An Attempt to Conceptually Replicate the Dissociation between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension

Is sentence structure processed by the same neural and cognitive resources that are recruited for processing word meanings, or do structure and meaning rely on distinct resources? Linguistic theorizing and much behavioral evidence suggest tight integration between lexico-semantic and syntactic representations and processing. However, most current proposals of the neural architecture of language continue to postulate a distinction between the two. One of the earlier and most cited pieces of neuroimaging evidence in favor of this dissociation comes from a paper by Dapretto and Bookheimer (1999). Using a sentence-meaning judgment task, Dapretto & Bookheimer observed two distinct peaks within the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG): one more active during a lexico-semantic manipulation, and the other during a syntactic manipulation. Although the paper is highly cited, no attempt has been made, to our knowledge, to replicate the original finding. We report an fMRI study that attempts to do so. Using a combination of whole-brain, group-level ROI, and participant-specific functional ROI approaches, we fail to replicate the original dissociation. In particular, whereas parts of LIFG respond reliably more strongly during lexico-semantic than syntactic processing, no part of LIFG (including in the region defined around the peak reported by Dapretto & Bookheimer) shows the opposite pattern. We speculate that the original result was a false positive, possibly driven by a small subset of participants or items that biased a fixed-effects analysis with low power.

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

[2]  Evelina Fedorenko,et al.  A new fun and robust version of an fMRI localizer for the frontotemporal language system , 2017, Cognitive neuroscience.

[3]  J. Ioannidis Why Most Published Research Findings Are False , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[4]  François Lazeyras,et al.  Anatomical variability of the lateral frontal lobe surface: implication for intersubject variability in language neuroimaging , 2005, NeuroImage.

[5]  N. Tzourio-Mazoyer,et al.  Automated Anatomical Labeling of Activations in SPM Using a Macroscopic Anatomical Parcellation of the MNI MRI Single-Subject Brain , 2002, NeuroImage.

[6]  J. Carlin,et al.  Beyond Power Calculations , 2014, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[7]  C. J. Price,et al.  An fMRI Study of Syntactic Adaptation , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  D. E. Nee fMRI replicability depends upon sufficient individual-level data. , 2019 .

[9]  Evelina Fedorenko,et al.  Subject-specific functional localizers increase . . . , 2012 .

[10]  A. Friederici,et al.  Auditory Language Comprehension: An Event-Related fMRI Study on the Processing of Syntactic and Lexical Information , 2000, Brain and Language.

[11]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science , 2015, Science.

[12]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Divide and conquer: A defense of functional localizers , 2006, NeuroImage.

[13]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Left inferior frontal cortex and syntax: function, structure and behaviour in patients with left hemisphere damage , 2011, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[14]  D. Shankweiler,et al.  Unification of sentence processing via ear and eye: An fMRI study , 2011, Cortex.

[15]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  New method for fMRI investigations of language: defining ROIs functionally in individual subjects. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  A. Schleicher,et al.  Broca's region revisited: Cytoarchitecture and intersubject variability , 1999, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[17]  Sharon L. Thompson-Schill,et al.  Item analysis in functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2007, NeuroImage.

[18]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Neural correlate of the construction of sentence meaning , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Alexa Bautista,et al.  Neural responses to grammatically and lexically degraded speech , 2016, Language, cognition and neuroscience.

[20]  M. Just,et al.  Brain activation for reading and listening comprehension: An fMRI study of modality effects and individual differences in language comprehension. , 2009, Psychology & neuroscience.

[21]  F. Dick,et al.  Language deficits, localization, and grammar: evidence for a distributive model of language breakdown in aphasic patients and neurologically intact individuals. , 2001, Psychological review.

[22]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  False-Positive Psychology , 2011, Psychological science.

[23]  Leon Bergen,et al.  Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Matthew Botvinick,et al.  Distinguishing grammatical constructions with fMRI pattern analysis , 2012, Brain and Language.

[25]  Evelina Fedorenko,et al.  Word meanings and sentence structure recruit the same set of fronto-temporal regions during comprehension , 2018, bioRxiv.

[26]  Tor D. Wager,et al.  False-positive neuroimaging: Undisclosed flexibility in testing spatial hypotheses allows presenting anything as a replicated finding , 2019, NeuroImage.

[27]  A. Friederici The cortical language circuit: from auditory perception to sentence comprehension , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  A M Dale,et al.  Optimal experimental design for event‐related fMRI , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[29]  Emmanuel Mandonnet,et al.  A re-examination of neural basis of language processing: Proposal of a dynamic hodotopical model from data provided by brain stimulation mapping during picture naming , 2014, Brain and Language.

[30]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Generalisability, Random Effects & Population Inference , 1998, NeuroImage.

[31]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  A Temporal Bottleneck in the Language Comprehension Network , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  S Thesen,et al.  Prospective acquisition correction for head motion with image‐based tracking for real‐time fMRI , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[33]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Lexical and syntactic representations in the brain: An fMRI investigation with multi-voxel pattern analyses , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[34]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Analysis of a large fMRI cohort: Statistical and methodological issues for group analyses , 2007, NeuroImage.

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

[36]  Evelina Fedorenko,et al.  Syntactic processing is distributed across the language system , 2016, NeuroImage.

[37]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Scanning the horizon: towards transparent and reproducible neuroimaging research , 2016, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[38]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence, and prevention , 2014, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  Y. Miyashita,et al.  A syntactic specialization for Broca's area. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[40]  Yosef Grodzinsky,et al.  fMRI adaptation dissociates syntactic complexity dimensions , 2010, NeuroImage.

[41]  Michael Bryce,et al.  Test 5.14.4. Deposit 18 June 15:43, embargoed 18/07/2019 : Article -> Review article , 2019 .

[42]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Language-Selective and Domain-General Regions Lie Side by Side within Broca’s Area , 2012, Current Biology.

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

[44]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience , 2013, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[45]  S. Schmidt Shall we Really do it Again? The Powerful Concept of Replication is Neglected in the Social Sciences , 2009 .

[46]  J. Obleser,et al.  Dissociable neural imprints of perception and grammar in auditory functional imaging , 2012, Human brain mapping.

[47]  MATTHEW S. DRYER,et al.  Case distinctions, rich verb agreement, and word order type (Comments on Hawkins’ paper) , 2002 .

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

[49]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  Shared Syntax in Language Production and Language Comprehension—An fMRI Study , 2011, Cerebral cortex.

[50]  Colin Humphries,et al.  Syntactic and Semantic Modulation of Neural Activity during Auditory Sentence Comprehension , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[51]  J. Gee,et al.  Large-scale neural network for sentence processing , 2006, Brain and Language.

[52]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Morphology, morphometry and probability mapping of the pars opercularis of the inferior frontal gyrus: an in vivo MRI analysis , 1999, The European journal of neuroscience.

[53]  Elizabeth Bates,et al.  On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition. , 1997 .

[54]  U. Simonsohn Small Telescopes , 2014, Psychological science.

[55]  Giosuè Baggio,et al.  The balance between memory and unification in semantics: A dynamic account of the N400 , 2011 .

[56]  M. Ullman The Declarative/Procedural Model , 2020, Theories in Second Language Acquisition.

[57]  L. Pylkkänen,et al.  Basic linguistic composition recruits the left anterior temporal lobe and left angular gyrus during both listening and reading. , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[58]  Paul A. Taylor,et al.  Is the statistic value all we should care about in neuroimaging? , 2016, NeuroImage.