The Experts below are selected from a list of 1137 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ferruccio Fazio - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild indri (Indri indri).
American journal of primatology, 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Marco Poli, Ferruccio FazioAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the “postural origins” theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: “branch-reach,” an action that occurs during foraging, and “higher support,” a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at “level 1 of laterality” in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201–232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the “postural origins” theory, as lateralized subjects are often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987], but they are the minority. Am. J. Primatol. 64:27–38, 2005. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild Indri (Indri indri)
'Wiley', 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Ferruccio Fazio, Marco PoliAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences10:247\u2013303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: \u2018\u2018branch-reach,\u2019\u2019 an action that occurs during foraging, and \u201chigher support\u201d, a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at \u2018\u2018level 1 of laterality\u2019\u2019 in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201\u2013232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory, since hand preference for lateralized subjects was often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247\u2013303, 1987]. However, only a minority of indris showed hand preference
Louis Goldstein - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Computational simulation of CV combination preferences in babbling
Journal of phonetics, 2013Co-Authors: Hosung Nam, Louis Goldstein, Sara Giulivi, Andrea G. Levitt, Douglas H. WhalenAbstract:There is a tendency for spoken consonant-vowel (CV) syllables, in babbling in particular, to show preferred combinations: labial consonants with central vowels, alveolars with front, and velars with back. This pattern was first described by Macneilage and Davis, who found the evidence compatible with their "frame-then-content" (F/C) model. F/C postulates that CV syllables in babbling are produced with no control of the tongue (and therefore effectively random tongue positions) but systematic oscillation of the jaw. Articulatory Phonology (AP; Browman & Goldstein) predicts that CV preferences will depend on the degree of synergy of tongue movements for the C and V. We present computational modeling of both accounts using articulatory synthesis. Simulations found better correlations between patterns in babbling and the AP account than with the F/C model. These results indicate that the underlying assumptions of the F/C model are not supported and that the AP account provides a better and account with broader coverage by showing that articulatory synergies influence all CV syllables, not just the most common ones.
-
Biomechanically preferred consonant-vowel combinations fail to appear in adult spoken corpora.
Language and Speech, 2012Co-Authors: Douglas H. Whalen, Sara Giulivi, Hosung Nam, Andrea G. Levitt, Pierre A. Hallé, Louis GoldsteinAbstract:Certain consonant/vowel (CV) combinations are more frequent than would be expected from the individual C and V frequencies alone, both in babbling and, to a lesser extent, in adult language, based on dictionary counts: Labial consonants cooccur with central vowels more often than chance would dictate; coronals co-occur with front vowels, and velars with back vowels (Davis & Macneilage, 1994). Plausible biomechanical explanations have been proposed, but it is also possible that infants are mirroring the frequency of the CVs that they hear. As noted, previous assessments of adult language were based on dictionaries; these "type" counts are incommensurate with the babbling measures, which are necessarily "token" counts. We analyzed the tokens in two spoken corpora for English, two for French and one for Mandarin. We found that the adult spoken CV preferences correlated with the type counts for Mandarin and French, not for English. Correlations between the adult spoken corpora and the babbling results had all three possible outcomes: significantly positive (French), uncorrelated (Mandarin), and significantly negative (English). There were no correlations of the dictionary data with the babbling results when we consider all nine combinations of consonants and vowels. The results indicate that spoken frequencies of CV combinations can differ from dictionary (type) counts and that the CV preferences apparent in babbling are biomechanically driven and can ignore the frequencies of CVs in the ambient spoken language.
-
Biomechanically preferred consonant-vowel combinations fail to appear in adult lexicons and spoken corpora
Language and Speech, 2012Co-Authors: Douglas Whalen, Sara Giulivi, Hosung Nam, Andrea Levitt, Pierre Hallé, Louis GoldsteinAbstract:Certain consonant/vowel (CV) combinations are more frequent than would be expected from the individual C and V frequencies alone, both in babbling and, to a lesser extent, in adult language, based on dictionary counts: Labial consonants cooccur with central vowels more often than chance would dictate; coronals co-occur with front vowels, and velars with back vowels (Davis & Macneilage, 1994). Plausible biomechanical explanations have been proposed, but it is also possible that infants are mirroring the frequency of the CVs that they hear. As noted, previous assessments of adult language were based on dictionaries; these "type" counts are incommensurate with the babbling measures, which are necessarily "token" counts. We analyzed the tokens in two spoken corpora for English, two for French and one for Mandarin. We found that the adult spoken CV preferences correlated with the type counts for Mandarin and French, not for English. Correlations between the adult spoken corpora and the babbling results had all three possible outcomes: significantly positive (French), uncorrelated (Mandarin), and significantly negative (English). There were no correlations of the dictionary data with the babbling results when we consider all nine combinations of consonants and vowels. The results indicate that spoken frequencies of CV combinations can differ from dictionary (type) counts and that the CV preferences apparent in babbling are biomechanically driven and can ignore the frequencies of CVs in the ambient spoken language.
-
An Articulatory Phonology Account of Preferred Consonant-Vowel Combinations.
Language learning and development : the official journal of the Society for Language Development, 2011Co-Authors: Sara Giulivi, Douglas H. Whalen, Louis Goldstein, Hosung Nam, Andrea G. LevittAbstract:Certain consonant/vowel combinations (labial/central, coronal/front, velar/back) are more frequent in babbling as well as, to a lesser extent, in adult language, than chance would dictate. The "Frame then Content" (F/C) hypothesis (Davis & Macneilage, 1994) attributes this pattern to biomechanical vocal-tract biases that change as infants mature. Articulatory Phonology (AP; Browman and Goldstein 1989) attributes preferences to demands placed on shared articulators. F/C implies that preferences will diminish as articulatory control increases, while AP does not. Here, babbling from children at 6, 9 and 12 months in English, French and Mandarin environments was examined. There was no developmental trend in CV preferences, although older ages exhibited greater articulatory control. A perception test showed no evidence of bias toward hearing the preferred combinations. Modeling using articulatory synthesis found limited support for F/C but more for AP, including data not originally encompassed in F/C. AP thus provides an alternative biomechanical explanation.
-
Response to Macneilage and Davis and to Oller
Language learning and development : the official journal of the Society for Language Development, 2011Co-Authors: Douglas H. Whalen, Sara Giulivi, Louis Goldstein, Hosung Nam, Andrea G. LevittAbstract:The article by Macneilage and Davis in this issue, entitled “In Defense of the ‘Frames, then Content’ (FC) Perspective on Speech Acquisition: A Response to Two Critiques” appears to assume that the only alternative to segment-level control is oscillation specifically of the jaw; however, other articulators could be oscillated by infants as well. This allows the preferred CV combinations to emerge without positing a level of segmental control in babbling. Their response does not address our modeling work, which, rather similarly to Davis’s own modeling (Serkhane, Schwartz, Boe, Davis, & Matyear, 2007), shows little support for the Frame-then-Content (F/C) account. Our results show substantial support for the Articulatory Phonology (AP) one. A closer look at feeding in infants shows substantial control of the tongue and lips, casting further doubt on the foundation of the F/C account.
Marco M. Rigamonti - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild indri (Indri indri).
American journal of primatology, 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Marco Poli, Ferruccio FazioAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the “postural origins” theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: “branch-reach,” an action that occurs during foraging, and “higher support,” a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at “level 1 of laterality” in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201–232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the “postural origins” theory, as lateralized subjects are often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987], but they are the minority. Am. J. Primatol. 64:27–38, 2005. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild Indri (Indri indri)
'Wiley', 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Ferruccio Fazio, Marco PoliAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences10:247\u2013303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: \u2018\u2018branch-reach,\u2019\u2019 an action that occurs during foraging, and \u201chigher support\u201d, a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at \u2018\u2018level 1 of laterality\u2019\u2019 in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201\u2013232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory, since hand preference for lateralized subjects was often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247\u2013303, 1987]. However, only a minority of indris showed hand preference
Marco Poli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild indri (Indri indri).
American journal of primatology, 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Marco Poli, Ferruccio FazioAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the “postural origins” theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: “branch-reach,” an action that occurs during foraging, and “higher support,” a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at “level 1 of laterality” in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201–232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the “postural origins” theory, as lateralized subjects are often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987], but they are the minority. Am. J. Primatol. 64:27–38, 2005. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild Indri (Indri indri)
'Wiley', 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Ferruccio Fazio, Marco PoliAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences10:247\u2013303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: \u2018\u2018branch-reach,\u2019\u2019 an action that occurs during foraging, and \u201chigher support\u201d, a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at \u2018\u2018level 1 of laterality\u2019\u2019 in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201\u2013232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory, since hand preference for lateralized subjects was often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247\u2013303, 1987]. However, only a minority of indris showed hand preference
Caterina Spiezio - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild indri (Indri indri).
American journal of primatology, 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Marco Poli, Ferruccio FazioAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the “postural origins” theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: “branch-reach,” an action that occurs during foraging, and “higher support,” a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at “level 1 of laterality” in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201–232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the “postural origins” theory, as lateralized subjects are often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247–303, 1987], but they are the minority. Am. J. Primatol. 64:27–38, 2005. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
-
Laterality of manual function in foraging and positional behavior in wild Indri (Indri indri)
'Wiley', 2005Co-Authors: Marco M. Rigamonti, Caterina Spiezio, Ferruccio Fazio, Marco PoliAbstract:This research is based on the idea that some prosimian species are good models in which to test certain postulates of the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory proposed by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences10:247\u2013303, 1987] to explain the evolution of hand preference within the order Primates. We investigated manual laterality in 16 wild indris (eight males and eight females, living in four social groups) in their habitat, the Madagascan tropical rain forest. Data were collected on two spontaneous behaviors: \u2018\u2018branch-reach,\u2019\u2019 an action that occurs during foraging, and \u201chigher support\u201d, a posture typical of clingers and leapers. A total of seven subjects were significantly lateralized for branch-reach (two showed a right preference, and five showed a left preference). Four subjects were significantly lateralized for higher support, and all of them showed a right-hand preference. Most of the indris we studied showed no preference. Our research suggests that indri are at \u2018\u2018level 1 of laterality\u2019\u2019 in the classification framework proposed by McGrew and Marchant [Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201\u2013232, 1997]. The data presented here are not discordant with the \u2018\u2018postural origins\u2019\u2019 theory, since hand preference for lateralized subjects was often in the direction predicted by Macneilage and colleagues [Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10:247\u2013303, 1987]. However, only a minority of indris showed hand preference
