Behavioral and EEG Reactions in Native Turkic-Speaking Inhabitants of Siberia and Siberian Russians during Recognition of Syntactic Errors in Sentences in Native and Foreign Languages
The aim of the study is to compare behavioral and
EEG reactions in Turkic-speaking inhabitants of Siberia (Tuvinians
and Yakuts) and Russians during the recognition of syntax errors in
native and foreign languages. Sixty-three healthy aboriginals of the
Tyva Republic, 29 inhabitants of the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic, and
55 Russians from Novosibirsk participated in the study. EEG were
recorded during execution of error-recognition task in Russian and
English language (in all participants) and in native languages
(Tuvinian or Yakut Turkic-speaking inhabitants). Reaction time (RT)
and quality of task execution were chosen as behavioral measures.
Amplitude and cortical distribution of P300 and P600 peaks of ERP
were used as a measure of speech-related brain activity. In Tuvinians,
there were no differences in the P300 and P600 amplitudes as well as
in cortical topology for Russian and Tuvinian languages, but there
was a difference for English. In Yakuts, the P300 and P600
amplitudes and topology of ERP for Russian language were the same
as Russians had for native language. In Yakuts, brain reactions during
Yakut and English language comprehension had no difference, while
the Russian language comprehension was differed from both Yakut
and English. We found out that the Tuvinians recognized both Russian and
Tuvinian as native languages, and English as a foreign language. The
Yakuts recognized both English and Yakut as foreign languages, but
Russian as a native language. According to the inquirer, both
Tuvinians and Yakuts use the national language as a spoken
language, whereas they do not use it for writing. It can well be a
reason that Yakuts perceive the Yakut writing language as a foreign
language while writing Russian as their native.
[1] S. Bentin, Electrophysiological studies of visual word perception,
lexical organization, and semantic processing: a tutorial review. Lang.
Speech, 1989, vol. 32 (Pt 3), pp. 205-20.
[2] S. Bentin, Y. Mouchetant-Rostaing, M. H. Giard, J. F. Echallier, J.
Pernier, ERP manifestations of processing printed words at different
psycholinguistic levels: time course and scalp distribution. J. Cogn.
Neuroci., 1999, vol. 11, № 3, pp.235-60.
[3] E. Pihko, V. V. Nikulin, R. J. Ilmoniemi, Visual attention to words in
different languages in bilinguals: a magnetoencephalographic study.
Neuroimage, 2002, vol. 17, № 4, pp. 1830-6.
[4] A.C. Tsai, A. N., Savostyanov, A. Wu, J. P. Evans, V. S. C. Chien, H.
H. Yang, D. Y. Yang, M. Liou, Recognizing syntactic errors in Chinese
and English sentences: Brain electrical activity in Asperger’s syndrom.,
Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2013, vol. 7, pp. 889-905.
[5] J. Pellikka, P. Heleniu, J. P. Mäkelä, M. Lehtonen, Context affects L1
but not L2 during bilingual word recognition: an MEG study. Brain
Lang., 2015, vol. 42, pp. 8-17.
[6] X. Meng, J. Jian, H. Shu, X. Tian, X. Zhou, ERP correlates of the
development of orthographical and phonological processing during
Chinese sentence reading. Brain Res., 2008, vol. 1219, pp. 91-102.
[7] Y. N. Yum, S. P. Law, I. F. Su, K. Y. Lau, K. N. Mo, An ERP study of
effects of regularity and consistency in delayed naming and lexicality
judgment in a logographic writing system. Front Psychol., 2014, vol.
5:315. [8] H. W. Boweden, K. Steinhauer, C. Sanz, M. T. Ullman, Native-like
brain processing of syntax can be attained by university foreign
language learners. Neuropsychologia, 2013, vol. 51, № 13, pp. 2492-
511.
[9] A. Delorme, S. Makeig EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of
single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis, J.
Neurosci. Methods, 2004, vol. 134, № 1, pp. 9–21.
[10] S. Makeig, A. J. Bell, T. P. Jung, T. J. Sejnowski Independent
component analysis of electroencephalografic data Adv. Neural Inf.
Process. Syst., 1996, vol. 8, pp. 145–151.
[1] S. Bentin, Electrophysiological studies of visual word perception,
lexical organization, and semantic processing: a tutorial review. Lang.
Speech, 1989, vol. 32 (Pt 3), pp. 205-20.
[2] S. Bentin, Y. Mouchetant-Rostaing, M. H. Giard, J. F. Echallier, J.
Pernier, ERP manifestations of processing printed words at different
psycholinguistic levels: time course and scalp distribution. J. Cogn.
Neuroci., 1999, vol. 11, № 3, pp.235-60.
[3] E. Pihko, V. V. Nikulin, R. J. Ilmoniemi, Visual attention to words in
different languages in bilinguals: a magnetoencephalographic study.
Neuroimage, 2002, vol. 17, № 4, pp. 1830-6.
[4] A.C. Tsai, A. N., Savostyanov, A. Wu, J. P. Evans, V. S. C. Chien, H.
H. Yang, D. Y. Yang, M. Liou, Recognizing syntactic errors in Chinese
and English sentences: Brain electrical activity in Asperger’s syndrom.,
Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2013, vol. 7, pp. 889-905.
[5] J. Pellikka, P. Heleniu, J. P. Mäkelä, M. Lehtonen, Context affects L1
but not L2 during bilingual word recognition: an MEG study. Brain
Lang., 2015, vol. 42, pp. 8-17.
[6] X. Meng, J. Jian, H. Shu, X. Tian, X. Zhou, ERP correlates of the
development of orthographical and phonological processing during
Chinese sentence reading. Brain Res., 2008, vol. 1219, pp. 91-102.
[7] Y. N. Yum, S. P. Law, I. F. Su, K. Y. Lau, K. N. Mo, An ERP study of
effects of regularity and consistency in delayed naming and lexicality
judgment in a logographic writing system. Front Psychol., 2014, vol.
5:315. [8] H. W. Boweden, K. Steinhauer, C. Sanz, M. T. Ullman, Native-like
brain processing of syntax can be attained by university foreign
language learners. Neuropsychologia, 2013, vol. 51, № 13, pp. 2492-
511.
[9] A. Delorme, S. Makeig EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of
single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis, J.
Neurosci. Methods, 2004, vol. 134, № 1, pp. 9–21.
[10] S. Makeig, A. J. Bell, T. P. Jung, T. J. Sejnowski Independent
component analysis of electroencephalografic data Adv. Neural Inf.
Process. Syst., 1996, vol. 8, pp. 145–151.
@article{"International Journal of Business, Human and Social Sciences:71265", author = "Tatiana N. Astakhova and Alexander E. Saprygin and Tatiana A. Golovko and Alexander N. Savostyanov and Mikhail S. Vlasov and Natalia V. Borisova and Alexandera G. Karpova and Urana N. Kavai-ool and Elena Mokur-ool and Nikolay A. Kolchano and Lyubomir I. Aftanas", title = "Behavioral and EEG Reactions in Native Turkic-Speaking Inhabitants of Siberia and Siberian Russians during Recognition of Syntactic Errors in Sentences in Native and Foreign Languages", abstract = "The aim of the study is to compare behavioral and
EEG reactions in Turkic-speaking inhabitants of Siberia (Tuvinians
and Yakuts) and Russians during the recognition of syntax errors in
native and foreign languages. Sixty-three healthy aboriginals of the
Tyva Republic, 29 inhabitants of the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic, and
55 Russians from Novosibirsk participated in the study. EEG were
recorded during execution of error-recognition task in Russian and
English language (in all participants) and in native languages
(Tuvinian or Yakut Turkic-speaking inhabitants). Reaction time (RT)
and quality of task execution were chosen as behavioral measures.
Amplitude and cortical distribution of P300 and P600 peaks of ERP
were used as a measure of speech-related brain activity. In Tuvinians,
there were no differences in the P300 and P600 amplitudes as well as
in cortical topology for Russian and Tuvinian languages, but there
was a difference for English. In Yakuts, the P300 and P600
amplitudes and topology of ERP for Russian language were the same
as Russians had for native language. In Yakuts, brain reactions during
Yakut and English language comprehension had no difference, while
the Russian language comprehension was differed from both Yakut
and English. We found out that the Tuvinians recognized both Russian and
Tuvinian as native languages, and English as a foreign language. The
Yakuts recognized both English and Yakut as foreign languages, but
Russian as a native language. According to the inquirer, both
Tuvinians and Yakuts use the national language as a spoken
language, whereas they do not use it for writing. It can well be a
reason that Yakuts perceive the Yakut writing language as a foreign
language while writing Russian as their native.", keywords = "EEG, brain activity, syntactic analysis, native and
foreign language.", volume = "9", number = "12", pages = "4100-5", }