language, 98, 1-11.
[44]	Jackendoff R. ( 1983). Semantics and cognition (Vol.8). MIT press.
[45]	Johnson E.K., & Huettig F. , ( 2011). Eye movements during language-mediated visual search reveal a strong link between overt visual attention and lexical processing in 36-month-olds. Psychological Research, 75( 1), 35-42. doi: 10.1007/s00426-010-0285-4 URL pmid: 20524009
[46]	Johnson E. K., McQueen J. M., & Huettig F . ( 2011). Toddlers’ language-mediated visual search: They need not have the words for it. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64( 9), 1672-1682. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2011.594165 URL pmid: 21812709
[47]	Knoeferle P., Crocker M. W., Scheepers C., & Pickering M. J . ( 2005). The influence of the immediate visual context on incremental thematic role-assignment: Evidence from eye-movements in depicted events. Cognition, 95( 1), 95-127. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.002 URL pmid: 15629475
[48]	Knoeferle P. & Guerra E., ( 2016). Visually situated language comprehension. Language & Linguistics Compass, 10( 2), 66-82.
[49]	Knoeferle P. & Kreysa H., ( 2012). Can speaker gaze modulate syntactic structuring and thematic role assignment during spoken sentence comprehension? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 538. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00538 pmid: 3514542
[50]	Kreysa H., Knoeferle P., & Nunneman E. M . ( 2014). Effects of speaker gaze versus depicted actions on visual attention during sentence comprehension. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society( Vol. 36, No. 36).
[51]	Kuchenbuch A., Paraskevopoulos E., Herholz S. C., & Pantev C . ( 2014). Audio-tactile integration and the influence of musical training. PloS One, 9( 1), e85743. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085743 URL pmid: 3897506
[52]	Lee R., Chambers C. G., Huettig F., & Ganea P. A . ( 2017). Children’s semantic and world knowledge overrides fictional information during anticipatory linguistic processing. In The 39th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2017)
[53]	Leonard M.K., & Chang E.F . ( 2014). Dynamic speech representations in the human temporal lobe. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(9), 472-479. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.05.001 URL pmid: 24906217
[54]	Linzen T., & Jaeger T.F . ( 2016). Uncertainty and expectation in sentence processing: Evidence from subcategorization distributions. Cognitive Science, 40(6), 1382-1411. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12274 URL pmid: 26286681
[55]	MacDonald M.C . ( 1993). The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32( 5), 692-715. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1993.1035 URL
[56]	MacDonald M. C., Pearlmutter N. J., & Seidenberg M. S . ( 1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101( 4), 676-703. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.101.4.676 URL pmid: 7984711
[57]	Mani N., Johnson E., McQueen J. M., & Huettig F . ( 2013). How yellow is your banana? Toddlers’ language-mediated visual search in referent-present tasks. Developmental Psychology, 49( 6), 1036-1044. doi: 10.1037/a0029382 URL pmid: 22845828
[58]	Mani N. & Schneider S., ( 2013). Speaker identity supports phonetic category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39( 3), 623-629. doi: 10.1037/a0030402 URL pmid: 23148468
[59]	Marslen-Wilson W.D . ( 1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process. Science, 189( 4198), 226-228. doi: 10.1126/science.189.4198.226 URL pmid: 17733889
[60]	McClelland J. L., Mirman D., Bolger D. J., & Khaitan P . ( 2014). Interactive activation and mutual constraint satisfaction in perception and cognition. Cognitive Science, 38( 6), 1139-1189. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12146 URL pmid: 25098813
[61]	McCrae P. ( 2009). A model for the cross-modal influence of visual context upon language processing. International Conference Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 09, Borovets, Bulgaria), 230-235.
[62]	McGurk H. & MacDonald J., ( 1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264( 5588), 746-748. doi: 10.1038/264746a0 URL pmid: 1012311
[63]	Melissa K., Snedeker J., & Schulz L . ( 2017). Linking language and events: Spatiotemporal cues drive children’s expectations about the meanings of novel transitive verbs. Language Learning and Development, 13( 1), 1-23. doi: 10.1080/15475441.2016.1171771 URL
[64]	Milburn E., Warren T., & Dickey M. W . ( 2015). World knowledge affects prediction as quickly as selectional restrictions: Evidence from the visual world paradigm. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31( 4), 536-548. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1117117 URL pmid: 27148555
[65]	Ng H. G., Anton P., Brügger M., Churamani N., Fließwasser E., Hummel T., .. Wermter S . ( 2017). Hey Robot, Why don't you talk to me. IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, Lisbon, Portugal. doi: 10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172383 URL
[66]	Noh Y. & Lee M., ( 2017). The impact of inhibitory controls on anticipatory sentence processing in L2. Journal of Cognitive Science, 18( 1), 21-41.
[67]	Nozari N., Trueswell J. C., & Thompson-Schill S. L . ( 2016). The interplay of local attraction, context and domain-general cognitive control in activation and suppression of semantic distractors during sentence comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23( 6), 1942-1953. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1068-8 URL pmid: 27230894
[68]	Ostarek M. & Hüettig F., ( 2017). Spoken words can make the invisible visible - Testing the involvement of low- level visual representations in spoken word processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43( 3), 499-508. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000313 URL pmid: 28080110
[69]	Peeters D., Snijders T. M., Hagoort P., & Özyürek A . ( 2017). Linking language to the visual world: Neural correlates of comprehending verbal reference to objects through pointing and visual cues. Neuropsychologia, 95, 21-29. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.12.004 URL pmid: 27939189
[70]	Pickering M. J., Garrod S., & McElree B . ( 2004). Interactions of language and vision restrict "visual world" interpretations.
[71]	Pluciennicka E., Coello Y., & Kalénine S . ( 2016). Development of implicit processing of thematic and functional similarity relations during manipulable artifact object identification: Evidence from eye-tracking in the Visual World Paradigm. Cognitive Development, 38, 75-88.
[72]	Pozzan L., & Trueswell J.C . ( 2016). Second language processing and revision of garden-path sentences: A visual word study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19( 3), 636-643. doi: 10.1017/S1366728915000838 URL pmid: 27212888
[73]	Eggermont J. J. (2017). Hearing loss: Causes, prevention, and treatment. Academic Press.
[74]	Richardson D.C., & Spivey M.J . ( 2000). Representation, space and Hollywood Squares: Looking at things that aren’t there anymore. Cognition, 76( 3), 269-295. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00084-6 URL pmid: 10913578
[75]	Rossion B. & Pourtois G., ( 2004). Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart’s object pictorial set: The role of surface detail in basic-level object recognition. Perception, 33( 2), 217-236. doi: 10.1068/p5117 URL pmid: 15109163
[76]	Salverda A.P., & Tanenhaus M.K . ( 2010). Tracking the time course of orthographic information in spoken-word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36( 5), 1108-1117. doi: 10.1037/a0019901 URL pmid: 20804288
[77]	Smith A. C., Monaghan P., & Huettig F . ( 2017). The multimodal nature of spoken word processing in the visual world: Testing the predictions of alternative models of multimodal integration. Journal of Memory and Language, 93, 276-303. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.08.005 URL
[78]	Smith A. C., Monaghan P., & Huettig F . ( 2014). Modelling language-Vision interactions in the hub and spoke framework. Computational Models of Cognitive Processes, 3-16. doi: 10.1142/9789814458849_0001 URL
[79]	Smith A. C., Monaghan P., & Huettig F . ( 2014). A comprehensive model of spoken word recognition must be multimodal: Evidence from studies of language-mediated visual attention. In 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2014). Cognitive Science Society.
[80]	Snedeker J., & Trueswell J.C . ( 2004). The developing constraints on parsing decisions: The role of lexical-biases and referential scenes in child and adult sentence processing. Cognitive Psychology, 49( 3), 238-299. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.03.001 URL pmid: 15342261
[81]	Staub A., Abbott M., & Bogartz R. S . ( 2012). Linguistically guided anticipatory eye movements in scene viewing. Visual Cognition, 20( 8), 922-946. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2012.715599 URL
[82]	Staub A. & Clifton Jr C. , ( 2006). Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: Evidence from either..or. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32( 2), 425-436. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.425 URL pmid: 1479855
[83]	Tanenhaus M.K., & Brown-Schmidt S. , ( 2008). Language processing in the natural world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363( 1493), 1105-1122. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2162 URL pmid: 2606799
[84]	Tanenhaus M. K., Spivey-Knowlton M. J., Eberhard K. M., & Sedivy J. C . ( 1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268( 5217), 1632-1634.
[85]	Vaidyanathan P., Prud’hommeaux E., Alm C. O., Pelz J. B., & Haake A. R . ( 2015). Alignment of eye movements and spoken language for semantic image understanding. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computational Semantics, 76-81.
[86]	van Bergen G., & Flecken M. , ( 2017). Putting things in new places: Linguistic experience modulates the predictive power of placement verb semantics. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 26-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.05.003 URL
[87]	Venhuizen N. J., Brouwer H., & Crocker M . ( 2016). When the food arrives before the menu: Modeling event-driven surprisal in language comprehension. In Abstract Presented at Events in Language and Cognition, Pre-CUNY Workshop on Event Structure (Gainesville, FL).
[88]	Yeung H.H., & Nazzi T. , ( 2014). Object labeling influences infant phonetic learning and generalization. Cognition, 132( 2), 151-163. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.04.001 URL pmid: 24809743
[89]	Yeung H.H., & Werker J.F . ( 2009). Learning words’ sounds before learning how words sound: 9-month-olds use distinct objects as cues to categorize speech information. Cognition, 113( 2), 234-243. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.010 URL pmid: 19765698