Toward a neurolexicology: A method for exploring the organization of the mental lexicon by analyzing electrophysiological signals

This article analyzes the organization of the mental lexicon based on neurophysiological data. The neuroscience literature has devoted many studies to the semantic processing of words. However, the research remains specific to certain categories, studied separately, and does not address the lexicon as a system. In order to provide further insight into the neuronal organization of the lexicon, we conducted an EEG-based semantic decision experiment using words from eight categories (four living and four nonliving categories) as the material. A data-analysis method (correspondence analysis or CA) commonly used in computational linguistics was applied to the electrophysiological signals. The results revealed a two-factor structure: an ontological organization separating the living from the nonliving, and an organization with a human referential structured by proximity to the person. A comparison of the ERP-CA and the linguistic-CA data revealed organizational analogies. Lastly, a tomography software (Loreta®) was used to estimate the cerebral sources associated with the ERP signals.

[1]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Domain-Specific Knowledge Systems in the Brain: The Animate-Inanimate Distinction , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  D. Caplan,et al.  Language: Structure, Processing, and Disorders , 1994 .

[3]  P. Fletcher,et al.  DO SEMANTIC CATEGORIES ACTIVATE DISTINCT CORTICAL REGIONS? EVIDENCE FOR A DISTRIBUTED NEURAL SEMANTIC SYSTEM , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[4]  A. Reboul Langage et cognition humaine , 2007 .

[5]  Ludovic Lebart,et al.  La sémiométrie : essai de statistique structurale , 2003 .

[6]  Patrick F. Reidy An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis , 2009 .

[7]  F. D. Saussure Cours de linguistique générale , 1924 .

[8]  M. Junghöfer,et al.  The polar average reference effect: a bias in estimating the head surface integral in EEG recording , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[9]  H. Wellman,et al.  Insides and essences: Early understandings of the non-obvious , 1991, Cognition.

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

[11]  Jordan Grafman,et al.  Social concepts are represented in the superior anterior temporal cortex , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Hyunseung Choo,et al.  Testing the cognitive relevance of a geometric model on a word association task: A comparison of humans, ACOM, and LSA , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[13]  Marta Kutas,et al.  The intractability of scaling scalp distributions to infer neuroelectric sources. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[14]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Domain-Specific Knowledge Systems in the Brain: The Animate-Inanimate Distinction , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[15]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions. , 1974 .

[16]  Ruslan Mitkov,et al.  The Oxford handbook of computational linguistics , 2003 .

[17]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  An introduction to latent semantic analysis , 1998 .

[18]  B. Pollock,et al.  Is desire for social relationships mediated by the serotonergic system in the prefrontal cortex? An [18F]setoperone PET study , 2010, Social neuroscience.

[19]  O Bertrand,et al.  A theoretical justification of the average reference in topographic evoked potential studies. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[20]  E. Rosch,et al.  Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  I. Johnsrude,et al.  Somatotopic Representation of Action Words in Human Motor and Premotor Cortex , 2004, Neuron.

[22]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Functional imaging with low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (LORETA): a review. , 2002, Methods and findings in experimental and clinical pharmacology.

[23]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Lexique 2 : A new French lexical database , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[24]  L. Tyler,et al.  ‘Two Eyes of a See-through’: Impaired and Intact Semantic Knowledge in a Case of Selective Deficit for Living Things , 1998 .

[25]  M. Grossman,et al.  Language: Structure, Processing, and Disorders , 1993 .

[26]  Tom Michael Mitchell,et al.  Predicting Human Brain Activity Associated with the Meanings of Nouns , 2008, Science.

[27]  L L Chao,et al.  Are face-responsive regions selective only for faces? , 1999, Neuroreport.

[28]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Category specificity in brain and mind , 2002 .

[29]  Hyungsuk Ji,et al.  A Model for Matching Semantic Maps between Languages (French/English, English/French) , 2003, CL.

[30]  A. Collins,et al.  Does category size affect categorization time , 1970 .

[31]  Eric Wehrli,et al.  Lexical Knowledge Representation with Contexonyms , 2003 .

[32]  Friedemann Pulvermüller,et al.  Brain mechanisms linking language and action , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[33]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Subjective Structures and Operations in Semantic Memory. , 1976 .

[34]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: a new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. , 1994, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[35]  Marc Jeannerod Language, Perception and Action. How Words are Grounded in the Brain , 2008, European Review.

[36]  C. C. Wood,et al.  Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: an ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.