| Across languages, certain syllable types (e.g., black) are systematically preferred to others (e.g., lback). Specifically, syllables like blif are preferred to bnif, which, in turn, are preferred to bdif; least preferred are syllables like lbif. Such preferences have been documented experimentally among speakers of English, Korean, Spanish, French, Hebrew, Mandarin, even when none of these syllable types exists in their language. Previous research demonstrated that these preferences are unlikely due to the auditory/phonetic demands of auditory materials, as they obtain even when items are presented in print. However, it remains possible that they might be informed by articulatory demands. According to the motor embodiment view, the perception of a linguistic stimulus entails the motor simulation of its production. The dispreference for items such as lbif could thus reflect the demands associated with their production---the harder a syllable is to articulate, even potentially, the more motor demands it requires, thus the less preferred it is. To address this possibility, we assessed participants' syllable preferences while their articulation was mechanically suppressed. To the extent that suppression effects were found, we next examined whether suppression attenuates participants' sensitivity to the syllable hierarchy (blif?bnif?bdif?lbif). According to the grammatical account, a grammatical ban on clusters like lb will prevent speakers from encoding them correctly. As a result, ill-formed monosyllables such as lbif will be repaired as better-formed structures (e.g., as lebif)---the worse-formed the cluster, the more likely its repair, hence, its misidentification as a disyllable (e.g., lebif). Crucially, this account predicts that these effects should be obtained irrespective of suppression. In contrast, if the syllable preference is due to articulatory simulation (as suggested by the motor embodiment account), then articulatory suppression should attenuate or even eliminate people's sensitivity to the syllable hierarchy. Our four experiments each found significant effects of suppression. Remarkably, people remained sensitive to the syllable hierarchy regardless of suppression. Specifically, the results from auditory materials (Experiments 1-2) yielded strong effects of syllable structure, and these effects obtained irrespective of suppression---the worse-formed the syllable, the more likely its misidentification. Moreover, syllable structure uniquely accounted for listeners' behavior even when some of the phonetic cues of our auditory materials were controlled for. Results with printed stimuli (Experiments 3-4) were more complex, as participants in these experiments appeared to verify their perception by a spelling strategy. Nonetheless, readers were sensitive to most of the syllable hierarchy (e.g., blif?bnif?bdif). Furthermore, these preferences emerged even under articulatory suppression, and they were found even when the statistical properties of our materials were controlled via a regression analysis. Together, these findings indicate that speakers possess broad grammatical preferences that are irreducible to either sensory or motor factors. |
