Neural correlates of semantic and syntactic processes in the comprehension of case marked pronouns: Evidence from German and Dutch

BMC Neuroscience

Volumn 7, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Lamers, Monique J A ^a   Jansma, Bernadette M ^b   Hammer, Anke ^c   Münte, Thomas F ^c  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c OTTO VON GUERICKE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EVOKED BRAIN STEM RESPONSE; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MALE; MISMATCH NEGATIVITY; SEMANTICS; SPEECH ARTICULATION; WORD RECOGNITION; WORKING MEMORY;

ADULT; COMPREHENSION; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; NETHERLANDS; SEMANTICS;

EID: 33646230570     PISSN: 14712202     EISSN: 14712202     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-7-23     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Clifton CJ, Kennison SM, Albrecht JE: Reading the words her, his, him: Implications for parsing principles based on frequency and on structure. Journal of Memory and Language 1997, 36:276-292.
2. Dell GS, McKoon G, Ratcliff R: The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1983, 22:121-132.
3. Garnham A, Oakhill J, Cain K: The interpretation of anaphoric noun phrases: Time course, and effects of overspecificity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 1997, 50A: 149-162.
4. Gernsbacher MA, Shroyer S: The cataphoric use of the indefinite this in spoken narratives. Mem Cognit 1989, 17:536-540.
5. Garrod S: Resolving pronouns and other anaphoric devices: The case for diversity in discourse processing. In Perspectives on sentence processing Edited by: Clifton CJ and Frazier L. Hillsdale, NJ, England, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1994:339-357.
6. Gernsbacher MA, Varner KR, Faust ME: Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1990, 16:430-445.
7. Gordon PC, Hendrick R: The representation and processing of coreference in discourse. Cognitive Science 1998, 22:389-424.
8. Arnold JE, Eisenband JG, Brown Schmidt S, Trueswell JC: The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course for pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition 2000, 76:B13-B26.
9. Garnham A, Oakhill J, Ehrlich MF, Carreiras M: Representations and Processes in the Interpretation of Pronouns: New Evidence from Spanish and French. Journal of Memory and Language (JMemL) 1995, 34:41-62.
10. Chomsky N: Knowledge of language: Its elements and origins. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 1981, 295:223-234.
11. Haegeman L: Introduction to government and binding theory. Oxford, Blackwell; 1991.
12. Gernsbacher MA: Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition 1989, 32:99-156.
13. Osterhout L, Bersick M, McLaughlin J: Brain potentials reflect violations of gender stereotypes. Memory & Cognition 1997, 25:273-285.
14. Schmitt B, Lamers M, Münte TF: Electrophysiological estimates of biological and syntactic gender violation during pronoun processing. Cognitive Brain Research 2002, 14:333-346.
15. Münte TF, Urbach TP, Düzel E, Kutas M: Event-related brainpotentials in the study of human cognition and neuropsychology. In Handbook of Neuropsychology 2nd edition. Edited by: Boller F, Grafman J and Rizzalotti G., Elsevier Science; 2000:139-235.
16. Brown C, Hagoort P: The Processing Nature of the N400: Evidence from Masked Priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993, 5:34-44.
17. Hagoort P, Brown C: Brain responses to lexical ambiguity resolution and parsing. In Perspectives on sentence processing Edited by: C. Clifton CJ, Frazier L. and Rayner K. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum; 1994:45-80.
18. Kutas M, Hillyard SA: Reading between the lines: event-related brain potentials during natural sentence processing. Brain Long 1980, 11:354-373.
19. Kutas M, Hillyard SA: Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies. MemCognit 1983, 11:539-550.
20. van Berkum JJ, Hagoort P, Brown CM: Semantic integration in sentences and discourse: evidence from the N400. JCogn Neurosci 1999, 11:657-671.
21. George MS, Kutas M, Martinez A, Sereno MI: Semantic integration in reading: engagement of the right hemisphere during discourse processing. Brain 1999, 122:1317-1325.
22. Hagoort P, Brown C, Groothusen J: The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP-measure of syntactic processing. Language and cognitive processes 1993, 8:439-483.
23. Hagoort P, Brown CM: ERP effects of listening to speech compared to reading: the P600/SPS to syntactic violations in spoken sentences and rapid serial visual presentation. Neuropsychologia 2000, 38:1531-1549.
24. McKinnon R, Ostehout L: Constraints on Movement Phenomena in Sentence Processing: Evidence from Event-related BrainPotentials. Language and cognitive processes 1996, 11:495-523.
25. Mecklinger A, Schriefers H, Steinhauer K, Friederici AD: Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: an analysis with event-related potentials. MemCognit 1995, 23:477-494.
26. Osterhout L, Holcomb P: Event-Related Brain Potentials Elicited by Syntactic Anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language 1992, 31:1-22.
27. Rösler F, Pechmann T, Streb J, Röder B, Hennighausen E: Parsing of Sentences in a Language with Varying Word Order: Word-by-Word Variations of Processing Demands Are Revealed by Event-Related Brain Potentials. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 38:150-176.
28. Kaan E, Swaab TY: Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15:98-110.
29. Friederici AD: The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: a model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain Lang 1995, 50:259-281.
30. Gunter TC, Stowe LA, Mulder G: When syntax meets semantics. Psychophysiology 1997, 34:660-676.
31. Kaan E, Harris A, Gibson E, Holcomb P: The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and cognitive processes 2000, 15:159-201.
32. Balogh J, Swinney D, Finkel L: Gap-Filling and End-of-Sentence Effects in Real-Time Language Processing: Implications for Modeling Sentence Comprehension in Aphasia. Brain Lang 1998, 61:169-182.
33. Kolk HHJ, Chwilla DJ, van Herten M, Oor PJW: Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language 2003, 85:1-36.
34. van Herten M, Kolk HHJ, Chwilla DJ: An ERP study of P600 effects elicited by semantic anomalies. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 22:241-255.
35. Kuperberg GR, Sitnikova T, Caplan D, Holcomb PJ: Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 17:117-129.
36. Münte TF, Heinze HJ, Matzke M, Wieringa BM, Johannes S: Brain potentials and syntactic violations revisited: No evidence for specificity of the syntactic positive shift. Neuropsychologia 1998, 36:217-226.
37. Coulson S, King J, Kutas M: Expect the Unexpected: Event-related Brain Response to Morphosyntactic Violations. Language and cognitive processes 1998, 13:21-58.
38. Münte TF, Heinze HJ, Mangun GR: Dissociation of Brain Activity Related to Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993, 5:335-344.
39. Neville HJ, Nicol JL, Barss A, Forster KI, Garrett MF: Syntactically Based Sentence Processing Classes: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1991, 3:151-165.
40. King J, Kutas M: Who did What and When? Using Word- and Clause-Level ERPs to Monitor Working Memory Usage in Reading. JCogn Neurosci 1995, 7:376-395.
41. Kluender R, Kutas M: Bridging the Gap: Evidence from ERPs on the Processing of Unbounded Dependencies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1993, 5:196-214.
42. Osterhout L, Mobley LA: Event-related Brain Potentials Elicited by Failure to Agree. Journal of Memory and Language 1995, 34:739-773.
43. King JW, Kutas M: Is she an engineer? (poster): Annual conference of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, Boston.; 1997.
44. Garnham A: Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora. In Essays in cognitive psychology Philadelphia, PA, Psychology Press; 2001:x, 170.
45. Hammer A, Jansma BM, Lamers M, Munte TF: Pronominal Reference in Sentences about Persons or Things: An Electrophysiological Approach. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17:227-239.
46. Streb J, Hennighausen E, Rosler F: Different Anaphoric Expressions are Investigated by Event-Related Brain Potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2004, 33:175-201.
47. Streb J, Rosler F, Hennighausen E: Event-related responses to pronoun and proper name anaphors in parallel and nonparallel discourse structures. Brain and Language 1999, 70:273-286.
48. Kutas M, Federmeier KD, Coulson S, King JW, Münte TF: Language. In Handbook of Psychophysiology, 2nd ed Edited by: Cacioppo JT, Tassinary LG and Berntson GG., Cambrigde University Press; 2000.
49. Kutas M, Petten CKV: Psycholinguistics electrified: event-related brain potential investigations. In Handbook of Psycholinguistics Edited by: Gernsbacher MA. San Diego, CA, Academic Press; 1994:83-143.
50. Lamers MJA: Sentence Processing: using syntactic, semantic, and thematic information. In Department of Linguistics Groningen, University of Groningen; 2001.
51. Lamers M: Resolving subject-object ambiguities with and without case: evidence from ERPs. In Case-marking: competition and variation Edited by: Amberber M and Hoop H., John Benjamins in press.
52. Hagoort P: How the brain solves the binding problem for language: A neurocomputational model of syntactic processing. Neurolmage 2003, 20:.
53. Vosse T, Kempen G: Syntactic structure assembly in human parsing: A computational model based on competitive inhibition and lexicalist grammar. Cognition 2000, 75:105-143.