Neurotypology of Sentence Comprehension: Cross-Linguistic Difference in Canonical Word Order Affects Brain Responses during Sentence Comprehension

While a clear variability of canonical word order across languages has been found, such a finding is not reflected in recent neuroimaging studies of language processing. Languages having a canonical word order of Subject- Object-Verb (SOV) in a sentence make up approximately 43% of world languages, while languages having a Subject- Verb-Object (SVO) word order make up approximately 37%. Sufficient attention has not been given to this typological difference in neuroimaging studies. In this article, we review neuroimaging studies of sentence processing to examine whether the typological difference of canonical word order in a sentence is represented in brain activation results or not. As a result of this literature survey, an effect from the difference in canonical word order was found to exist between SVO and SOV languages for brain activation during sentence comprehension. This effect was found mainly in the left inferior and middle frontal gyri, precentral gyrus, supplemental motor area, inferior and middle temporal gyri, temporal pole, hippocampus, and cerebellum. These results imply that a difference in canonical word order causes a different sentence processing pattern, as well as a different load in the working memory process.

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

[2]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language. A positron emission tomography activation study. , 1994, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[3]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Syntax in the brain: Linguistic versus neuroanatomical specificity , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[4]  Satoru Yokoyama,et al.  Neuro-physiological evidence of linguistic empathy processing in the human brain: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study , 2009, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[5]  Shigeru Sato,et al.  Brain activation during the course of sentence comprehension , 2006, Brain and Language.

[6]  Shigeru Sato,et al.  Scrambling effects on the processing of Japanese sentences: An fMRI study , 2009, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[7]  Daphne Bavelier,et al.  Dissociating neural subsystems for grammar by contrasting word order and inflection , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Kuniyoshi L Sakai,et al.  Specialization in the Left Prefrontal Cortex for Sentence Comprehension , 2002, Neuron.

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

[10]  Yuki Kamide,et al.  Incremental Pre-Head Attachment in Japanese Parsing. , 1999 .

[11]  Yasushi Miyashita,et al.  From Perception to Sentence Comprehension: The Convergence of Auditory and Visual Information of Language in the Left Inferior Frontal Cortex , 2002, NeuroImage.

[12]  A. Friederici,et al.  Functional MR imaging exposes differential brain responses to syntax and prosody during auditory sentence comprehension , 2003, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[13]  A. Nobre,et al.  The Response of Left Temporal Cortex to Sentences , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  Edson T Miyamoto,et al.  Case Markers as Clause Boundary Inducers in Japanese , 2002, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[15]  Noriaki Yahata,et al.  Selective enhancement of functional connectivity in the left prefrontal cortex during sentence processing , 2003, NeuroImage.

[16]  Matthias Schlesewsky,et al.  The extended argument dependency model: a neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. , 2006, Psychological review.

[17]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Lateral Inferotemporal Cortex Maintains ConceptualSemantic Representations in Verbal Working Memory , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  J. Hawkins.  Efficiency and complexity in grammars , 2004 .

[19]  Shigeru Sato,et al.  Effect of syntactic similarity on cortical activation during second language processing: A comparison of English and Japanese among native Korean trilinguals , 2007, Human brain mapping.

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

[21]  Shigeru Sato,et al.  Cortical activation in the processing of passive sentences in L1 and L2: An fMRI study , 2006, NeuroImage.

[22]  G Hickok,et al.  Role of anterior temporal cortex in auditory sentence comprehension: an fMRI study , 2001, Neuroreport.

[23]  John A. Hawkins,et al.  A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency , 1995 .

[24]  T. Inui,et al.  Role of left inferior frontal gyrus in the processing of particles in Japanese , 2007, Neuroreport.

[25]  D. Swinney,et al.  Response of anterior temporal cortex to syntactic and prosodic manipulations during sentence processing , 2005, Human brain mapping.

[26]  Jay J Pillai,et al.  Functional MR imaging study of language-related differences in bilingual cerebellar activation. , 2004, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[27]  Eleanor A Maguire,et al.  The brain network associated with acquiring semantic knowledge , 2004, NeuroImage.

[28]  G Mulder,et al.  Sentence comprehension and word repetition: a positron emission tomography investigation. , 1999, Psychophysiology.