The interplay between semantic and referential aspects of anaphoric noun phrase resolution: Evidence from ERPs

In this event-related brain potential (ERP) study, we examined how semantic and referential aspects of anaphoric noun phrase resolution interact during discourse comprehension. We used a full factorial design that crossed referential ambiguity with semantic incoherence. Ambiguous anaphors elicited a sustained negative shift (Nref effect), and incoherent anaphors elicited an N400 effect. Simultaneously ambiguous and incoherent anaphors elicited an ERP pattern resembling that of the incoherent anaphors. These results suggest that semantic incoherence can preclude readers from engaging in anaphoric inferencing. Furthermore, approximately half of our participants unexpectedly showed common late positive effects to the three types of problematic anaphors. We relate the latter finding to recent accounts of what the P600 might reflect, and to the role of individual differences therein.

[1]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs , 2006, Brain Research.

[2]  Lee Osterhout,et al.  On the Brain Response to Syntactic Anomalies: Manipulations of Word Position and Word Class Reveal Individual Differences , 1997, Brain and Language.

[3]  Gina R. Kuperberg,et al.  Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax , 2007, Brain Research.

[4]  F. R. Yekovich,et al.  Activation and use of script-based antecedents in anaphoric reference , 1987 .

[5]  Vicka R. Corey,et al.  On the Language Specificity of the Brain Response to Syntactic Anomalies: Is the Syntactic Positive Shift a Member of the P300 Family? , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  P. Hagoort,et al.  A superficial resemblance does not necessarily mean you are part of the family : Counterarguments to Coulson, King and Kutas (1998) in the P600/SPS-P300 debate , 1999 .

[7]  S Makeig,et al.  Blind separation of auditory event-related brain responses into independent components. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[9]  E. J. O'Brien,et al.  Processes involved in the resolution of explicit anaphors , 1997 .

[10]  Karl G. D. Bailey,et al.  Good-Enough Representations in Language Comprehension , 2002 .

[11]  E. J. O'Brien,et al.  Sources of coherence in reading , 1995 .

[12]  Simon Garrod,et al.  Interpreting anaphoric relations: The integration of semantic information while reading. , 1977 .

[13]  M. Gernsbacher.  Mechanisms that improve referential access , 1989, Cognition.

[14]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  61 Postlexical Integration Processes in Language Comprehension : Evidence from Brain-Imaging Research , 2002 .

[15]  Jerome L. Myers,et al.  Accessing the discourse representation during reading , 1998 .

[16]  S. Garrod,et al.  Resolving sentences in a discourse context: How discourse representation affects language understanding. , 1994 .

[17]  S. Bookheimer.  Functional MRI of language: new approaches to understanding the cortical organization of semantic processing. , 2002, Annual review of neuroscience.

[18]  Alan Garnham,et al.  Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora , 2001 .

[19]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective , 2007, Brain Research.

[20]  J. Nicol,et al.  On the Distinctiveness, Independence, and Time Course of the Brain Responses to Syntactic and Semantic Anomalies. , 1999 .

[21]  H. Oostendorp,et al.  The Construction of Mental Representations During Reading , 1998 .

[22]  Petra Burkhardt,et al.  Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms: Evidence from event-related brain potentials , 2006, Brain and Language.

[23]  Jan-Ola Östman,et al.  Handbook of Pragmatics , 2018, Handbook of Pragmatics.

[24]  S. Garrod,et al.  What, when, and how?: Questions of immediacy in anaphoric reference resolution , 1989 .

[25]  L. Osterhout,et al.  The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2005 .

[26]  A. Garnham,et al.  The Interpretation of Anaphoric Noun Phrases Time Course, and Effects of Overspecificity , 1997 .

[27]  A. Almor,et al.  Noun-phrase anaphors and focus: the informational load hypothesis. , 1999, Psychological review.

[28]  Celia M. Klin,et al.  When Anaphor Resolution Fails , 2000 .

[29]  E. Bizzi,et al.  The Cognitive Neurosciences , 1996 .

[30]  Phillip J. Holcomb,et al.  The contributions of lexico-semantic and discourse information to the resolution of ambiguous categorical anaphors , 2007 .

[31]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in anaphoric reference , 1980 .

[32]  W. Pritchard.  Psychophysiology of P300. , 1981, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  Celia M. Klin,et al.  When anaphor resolution fails: Partial encoding of anaphoric inferences , 2006 .

[34]  Jos J. A. Van Berkum,et al.  What makes a discourse constraining? Comparing the effects of discourse message and scenario fit on the discourse-dependent N400 effect , 2007, Brain Research.

[35]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. , 1983 .

[36]  S. Garrod,et al.  Incrementality in discourse understanding. , 1999 .

[37]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials , 1999 .

[38]  L. Osterhout,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potentials Elicited by Failure to Agree , 1995 .

[39]  Gordon E. Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading—XVI. The visual span in normal and low vision , 1997, Vision Research.

[40]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Pronoun resolution and discourse models. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[41]  J. Auer.  Referential problems in conversation , 1984 .

[42]  P. Holcomb,et al.  Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly , 1992 .

[43]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Speech, language, and communication , 1997 .

[44]  Mira Ariel.  Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents , 1990 .

[45]  H. Kolk,et al.  Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials , 2003, Brain and Language.

[46]  J. Mattingley,et al.  Annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society , 1997 .

[47]  H. Kolk,et al.  Late positivities in unusual situations , 2007, Brain and Language.

[48]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  Event-related brain potentials reflect discourse-referential ambiguity in spoken language comprehension. , 2003, Psychophysiology.

[49]  P. Gordon,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for Reversed Lexical Repetition Effects in Language Processing , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[50]  D. Caplan,et al.  Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[51]  S. Levinson.  Presumptive Meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature , 2001 .

[52]  P. Broek,et al.  The role of readers' standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. , 1995 .

[53]  Kristin M Weingartner,et al.  Readers’ sensitivity to linguistic cues in narratives: How salience influences anaphor resolution , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[54]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary semantic change deafness in discourse comprehension. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[55]  Uwe Reyle,et al.  From discourse to logic , 1993 .

[56]  A. Sanford,et al.  Depth of processing in language comprehension: not noticing the evidence , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[57]  M. Kutas,et al.  Expect the Unexpected: Event-related Brain Response to Morphosyntactic Violations , 1998 .

[58]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Who are You Talking About? Tracking Discourse-level Referential Processing with Event-related Brain Potentials , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[59]  M. Kutas,et al.  Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association , 1984, Nature.

[60]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Approaches to studying world-situated language use : bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions , 2005 .

[61]  R. Jackendoff.  Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution , 2002 .

[62]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

[63]  P. Hagoort.  Interplay between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension: ERP Effects of Combining Syntactic and Semantic Violations , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[64]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  On sense and reference: Examining the functional neuroanatomy of referential processing , 2007, NeuroImage.

[65]  Z. Harris,et al.  Foundations of language , 1941 .

[66]  Benjamin J. Shannon,et al.  Parietal lobe contributions to episodic memory retrieval , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[67]  Gennaro Chierchia,et al.  Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics , 1990 .

[68]  Gordon E Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision , 2001, Vision Research.

[69]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  Brain potentials and syntactic violations revisited: no evidence for specificity of the syntactic positive shift , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[70]  John C. Trueswell,et al.  Chapter 7 – Sentence Comprehension , 1995 .

[71]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processing with ERPs , 2007 .

[72]  Randall Hendrick,et al.  The Representation and Processing of Coreference in Discourse , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[73]  H. Kolk,et al.  The interplay of heuristics and parsing routines in sentence comprehension: Evidence from ERPs and reaction times , 2007, Biological Psychology.

[74]  Deirdre Wilson,et al.  Relevance theory: A tutorial , 2002 .

[75]  RAYMOND W. GIBBS,et al.  Literal Meaning and Psychological Theory , 1984, Cogn. Sci..