Do discourse global coherence and cumulated information impact on sentence syntactic processing? An event-related brain potentials study

The present study aimed at exploring how two main primarily semantic factors of discourse comprehension, namely global coherence and amount of information cumulated across a passage, may impact on the sentential syntactic processing. This was measured in two event-related brain potentials (ERP) to grammatical (morphosyntactic) violations: anterior negativities (LAN) and posterior positivities (P600). Global coherence did not yield any significant effects on either ERP component, although it appeared advantageous to the detection of morphosyntactic errors. Anterior negativities were also unaffected by the amount of cumulated information. Accordingly, it seems that first-pass syntactic processes are unaffected by these discourse variables. In contrast, the first portion of the P600 was significantly modulated (increased) by the latter factor. This probably reflects bigger efforts to combine sentential information during situations highly demanding for working memory. Our results would suggest that processes involved in global discourse coherence appear relatively independent of the on-line syntactic and combinatorial mechanisms reflected in the LAN and the P600 components of the ERPs.

[1]  D. Ruchkin,et al.  Short-term memory storage and retention: an event-related brain potential study. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

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

[3]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

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

[5]  M. Schlesewsky,et al.  The N400 as a correlate of interpretively relevant linguistic rules: Evidence from Hindi , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  S. Geisser,et al.  On methods in the analysis of profile data , 1959 .

[7]  Enriqueta Canseco-Gonzalez.  Using the Recording of Event-Related Brain Potentials in the Study of Sentence Processing , 2000 .

[8]  A D Friederici,et al.  Syntactic parsing as revealed by brain responses: First-pass and second-pass parsing processes , 1996, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[9]  A. Friederici,et al.  Concerning the automaticity of syntactic processing. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[10]  Evelyn C. Ferstl,et al.  The role of coherence and cohesion in text comprehension: an event-related fMRI study. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[11]  Mathieu Koppen,et al.  Modeling multiple levels of text representation , 2007 .

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

[13]  Edith Kaan,et al.  Event-Related Potentials and Language Processing: A Brief Overview , 2007, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[14]  Elisabet Service,et al.  Differential recall of derived and inflected word forms in working memory: examining the role of morphological information in simple and complex working memory tasks , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[15]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  The N400 as a function of the level of processing. , 1995, Psychophysiology.

[16]  D. Dooling,et al.  Effects of comprehension on retention of prose , 1971 .

[17]  Yufang Yang,et al.  Topic Structure Affects Semantic Integration: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials , 2013, PloS one.

[18]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[19]  W. Sommer,et al.  Semantics prevalence over syntax during sentence processing: A brain potential study of noun–adjective agreement in Spanish , 2006, Brain Research.

[20]  C. Clifton,et al.  The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .

[21]  G. Mulder,et al.  When syntax meets semantics. , 1997, Psychophysiology.

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

[23]  M. Kutas,et al.  Psycholinguistics Electrified II (1994–2005) , 2006 .

[24]  Marcel Adam Just,et al.  The Role of the Theory-of-Mind Cortical Network in the Comprehension of Narratives , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[25]  H. Lüders,et al.  American Electroencephalographic Society Guidelines for Standard Electrode Position Nomenclature , 1991, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

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

[27]  Rocky Ross,et al.  Mental models , 2004, SIGA.

[28]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  The time course of lexical access in speech production: A study of picture naming , 1991 .

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

[30]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  The neurobiology of language beyond single words. , 2014, Annual review of neuroscience.

[31]  F. Rubia,et al.  Similarities and differences between phrase structure and morphosyntactic violations in Spanish: An event-related potentials study , 2003 .

[32]  Juan Antonio Hernández Tamames,et al.  Brain activation in discourse comprehension: A 3t fMRI study , 2008, NeuroImage.

[33]  A. Friederici,et al.  The status of subject-object reanalyses in the language comprehension architecture , 2008 .

[34]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Grammatical Gender and Number Agreement in Spanish: An ERP Comparison , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[35]  E Donchin,et al.  A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

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

[37]  A. Friederici,et al.  Lexical integration: Sequential effects of syntactic and semantic information , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[38]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed processing approach , 1989, Language and Cognitive Processes.

[39]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: evidence from ERPs and reading times. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

[41]  G. Waters,et al.  The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: critique of Just and Carpenter (1992) , 1996, Psychological review.

[42]  A. Mecklinger,et al.  Event-related potentials reveal topographical and temporal distinct neuronal activation patterns for spatial and object working memory. , 1996, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[43]  A. Friederici.  Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[44]  M. Kutas,et al.  Semantic integration in reading: engagement of the right hemisphere during discourse processing. , 1999, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[45]  P. Hagoort,et al.  The Influence of Semantic and Syntactic Context Constraints on Lexical Selection and Integration in Spoken-Word Comprehension as Revealed by ERPs , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[46]  Michael B. W. Wolfe,et al.  Memory for narrative and expository text: independent influences of semantic associations and text organization. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[47]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall , 1972 .

[48]  Helen J. Neville,et al.  An ERP study of syntactic processing in English and nonsense sentences , 2007, Brain Research.

[49]  Nash Unsworth,et al.  Variation in working memory capacity and episodic recall: The contributions of strategic encoding and contextual retrieval , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[50]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[51]  John C J Hoeks,et al.  Seeing words in context: the interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[52]  A. Friederici.  The neural basis of syntactic processes , 2004 .

[53]  J. Jescheniak,et al.  What's left if the Jabberwock gets the semantics? An ERP investigation into semantic and syntactic processes during auditory sentence comprehension. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[54]  W. Sommer,et al.  The influence of emotional words on sentence processing: Electrophysiological and behavioral evidence , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[55]  R. Engle,et al.  Working-memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: limits on long-term memory retrieval. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[56]  Marta Kutas.  Electrical signs of language in the brain , 1999 .

[57]  M. Kutas,et al.  Bridging the Gap: Evidence from ERPs on the Processing of Unbounded Dependencies , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[58]  Tilo Kircher,et al.  Neural correlates of narrative shifts during auditory story comprehension , 2009, NeuroImage.

[59]  R. Mar.  The neural bases of social cognition and story comprehension. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[60]  Matthias Schlesewsky,et al.  The P600 as an indicator of syntactic ambiguity , 2002, Cognition.

[61]  A. Baddeley.  The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[62]  Thomas F. Mnte,et al.  Brain Activity Associated with Syntactic Incongruencies in Words and Pseudo-Words , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[63]  Suzanne Mannes,et al.  Global Semantic Expectancy and Language Comprehension , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[64]  B. McElree,et al.  Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking , 2004 .

[65]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[66]  M. Bennett,et al.  Through the looking glass. , 2009, Minnesota medicine.

[67]  M. Kutas,et al.  Who Did What and When? Using Word- and Clause-Level ERPs to Monitor Working Memory Usage in Reading , 1995, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[68]  W. Kintsch.  The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[69]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis ☆ , 1990 .

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

[71]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

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

[73]  C Fernández-Frías,et al.  Are the anterior negativities to grammatical violations indexing working memory? , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[74]  E. Kang,et al.  Neural Correlates of Bridging Inferences and Coherence Processing , 2012, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[75]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Strategies of discourse comprehension , 1983 .