Differential contributions of the inferior parietal and inferior frontal regions to the processing of grammatical and semantic relationships in wh-questions

Abstract The processing of grammatical and semantic relationships is important in sentence comprehension. Although previous studies have demonstrated brain activities during grammatical and semantic processing in declarative sentences, functional MRI (fMRI) evidence related to these processes in wh-questions is largely unavailable. In Japanese wh-questions, a wh-phrase is grammatically associated with the closest particle, and a sentential subject is semantically associated with the verb. These features in Japanese wh-questions enable us to make grammatical or semantic anomalies without adding other words or morphemes in the violation paradigm. According to this advantage of Japanese wh-questions, this fMRI study investigated the brain activities in Japanese native speakers during grammatical and semantic processing of wh-questions to judge whether or not presented sentences were natural Japanese sentences (naturalness decision task). Three types of wh-questions were presented: correct, grammatically anomalous, and semantically anomalous conditions. This study yielded three main findings. First, activity in the left inferior parietal lobule was greater during processing of grammatically anomalous than correct or semantically anomalous wh-questions. Second, activity in the left inferior frontal gyrus was greater during processing of semantically anomalous than correct or grammatically anomalous wh-questions. Finally, significant correlations were identified between activities in the left inferior parietal lobule and the left inferior frontal gyrus during grammatically anomalous and semantically anomalous wh-questions. These findings suggest that the left inferior parietal and inferior frontal regions have differential contributions to the processing of grammatical and semantic relationships in wh-question sentences, and that the interaction between these regions could be essential in the comprehension of wh-questions by combining the grammatical process with the semantic process.

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

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

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

[4]  D. Shankweiler,et al.  An Event-related Neuroimaging Study Distinguishing Form and Content in Sentence Processing , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[5]  Jian Huang,et al.  Involvement of left inferior frontal gyrus in sentence-level semantic integration , 2009, NeuroImage.

[6]  H Nakajima,et al.  A topographical study of ERP correlates of semantic and syntactic violations in the Japanese language using the multichannel EEG system. , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[7]  Derek K. Jones,et al.  Perisylvian language networks of the human brain , 2005, Annals of neurology.

[8]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  The temporal structure of spoken language understanding , 1980, Cognition.

[9]  Jonas Obleser,et al.  Disentangling syntax and intelligibility in auditory language comprehension , 2009, Human brain mapping.

[10]  S. Bookheimer,et al.  Form and Content Dissociating Syntax and Semantics in Sentence Comprehension , 1999, Neuron.

[11]  Derek K. Jones,et al.  Symmetries in human brain language pathways correlate with verbal recall , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  R. Todd Constable,et al.  Modulation of functional connectivity with the syntactic and semantic demands of a Noun Phrase Formation Task: A possible role for the Default Network , 2009, NeuroImage.

[13]  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.

[14]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Mapping sentence form onto meaning: The syntax–semantic interface , 2007, Brain Research.

[15]  E. Gibson,et al.  The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty , 2000 .

[16]  P. Hagoort,et al.  Integration of Word Meaning and World Knowledge in Language Comprehension , 2004, Science.

[17]  Douglas Saddy,et al.  Distinct Neurophysiological Patterns Reflecting Aspects of Syntactic Complexity and Syntactic Repair , 2002, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[18]  Kuniyoshi L Sakai,et al.  An event-related fMRI study of explicit syntactic processing of normal/anomalous sentences in contrast to implicit syntactic processing. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[19]  H. Neville,et al.  An Event-Related fMRI Study of Syntactic and Semantic Violations , 2001, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

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

[21]  Gregory Hickok,et al.  Selective attention to semantic and syntactic features modulates sentence processing networks in anterior temporal cortex. , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

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

[23]  Suiping Wang,et al.  Broca's area plays a role in syntactic processing during Chinese reading comprehension , 2008, Neuropsychologia.

[24]  D. V. von Cramon,et al.  Neurocognition of auditory sentence comprehension: event related fMRI reveals sensitivity to syntactic violations and task demands. , 2000, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

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

[26]  Gina R. Kuperberg,et al.  Neuroanatomical distinctions within the semantic system during sentence comprehension: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2008, NeuroImage.

[27]  Peter F. Liddle,et al.  Reading Anomalous Sentences: An Event-Related fMRI Study of Semantic Processing , 2002, NeuroImage.

[28]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Unification of speaker and meaning in language comprehension: an fMRI study , 2022 .

[29]  C. Fiebach,et al.  The role of left inferior frontal and superior temporal cortex in sentence comprehension: localizing syntactic and semantic processes. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[30]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  Effects of Repetition and Competition on Activity in Left Prefrontal Cortex during Word Generation , 1999, Neuron.

[31]  Lee Osterhout,et al.  Event-related potentials and syntactic anomaly: Evidence of anomaly detection during the perception of continuous speech , 1993 .

[32]  A. Dale,et al.  Distinct Patterns of Neural Modulation during the Processing of Conceptual and Syntactic Anomalies , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[33]  E. Bullmore,et al.  Common and Distinct Neural Substrates for Pragmatic, Semantic, and Syntactic Processing of Spoken Sentences: An fMRI Study , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  J. Desmond,et al.  Functional Specialization for Semantic and Phonological Processing in the Left Inferior Prefrontal Cortex , 1999, NeuroImage.

[35]  J. Talairach,et al.  Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain: 3-Dimensional Proportional System: An Approach to Cerebral Imaging , 1988 .

[36]  A. Friederici,et al.  Syntactic Gender and Semantic Expectancy: ERPs Reveal Early Autonomy and Late Interaction , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[37]  Matthias Schlesewsky,et al.  An alternative perspective on “semantic P600” effects in language comprehension , 2008, Brain Research Reviews.