Similarity-based competition in relative clause production and comprehension

This work investigates the role of semantic similarity in sentence production and comprehension. Previous research suggests that animacy and conceptual similarity of the noun concepts within complex descriptive phrases modulate structural preferences in production, and processing cost in comprehension. For example, animate-head phrases such as the girl that the boy is pulling are rare in production and more difficult to understand in comprehension. In contrast, phrases with passive clauses such as the girl being pulled by the boy are commonly produced and more easily understood, as are inanimate-head structures such as the truck the boy is pulling. In three picture-based studies, we examined the mechanisms underlying semantic similarity effects in producing and comprehending these phrases. Study 1 investigated structural preferences in production, whereas Study 2 investigated processing cost in comprehension. Study 3 used eye-tracking to examine the time-course of production processes. The results showed that semantic similarity elicited competition during phrase planning, influenced the choice of syntactic structure in production, and engendered comprehension difficulty in animate-head active configurations. Structural preferences, fixation probabilities reflecting production planning processes and comprehension cost significantly correlated with measures of conceptual similarity across the three studies. We argue that similarity-based competition modulates sentence production and comprehension processes when verbs are planned or interpreted, i.e., when event-based semantic or syntactic roles are determined. In addition to task-specific processes, we suggest that a similar and shared semantic competition mechanism underlies both production and comprehension, a view consistent with existing evidence for common brain regions recruited in both tasks.

[1]  W. Levelt,et al.  Semantic distance effects on object and action naming , 2002, Cognition.

[2]  John C. Trueswell,et al.  Co-localization of Stroop and Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution in Broca's Area: Implications for the Neural Basis of Sentence Processing , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  M. MacDonald,et al.  Conflicting cues and competition in subject-verb agreement , 2003 .

[4]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  The Influence of Animacy on Relative Clause Processing , 2002 .

[5]  B. McElree,et al.  Cue-dependent interference in comprehension. , 2011 .

[6]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  How language production shapes language form and comprehension , 2012, Front. Psychol..

[7]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  An Activation-Based Model of Sentence Processing as Skilled Memory Retrieval , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[8]  Albert Costa,et al.  On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[10]  B. McElree,et al.  Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. , 2006, Journal of memory and language.

[11]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Some structural properties of simple active and passive sentences , 1965 .

[12]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[13]  Douglas Roland,et al.  Frequency of Basic English Grammatical Structures: A Corpus Analysis. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[14]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  Processing Subject and Object Relative Clauses: Evidence from Eye Movements , 2002 .

[15]  Adrian Staub,et al.  Eye movements and processing difficulty in object relative clauses , 2010, Cognition.

[16]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Recovering Meaning Left Prefrontal Cortex Guides Controlled Semantic Retrieval , 2001, Neuron.

[17]  Koenraad De Smedt,et al.  Incremental Sentence Production, Self-Correction and Coordination , 1987 .

[18]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[19]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production : Picture word interference studies , 1990 .

[20]  G. Altmann,et al.  The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye-movements , 2003 .

[21]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  A case for conflict across multiple domains: Memory and language impairments following damage to ventrolateral prefrontal cortex , 2009, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[22]  M. Pickering,et al.  Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  J. A. Dyke Interference effects from grammatically unavailable constituents during sentence processing. , 2007 .

[24]  Kumiko Fukumura,et al.  The effect of animacy on the choice of referring expression , 2011 .

[25]  Todd R. Ferretti,et al.  Thematic Roles as Verb-specific Concepts , 1997 .

[26]  D. Barr Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression , 2008 .

[27]  K. Bock An Effect of the Accessibility of Word Forms on Sentence Structures , 1987 .

[28]  M. Farah,et al.  Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: a reevaluation. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  E. Miller,et al.  An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[30]  Maryellen C MacDonald,et al.  Visual Salience Modulates Structure Choice in Relative Clause Production , 2014, Language and speech.

[31]  M. MacDonald,et al.  When Singular and Plural are Both Grammatical: Semantic and Morphophonological Effects in Agreement. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[32]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Competitive mechanisms in sentence processing: Common and distinct production and reading comprehension networks linked to the prefrontal cortex , 2014, NeuroImage.

[33]  Tessa C. Warren,et al.  The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity , 2002, Cognition.

[34]  P. Gordon,et al.  Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: Evidence from eye tracking during reading. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Language production : Grammatical encoding , 1994 .

[36]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[37]  K. McRae,et al.  Integrating Verbs, Situation Schemas, and Thematic Role Concepts , 2001 .

[38]  Andrew R. A. Conway,et al.  Working memory and retrieval: a resource-dependent inhibition model. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[39]  Gina F. Humphreys Linking sentence production and comprehension: The neural mechanisms underlying production and comprehension control processes , 2012 .

[40]  Randi C. Martin,et al.  Semantic relatedness effects in conjoined noun phrase production: implications for the role of short-term memory , 2004, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[41]  The recovery of thematic role structure during noun-noun interpretation , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Animacy and competition in relative clause production: A cross-linguistic investigation , 2012, Cognitive Psychology.

[43]  Rutvik H. Desai,et al.  The neurobiology of semantic memory , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[44]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  How Speakers Refer: The Role of Accessibility , 2010, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[45]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article WHAT THE EYES SAY ABOUT SPEAKING , 2022 .

[46]  J. Duncan The multiple-demand (MD) system of the primate brain: mental programs for intelligent behaviour , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[47]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Linking production and comprehension processes: The case of relative clauses , 2009, Cognition.

[48]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush , 2006 .

[49]  J. K. Bock,et al.  Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation , 1985, Cognition.

[50]  M. H. Kelly,et al.  Word and World Order: Semantic, Phonological, and Metrical Determinants of Serial Position , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[51]  J. Fuster The Prefrontal Cortex—An Update Time Is of the Essence , 2001, Neuron.

[52]  G. Dell,et al.  Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production , 2007, Cognition.

[53]  Michael C. Anderson,et al.  Inhibitory processes and the control of memory retrieval , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[54]  A. Miyake,et al.  The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: a latent-variable analysis. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[55]  S. Thompson-Schill,et al.  Task-dependent semantic interference in language production: An fMRI study , 2008, Brain and Language.

[56]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Context-dependent interpretation of words: Evidence for interactive neural processes , 2007, NeuroImage.

[57]  Mark C. Smith,et al.  Horizontal information flow in spoken sentence production. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[58]  Edward Gibson,et al.  The nature of working memory capacity in sentence comprehension : Evidence against domain-specific working memory resources , 2006 .

[59]  K. Bock,et al.  From conceptual roles to structural relations: bridging the syntactic cleft. , 1992 .

[60]  Michael K Tanenhaus,et al.  Scalar reference, contrast and discourse: Separating effects of linguistic discourse from availability of the referent. , 2011, Journal of memory and language.

[61]  M. L. Lambon Ralph,et al.  Semantic impairment in stroke aphasia versus semantic dementia: a case-series comparison. , 2006, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[62]  Susan M. Garnsey,et al.  Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1994 .

[63]  E. Gibson Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies , 1998, Cognition.

[64]  Sarah M. E. Gierhan,et al.  Shared Language , 2011, Psychological science.

[65]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Priming sentence planning , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[66]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[67]  P. Gordon,et al.  Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity , 2004 .

[68]  Rita Sloan Berndt,et al.  Comprehension of reversible sentences in “agrammatism”: a meta-analysis , 1996, Cognition.

[69]  S. Thompson-Schill,et al.  The frontal lobes and the regulation of mental activity , 2005, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[70]  Jared M. Novick,et al.  Broca's Area and Language Processing: Evidence for the Cognitive Control Connection , 2010, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[71]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Meaning, sound, and syntax: Lexical priming in sentence production. , 1986 .

[72]  Robert J Hartsuiker,et al.  When you name the pizza you look at the coin and the bread: Eye movements reveal semantic activation during word production , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[73]  Clinton L. Johns,et al.  Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension , 2014, Cognition.

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

[75]  Gerard Kempen,et al.  An Incremental Procedural Grammar for Sentence Formulation , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[76]  L Robert Slevc,et al.  Saying what's on your mind: working memory effects on sentence production. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[77]  Roger P. G. van Gompel,et al.  How does similarity-based interference affect the choice of referring expression? , 2011 .

[78]  Sandra A. Thompson,et al.  A Discourse Explanation of the Grammar of Relative Clauses in English Conversation. , 1990 .

[79]  David Badre,et al.  Left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the cognitive control of memory , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[80]  W. Glaser,et al.  The time course of picture-word interference. , 1984 .

[81]  Douglas Roland,et al.  Discourse Expectations and Relative Clause Processing. , 2012 .

[82]  P. Gordon,et al.  Memory interference during language processing. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[83]  Cameron S Carter,et al.  Prefrontal Cortex Guides Context-Appropriate Responding during Language Production , 2004, Neuron.