Neurosci Lett
Center for Clinical Neurosciences, Children's Learning Institute, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Published: January 2018
The type of syntactic operations that increase neuronal activation in humans as a result of syntactically erroneous, unexpected lexical items in hearing sentences has remained unclear. In the present study, we used recordings of magnetoencephalographic (MEG) activity to compare bare infinitive and full infinitive constructions in English. This research aims to identify the type of syntactic deviance that may trigger an early syntax-related mismatch field (MMF) component when unexpected words appear in sentences. Six speakers of English as a first language were presented with auditory stimuli of sentences or words in a passive odd-ball paradigm while watching a silent movie. The experimental protocol included four sessions, specifically investigating the sentential (structural) versions of full (with the 'to' infinitival particle) and bare infinitival structures (without the particle) and the lexical (non-structure) versions of the verb either with or without the particle to determine whether the structure processing of sentences was a more crucial factor in the detection of the MMF than the simple processing of lexical items in verb-only conditions. The amplitude analysis of the resulting evoked fields showed that the presence of the syntactic category error of bare infinitival structures against syntactic predictions evoked a significantly larger MMF activation with a peak latency of approximately 200ms in the anterior superior temporal sulci in the left hemisphere, compared with the lexical items that did not have any syntactic status. These results clearly demonstrate that syntactically unexpected, illegal input in the bare infinitival structure is likely to be noticed more robustly in the brain while processing the structural information of the entire sentence than the corresponding verb-only items.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2017.07.051 | DOI Listing |
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn
December 2024
University of Massachusetts-Amherst, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences.
Listeners can use both lexical context (i.e., lexical knowledge activated by the word itself) and lexical predictions based on the content of a preceding sentence to adjust their phonetic categories to speaker idiosyncrasies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Psycholinguist Res
January 2025
Department of Comparative and General Linguistics, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Deverbal formations in Greek, e.g. mi'razo 'to distribute' < 'mirazma 'distributing' are considered morphologically complex lexical items.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform
January 2025
Faculty of Science & Technology, Department of Psychology, Bournemouth University.
Computational models of eye movement control during reading have revolutionized the study of visual, perceptual, and linguistic processes underlying reading. However, these models can only simulate and test predictions about the reading of single lines of text. Here we report two studies that examined how input variables for lexical processing (frequency and predictability) in these models influence the processing of line-final words.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFTop Cogn Sci
December 2024
Department of Linguistics, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
As they process complex linguistic input, language comprehenders must maintain a mapping between lexical items (e.g., morphemes) and their syntactic position in the sentence.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPsychon Bull Rev
December 2024
Laboratoire Cognition Langage & Développement (LCLD), Centre de Recherche Cognition et Neurosciences (CRCN), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Av. F. Roosevelt, 50 /CP 191, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Lexical competition between newly acquired and already established representations of written words is considered a marker of word integration into the mental lexicon. To date, studies about the emergence of lexical competition involved mostly artificial training procedures based on overexposure and explicit instructions for memorization. Yet, in real life, novel word encounters occur mostly without explicit learning intent, through reading texts with words appearing rarely.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!
© LitMetric 2025. All rights reserved.