本研究以事件相關腦電位(ERP)之實驗，探討臺灣閩南語使用者口說表現的語言變體是否足以代表其心理詞彙庫中的語言變體。
本研究實驗以圖片促發受試者的預期語音，記錄受試者對於不同次方言的變調方式之事件相關腦電位反應，同時也請他們對於所看到的圖及所聽到的音檔配對是否符合做判斷。配合圖片的語音有四類：正確答案，包含第五調之漳腔變調、正確答案，包含第五調之泉腔變調、正確答案，不包含第五調，錯誤答案。不包含第五調的正確答案和錯誤答案這兩類題目，用以作為判定該受試者的閩南語能力是否良好的依據。完成圖片促發的事件相關腦電位實驗後，請受試者進行看圖片說出其名稱，記錄其反應並計算這些口說反應的變調方式。
研究結果發現，就受試者進行看圖片說出其名稱的口說反應來看，有些受試者使用較多的漳腔變調方式，有些受試者使用較多的泉腔變調方式。但是不論他們面對圖片說出其名稱的反應使用較多的漳腔變調方式或是較多的泉腔變調方式，他們在聽到這兩類配對時，均認為是正確配對的比例相當高，表示其心理詞彙庫同時存有兩種腔調的變體。而從其腦電位的 N400 反應及溯源分析結果，都無法支持其看圖片說出其名稱的口說反應所傾向的腔調在理解時也比較容易。
這顯示當受試者口說表現偏向某一種腔調，並不代表大腦不熟悉另一種腔調。而其口說表現結果與腦電波反應結果之間並沒有一定的相關性，即便受試者在說某一個詞彙時偏向某一種腔調，並不代表其大腦對於該詞彙與那一種腔調的語音配對處理較容易。因此，可得知語言使用者的方言腔調處理歷程相當複雜，並具有個別差異，無法單從其口說表現的語言變體下定論。

In this study, to assess whether the preferred oral form, produced by each subject in off-line confrontation picture naming, is more easily processed, EEG was recorded while the subjects made the on-line picture-sound matching. Different tone-sandhi forms, used in two major Taiwanese subdialects, were manipulated to induce different responses shown in their event-related potentials. In addition to the two tone-sandhi conditions, there were two conditions irrelevant to tone-sandhi as fillers. The event-related stimuli consisted of four conditions in total.
Behavioral results in the on-line experiments showed a pretty high acceptance rate for either one of the two tone-sandhi varieties given the same picture. It is rarely revealed in their behaviors of off-line confrontation picture naming. Grouped by their preferred forms produced orally in off-line confrontation picture naming, 7 subjects tended to use subdialect A, and 15 subjects tended to use subdialect B. However, the preferred tone-sandhi condition didn’t elicit smaller N400 as predicted in each group. Furthermore, the results from source localization analyses of their event-related potentials also confirmed the N400 results.
The findings in this study that the preferred sandhi form, produced orally by each subject in off-line confrontation picture naming, was not unequivocally processed more easily than the other tone-sandhi form in on-line picture-sound matching, suggests a necessity to give a very careful consideration in delineating the boundaries of subdialects and trying to understand the mechanisms of dialectal amalgamations and merges.

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
致謝辭 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2研究目的 2
1.3研究問題 2
1.4名詞釋義 3
1.5論文架構 3
第二章 文獻回顧 4
2.1 臺灣閩南語方言相關研究 4
2.1.1臺灣閩南語次方言相關文獻 4
2.1.2臺灣閩客雜居之語言互動空間之文獻 6
2.1.3 閩南語次方言事件相關腦電位研究相關文獻 7
2.2國外同位音相關研究文獻 9
2.3語音感知與大腦處理聽覺語言運作之歷程 10
2.3.1言語感知三階段 10
2.3.2 詞彙存取理論 10
2.3.3 詞彙概念形成到產出歷程 11
2.3.4 大腦處理聽覺語言運作歷程 13
2.3.5大腦基本構造與聽覺處理程序 15
2.3.6語義記憶之運作腦區 19
2.4　N400腦波成分 19
2.4.1 N400的研究種類與歷史 19
2.4.2 N400特性與在大腦語言分析之角色 20
2.4.3 N400處於哪一個語言分工階段 21
2.5 小結 23
第三章 研究方法 25
3.1 受試者 25
3.2實驗時間與地點 25
3.3實驗儀器與設置 25
3.4實驗語料 26
3.5 實驗程序 28
3.5.1實驗流程 28
3.5.2 實驗程序 29
3.6腦電波分析程序 31
3.7 追蹤各時間點的腦部位分析程序 31
第四章 研究結果與討論 33
4.1 按鍵反應、口語外在表現腔調傾向、腦電波面積數值 33
4.1.1受試者按鍵反應正確率 34
4.1.2受試者閩南語圖片命名漳腔第五調變調之口語反應 36
4.1.3受試者腦電波腔調傾向與口說反應比較 37
4.1.4口說反應與按鍵判斷反應 38
4.1.5受試者CZ點N400腦電波數值分析與按鍵反應之比較 40
4.1.6受試者腦電波電極點數值與圖片命名偏漳程度之相關係數值 41
4.2討論 46
4.2.1腦電波反應討論 46
4.2.2大腦溯源討論 55
4.2.3 小結 62
第五章 結論 63
5.1本研究主要發現 63
5.2研究貢獻 64
5.3研究限制 64
5.4研究展望 65
5.5 結語 65
參考文獻 67
附錄 74
附錄一 受試者基本資料 74
附錄二 實驗語料之圖檔與音檔搭配 75
附錄三 受試者數值表 79
附錄四 受試者慣用手總表 81
附錄五 受試者按鍵行為總整理 82
附錄六 受試者口說行為反應整理 83
附錄七 閩南語第五聲變調實驗分析聲譜圖一覽表 90

涂文欽 (2011)。彰化縣閩南語方言類型與方言分區。臺灣語文研究,6(2), 111-145。
林郁靜 (2002)。麥寮方言的調查與研究-語音及詞彙初探。碩士論文,新竹教育大學臺灣語言與語文教育研究所。
洪惟仁 (1985)。臺灣河佬話語聲調研究。自立晚報社。
洪惟仁 (1991)。臺灣方言之旅。前衛出版社。
洪惟仁 (2003)。音變的動機與方向: 漳泉競爭與臺灣普通腔的形成。國立清華大學博士論文。
洪惟仁 (2009)。臺北地區閩南語的方言類型與方言分區。臺灣語文研究, (3), 239-309。
洪惟仁 (2010)。臺灣地區的語言分佈。敲開語言的窗口: 華語的使用現象 (情況與調查),1-39。
黃上輔 (2008)。臺灣閩南語次方言語音感知之腦事件相關電位研究。國立新竹教育大學碩士論文，1-68。
莊文岳 (2013)。臺灣彰化縣閩南語次方言聲韻調之調查比較。國立新竹教育大學碩士論文。
張美玲 (2017)。新竹南寮蟹仔埔語音演變。國立清華大學碩士論文。
張素蓉 (2006)。臺中縣海線地區泉州腔的漸層分布。 國立新竹教育大學碩士論文。
鄭錦全 (2006)。臺灣客家與閩南族群雜居環境的語言互動空間。全球視野下的客家與地方社會:第一屆臺灣客家研究國際研討會。
陳雅玲 (2010)。高雄市海岸地帶偏泉腔閩南語的語音變異。國立新竹教育大學碩士論文。
曹逢甫 (2013)。臺灣閩南語共同腔的浮現:語言學與社會語言學的探討。 語言暨語言學, 14(2), 457-484。
 
Ardal, S., Donald, M. W., Meuter, R., Muldrew, S., & Luce, M. (1990). Brain responses to semantic incongruity in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 39(2), 187-205. doi:10.1016/0093-934x(90)90011-5
Bentin, S., Mouchetant-Rostaing, Y., Giard, M.-H., Echallier, J.-F., & Pernier, J. (1999). ERP manifestations of processing printed words at different psycholinguistic levels: time course and scalp distribution. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(3), 235-260.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008). An alternative perspective on "semantic P600" effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews, 59(1), 55-73. doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.05.003
Brown, C., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the n400 - evidence from masked priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(1), 34-44. doi:10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34
Chwilla, D. J., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1995). The n400 as a function of the level of processing. Psychophysiology, 32(3), 274-285. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1995.tb02956.x
Coull, J. T. (1998). Neural correlates of attention and arousal: Insights from electrophysiology, functional neuroimaging and psychopharmacology. Progress in Neurobiology, 55(4), 343-361. doi:10.1016/s0301-0082(98)00011-2
Coulson, S., Federmeier, K. D., Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (2005). Right hemisphere sensitivity to word- and sentence-level context: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 31(1), 129-147. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.1.129
Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998). Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain response to morphosyntactic violations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13(1), 21-58. doi:10.1080/016909698386582
Curran, T. (2000). Brain potentials of recollection and familiarity. Memory & Cognition, 28(6), 923-938. doi:10.3758/bf03209340
Deacon, D., Breton, F., Ritter, W., & Vaughan, H. G. (1991). The relationship between n2 and n400 - scalp distribution, stimulus probability, and task relevance. Psychophysiology, 28(2), 185-200. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1991.tb00411.x
Deacon, D., Dynowska, A., Ritter, W., & Grose-Fifer, J. (2004). Repetition and semantic priming of nonwords: Implications for theories of N400 and word recognition. Psychophysiology, 41(1), 60-74. doi:10.1111/1469-8986.00120
Deacon, D., Hewitt, S., Yang, C.-M., & Nagata, M. (2000). Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process. Cognitive Brain Research, 9(2), 137-146.
Deacon, D., & Shelley-Tremblay, J. (2000). How automatically is meaning accessed: A review of the effects of attention on semantic processing. Frontiers in Bioscience, 5, E82-E94. doi:10.2741/deacon
Debruille, J. B. (2007). The N400 potential could index a semantic inhibition. Brain Research Reviews, 56(2), 472-477. doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2007.10.001
Duzel, E., Yonelinas, A. P., Mangun, G. R., Heinze, H. J., & Tulving, E. (1997). Event-related brain potential correlates of two states of conscious awareness in memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94(11), 5973-5978. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.11.5973
Dufour, S., Brunellière, A., & Nguyen, N. (2013). To what extent do we hear phonemic contrasts in a non-native regional variety? Tracking the dynamics of perceptual processing with EEG. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 42(2), 161-173.
Federmeier, K. D. (2007). Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 44(4), 491-505. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00531.x
Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78-84.
Friederici, A. D., Pfeifer, E., & Hahne, A. (1993). EVENT-RELATED BRAIN POTENTIALS DURING NATURAL SPEECH PROCESSING - EFFECTS OF SEMANTIC, MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC VIOLATIONS. Cognitive Brain Research, 1(3), 183-192. doi:10.1016/0926-6410(93)90026-2
Friedrich, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Early N400 development and later language acquisition. Psychophysiology, 43(1), 1-12. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00381.x
Friesen, D. C., Chung-Fat-Yim, A., & Bialystok, E. (2016). Lexical selection differences between monolingual and bilingual listeners. Brain and Language, 152, 1-13. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2015.11.001
Gomes, H., Ritter, W., Tartter, V. C., Vaughan Jr, H. G., & Rosen, J. J. (1997). Lexical processing of visually and auditorily presented nouns and verbs: evidence from reaction time and N400 priming data. Cognitive Brain Research, 6(2), 121-134.
Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., & Petersson, K. M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438-441. doi:10.1126/science.1095455
Halgren, E., Dhond, R. P., Christensen, N., Van Petten, C., Marinkovic, K., Lewine, J. D., & Dale, A. M. (2002). N400-like magnetoencephalography responses modulated by semantic context, word frequency, and lexical class in sentences. Neuroimage, 17(3), 1101-1116. doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1268
Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation - implications for the role of the n400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30(1), 47-61. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb03204.x
Kiefer, M. (2002). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects. Cognitive Brain Research, 13(1), 27-39.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463-470. doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01560-6
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty Years and Counting: Finding Meaning in the N400 Component of the Event-Related Brain Potential (ERP). In S. T. Fiske, D. L. Schacter, & S. E. Taylor (Eds.), Annual Review of Psychology, Vol 62 (Vol. 62, pp. 621-647). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.
Lau, E. F., Phillips, C., & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(12), 920-933. doi:10.1038/nrn2532
McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive psychology, 18(1), 1-86.
Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2005). Processing semantic anomalies in two languages: an electrophysiological exploration in both languages of Spanish-English bilinguals. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 205-220. doi:10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.08.010
Miglietta, S., Grimaldi, M., & Calabrese, A. (2013). conditioned allophony in speech perception: An ERP study. Brain and language, 126(3), 285-290.
Palomar-García, M.-Á., Bueichekú, E., Ávila, C., Sanjuán, A., Strijkers, K., Ventura-Campos, N., & Costa, A. (2015). Do bilinguals show neural differences with monolinguals when processing their native language? Brain and Language, 142, 36-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2015.01.004
Pelvig, D., Pakkenberg, H., Stark, A., & Pakkenberg, B. (2008). Neocortical glial cell numbers in human brains. Neurobiology of aging, 29(11), 1754-1762.
Pylkkänen, L., & Marantz, A. (2003). Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 187-189.
Race, D., & Hillis, A. (2015). Naming.
Rauschecker, J. P., & Scott, S. K. (2009). Maps and streams in the auditory cortex: nonhuman primates illuminate human speech processing. Nature neuroscience, 12(6), 718.
Schmitt, B., & Münte, T. u. Kutas, M.(2000). Electrophysiological estimates of the time course of semantic and phonological encoding during implicit picture naming. Psychophysiology, 37(473-484).
van Berkum, J. J. A., Hagoort, P., & Brown, C. M. (1999). Semantic integration in sentences and discourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(6), 657-671. doi:10.1162/089892999563724
Worthington, D. L., & Bodie, G. D. (2017). The sourcebook of listening research: Methodology and measures: John Wiley & Sons.