Flexibility in embodied lexical‐semantic representations

According to an embodied view of language comprehension, language concepts are grounded in our perceptual systems. Evidence for the idea that concepts are grounded in areas involved in action and perception comes from both behavioral and neuroimaging studies (Glenberg [1997]: Behav Brain Sci 20:1‐55; Barsalou [1999]: Behav Brain Sci 22:577‐660; Pulvermueller [1999]: Behav Brain Sci 22:253‐336; Barsalou et al. [2003]: Trends Cogn Sci 7:84‐91). However, the results from several studies indicate that the activation of information in perception and action areas is not a purely automatic process (Raposo et al. [2009]: Neuropsychologia 47:388‐396; Rueschemeyer et al. [2007]: J Cogn Neurosci 19:855‐865). These findings suggest that embodied representations are flexible. In these studies, flexibility is characterized by the relative presence or absence of activation in our perceptual systems. However, even if the context in which a word is presented does not undermine a motor interpretation, it is possible that the degree to which a modality‐specific region contributes to a representation depends on the context in which conceptual features are retrieved. In the present study, we investigated this issue by presenting word stimuli for which both motor and visual properties (e.g., Tennis ball, Boxing glove) were important in constituting the concept. Conform with the idea that language representations are flexible and context dependent, we demonstrate that the degree to which a modality‐specific region contributes to a representation considerably changes as a function of context. Hum Brain Mapp 33:2322–2333, 2012. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  How specifically are action verbs represented in the neural motor system: An fMRI study , 2010, NeuroImage.

[2]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM) , 1996 .

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

[4]  Christine D. Wilson,et al.  Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[5]  O. Hauk,et al.  Neurophysiological distinction of action words in the fronto‐central cortex , 2004, Human brain mapping.

[6]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Category-specific conceptual processing of color and form in left fronto-temporal cortex. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[7]  B. Bahrami,et al.  Coming of age: A review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics , 2012, Cortex.

[8]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Grounding language in action , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Domain specificity in visual cortex. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[10]  Lei Mo,et al.  Dynamic Mental Representations in Language Comprehension , 2009, Perceptual and motor skills.

[11]  W. K. Simmons,et al.  A common neural substrate for perceiving and knowing about color , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  A. Borghi,et al.  Sentence comprehension and action: Effector specific modulation of the motor system , 2007, Brain Research.

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

[14]  Bradford Z. Mahon,et al.  A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content , 2008, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[15]  M. Brett,et al.  Large, colorful, or noisy? Attribute- and modality-specific activations during retrieval of perceptual attribute knowledge , 2001 .

[16]  Markus Kiefer,et al.  Conceptual Flexibility in the Human Brain: Dynamic Recruitment of Semantic Maps from Visual, Motor, and Motion-related Areas , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[17]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Discrete Cortical Regions Associated with Knowledge of Color and Knowledge of Action , 1995, Science.

[18]  Karen Emmorey,et al.  Modulation of BOLD Response in Motion-sensitive Lateral Temporal Cortex by Real and Fictive Motion Sentences , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  K. James,et al.  Auditory verb perception recruits motor systems in the developing brain: an fMRI investigation. , 2009, Developmental science.

[20]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  Context Effects in Embodied Lexical-Semantic Processing , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[21]  Roel M. Willems,et al.  The Function of Words: Distinct Neural Correlates for Words Denoting Differently Manipulable Objects , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Grasping Ideas with the Motor System: Semantic Somatotopy in Idiom Comprehension , 2009 .

[23]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Distributed neuronal networks for encoding category‐specific semantic information: the mismatch negativity to action words , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[24]  L. Fadiga,et al.  Active perception: sensorimotor circuits as a cortical basis for language , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[25]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  Body schematics: On the role of the body schema in embodied lexical–semantic representations , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  T. Talavage,et al.  Neuroanatomical distribution of five semantic components of verbs: Evidence from fMRI , 2008, Brain and Language.

[27]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Goal Representation in Human Anterior Intraparietal Sulcus , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Moving words: dynamic representations in language comprehension , 2004 .

[29]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Activation of sensory-motor areas in sentence comprehension. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[30]  L. Tyler,et al.  Modulation of motor and premotor cortices by actions, action words and action sentences , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[31]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Improved Assessment of Significant Activation in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI): Use of a Cluster‐Size Threshold , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[32]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Comprehending Prehending: Neural Correlates of Processing Verbs with Motor Stems , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[33]  Xiaoping P. Hu,et al.  fMRI evidence for word association and situated simulation in conceptual processing , 2008, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[34]  L. Barsalou Grounded cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[35]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Congruent Embodied Representations for Visually Presented Actions and Linguistic Phrases Describing Actions , 2006, Current Biology.

[36]  Lindsey J. Powell,et al.  My body or yours? The effect of visual perspective on cortical body representations. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[37]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A direct quantitative relationship between the functional properties of human and macaque V5 , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[38]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Extrastriate body area in human occipital cortex responds to the performance of motor actions , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[39]  J. Hart,et al.  Distinct prefrontal cortex activity associated with item memory and source memory for visual shapes. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[40]  Pasquale A. Della Rosa,et al.  The impact of semantic reference on word class: An fMRI study of action and object naming , 2006, NeuroImage.

[41]  M. Garrett,et al.  Representing the meanings of object and action words: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[42]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Whither structured representation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[43]  Vittorio Gallese,et al.  Listening to Action-related Sentences Activates Fronto-parietal Motor Circuits , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[44]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Neurophysiological distinction of verb categories , 2000, Neuroreport.

[45]  Sharon L. Thompson-Schill,et al.  Conceptual Representations of Action in the Lateral Temporal Cortex , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[46]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Human Body , 2001 .

[47]  Alex Martin,et al.  Representation of Manipulable Man-Made Objects in the Dorsal Stream , 2000, NeuroImage.

[48]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Spatiotemporal Signatures of Large-Scale Synfire Chains for Speech Processing as Revealed by MEG , 2008, Cerebral cortex.

[49]  F. Pulvermüller,et al.  Language outside the focus of attention: The mismatch negativity as a tool for studying higher cognitive processes , 2006, Progress in Neurobiology.

[50]  D. Bub,et al.  Kicking Calculators: Contribution of Embodied Representations to Sentence Comprehension. , 2008 .