The Neurocognition of Referential Ambiguity in Language Comprehension

Referential ambiguity arises whenever readers or listeners are unable to select a unique referent for a linguistic expression out of multiple candidates. In the current article, we review a series of neurocognitive experiments from our laboratory that examine the neural correlates of referential ambiguity, and that employ the brain signature of referential ambiguity to derive functional properties of the language comprehension system. The results of our experiments converge to show that referential ambiguity resolution involves making an inference to evaluate the referential candidates. These inferences only take place when both referential candidates are, at least initially, equally plausible antecedents. Whether comprehenders make these anaphoric inferences is strongly context dependent and co-determined by characteristics of the reader. In addition, readers appear to disregard referential ambiguity when the competing candidates are each semantically incoherent, suggesting that, under certain circumstances, semantic analysis can proceed even when referential analysis has not yielded a unique antecedent. Finally, results from a functional neuroimaging study suggest that whereas the neural systems that deal with referential ambiguity partially overlap with those that deal with referential failure, they show an inverse coupling with the neural systems associated with semantic processing, possibly reflecting the relative contributions of semantic and episodic processing to re-establish semantic and referential coherence, respectively.

[1]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  So who's "he" anyway? Differential ERP and ERSP effects of referential success, ambiguity and failure during spoken language comprehension , 2004 .

[2]  W. Kintsch The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[3]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective , 2007, Brain Research.

[4]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Reassessing Working Memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996) , 2002 .

[5]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in anaphoric reference , 1980 .

[6]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Invoking Discourse-Based Contrast Sets and Resolving Syntactic Ambiguities ☆ , 2002 .

[7]  Keith S. Donnellan Reference and Definite Descriptions , 1966 .

[8]  A. Garnham Mental models as representations of text , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[9]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  Ambiguous Pronoun Resolution , 2005, Psychological science.

[10]  R. Jackendoff Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution , 2002 .

[11]  Kristin M Weingartner,et al.  Readers’ sensitivity to linguistic cues in narratives: How salience influences anaphor resolution , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[12]  Evelyn C. Ferstl,et al.  The extended language network: A meta‐analysis of neuroimaging studies on text comprehension , 2008, Human brain mapping.

[13]  M. Kutas,et al.  Views on how the electrical activity that the brain generates reflects the functions of different language structures. , 1997, Psychophysiology.

[14]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  The interplay between semantic and referential aspects of anaphoric noun phrase resolution: Evidence from ERPs , 2008, Brain and Language.

[15]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Interaction with context during human sentence processing , 1988, Cognition.

[16]  S. Bookheimer Functional MRI of language: new approaches to understanding the cortical organization of semantic processing. , 2002, Annual review of neuroscience.

[17]  J. O'Doherty,et al.  Model‐Based fMRI and Its Application to Reward Learning and Decision Making , 2007, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

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

[19]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Pragmatic Versus Form-Based Accounts of Referential Contrast: Evidence for Effects of Informativity Expectations , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[20]  Manfred Consten,et al.  Anaphors in text : cognitive, formal and applied approaches to anaphoric reference , 2007 .

[21]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[22]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Morphosyntactic and Pragmatic Factors Affecting the Accessibility of Discourse Entities , 1993 .

[23]  Jerome L. Myers,et al.  Accessing the discourse representation during reading , 1998 .

[24]  Tony Harris,et al.  An ERP Investigation of Binding and Coreference , 2000, Brain and Language.

[25]  Yul-Wan Sung,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2004, Scholarpedia.

[26]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness , 1985 .

[27]  Nikos K Logothetis,et al.  Interpreting the BOLD signal. , 2004, Annual review of physiology.

[28]  L. Osterhout,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potentials Elicited by Failure to Agree , 1995 .

[29]  Celia M. Klin,et al.  When Anaphor Resolution Fails , 2000 .

[30]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Subject Terms: Linguistics Language Eyes & eyesight Cognition & reasoning , 1995 .

[31]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials , 1999 .

[32]  David Caplan,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology New Arguments in Favour of an Automatic Gender Pronominal Process New Arguments in Favour of an Automatic Gender Pronominal Process , 2022 .

[33]  Mira Ariel Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents , 1990 .

[34]  D. Swinney,et al.  Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  Evelyn C. Ferstl,et al.  Neuroimaging studies of coherence processes , 2007 .

[36]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  P. Hagoort Interplay between Syntax and Semantics during Sentence Comprehension: ERP Effects of Combining Syntactic and Semantic Violations , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[38]  D. Barr,et al.  Taking Perspective in Conversation: The Role of Mutual Knowledge in Comprehension , 2000, Psychological science.

[39]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[40]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences , 1983 .

[41]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Circumscribing Referential Domains during Real-Time Language Comprehension , 2002 .

[42]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs , 2006, Brain Research.

[43]  L. Shah,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 2010, Seminars in roentgenology.

[44]  Scott Weinstein,et al.  Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse , 1995, CL.

[45]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Higher level language processes in the brain : inference and comprehension processes , 2007 .

[46]  Evelyn C. Ferstl,et al.  Functional specialization within the anterior medial prefrontal cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study with human subjects , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[47]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Eye movements and spoken language comprehension: Effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution , 2002, Cognitive Psychology.

[48]  M. Gernsbacher Mechanisms that improve referential access , 1989, Cognition.

[49]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Discourse comprehension. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[50]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  The neural signatures of causal inferences: a preliminary computational account of brain-imaging and behavioral data , 2007 .

[51]  S. Garrod,et al.  Resolving sentences in a discourse context: How discourse representation affects language understanding. , 1994 .

[52]  Lee Osterhout,et al.  On the Brain Response to Syntactic Anomalies: Manipulations of Word Position and Word Class Reveal Individual Differences , 1997, Brain and Language.

[53]  J. V. Berkum,et al.  On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension : Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking , 2006 .

[54]  Jerry R. Hobbs Coherence and Coreference , 1979, Cogn. Sci..

[55]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[56]  Alan Garnham,et al.  Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora , 2001 .

[57]  H. H. Clark,et al.  In search of referents for nouns and pronouns , 1979 .

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

[59]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Refer-ential context and syntactic ambiguity resolution , 1994 .

[60]  COTTLOB FRECE On Sense and Nominatum , 2006 .

[61]  P. Gordon,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence for Reversed Lexical Repetition Effects in Language Processing , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[62]  M. Just,et al.  Neuroimaging Contributions to the Understanding of Discourse Processes , 2006 .

[63]  M. Rugg,et al.  Electrophysiology of Mind. , 1996 .

[64]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  On sense and reference: Examining the functional neuroanatomy of referential processing , 2007, NeuroImage.

[65]  Sarah Brown-Schmidt,et al.  Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation , 2008, Cognition.

[66]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Modifier Attachment in Sentence Parsing: Evidence from Dutch , 1996 .

[67]  C. Clifton,et al.  The On-line Study of Sentence Comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs and Beyond , 2004 .

[68]  Mante S. Nieuwland,et al.  Who are You Talking About? Tracking Discourse-level Referential Processing with Event-related Brain Potentials , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[70]  S. Garrod,et al.  What, when, and how?: Questions of immediacy in anaphoric reference resolution , 1989 .

[71]  Benjamin J. Shannon,et al.  Parietal lobe contributions to episodic memory retrieval , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[72]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Approaches to studying world-situated language use : bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions , 2005 .

[73]  M. Jung-Beeman Bilateral brain processes for comprehending natural language , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[74]  Simon Garrod,et al.  Interpreting anaphoric relations: The integration of semantic information while reading. , 1977 .

[75]  Mathieu Koppen,et al.  Coherence-driven resolution of referential ambiguity: A computational model , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[76]  P C Gordon,et al.  Language comprehension and probe-list memory. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[77]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type‐shifting Principles , 2008 .

[78]  R. Henson,et al.  Frontal lobes and human memory: insights from functional neuroimaging. , 2001, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[79]  G. Altmann,et al.  Incremental interpretation at verbs: restricting the domain of subsequent reference , 1999, Cognition.

[80]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Achieving incremental semantic interpretation through contextual representation , 1999, Cognition.

[81]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  Event-related brain potentials reflect discourse-referential ambiguity in spoken language comprehension. , 2003, Psychophysiology.

[82]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Pragmatic effects on reference resolution in a collaborative task: evidence from eye movements , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[83]  Phillip J. Holcomb,et al.  Making sense of discourse: An fMRI study of causal inferencing across sentences , 2006, NeuroImage.

[84]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Pronoun resolution and discourse models. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[85]  G. Waters,et al.  Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[86]  C. Clifton,et al.  The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .

[87]  R. Engle Working Memory Capacity as Executive Attention , 2002 .

[88]  Mark Steedman,et al.  On not being led up the garden path : The use of context by the psychological syntax processor , 1985 .

[89]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Reassessing working memory: comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). , 2002, Psychological review.

[90]  Z. Harris,et al.  Foundations of language , 1941 .

[91]  H. Oostendorp,et al.  The Construction of Mental Representations During Reading , 1998 .

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

[93]  J. Auer Referential problems in conversation , 1984 .

[94]  A. Almor,et al.  Noun-phrase anaphors and focus: the informational load hypothesis. , 1999, Psychological review.

[95]  Evan Kidd,et al.  Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[96]  Randall Hendrick,et al.  The Representation and Processing of Coreference in Discourse , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[97]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Individual differences in working memory and reading , 1980 .

[98]  Roger M. Cooper,et al.  The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. , 1974 .

[99]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  Measuring inhibition and facilitation from pronouns , 1990 .

[100]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  The effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation , 2003 .

[101]  J. Trueswell,et al.  Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca’s area in sentence comprehension , 2005, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[102]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Evidence of Perspective-Taking Constraints in Children's On-Line Reference Resolution , 2002, Psychological science.

[103]  M. Kutas,et al.  Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. , 1980, Science.

[104]  Sarah Brown-Schmidt,et al.  Real-Time Investigation of Referential Domains in Unscripted Conversation: A Targeted Language Game Approach , 2008, Cogn. Sci..

[105]  Michael L. Geis,et al.  Syntax and Semantics. Volume 3 : Speech Acts , 1976 .

[106]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Studies in discourse, representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers , 1987 .

[107]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[108]  David Caplan,et al.  How long does it take to find a cause? An online investigation of implicit causality in sentence production , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[109]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[110]  Jos J. A. Van Berkum,et al.  Chapter 13 Sentence Comprehension in a Wider Discourse: Can We Use ERPs To Keep Track of Things? , 2004 .

[111]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Situation models in language comprehension and memory. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.