Event-related potentials show online influence of lexical biases on prosodic processing

NeuroReport

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 8-13

  Itzhak, Inbal ^a   Pauker, Efrat ^a   Drury, John E ^a   Baum, Shari R ^a   Steinhauer, Karsten ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Closure positive shift; Early closure late closure ambiguity; Event related potentials; Garden path sentences; Lexical bias; N400; P600; Prosody; Speech; Transitivity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; ONLINE SYSTEMS; PHONETICS; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 74349107724     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e328330251d     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Frazier L, Fodor JD. The sausage machine: a new two-stage parsing model. Cognition 1978; 6:291-325.
2. Gorrell P. Syntax and parsing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
3. Snedeker J, Yuan S. Effects of prosodic and lexical constraints on parsing in young children (and adults). J Mem Lang 58:574-608.
4. Beach CM. The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: evidence for cue trading relations. J Mem Lang 1991; 30:644-663.
5. Carlson K, Clifton C, Frazier L. Prosodic boundaries in adjunct attachment. J Mem Lang 2001; 45:58-81.
6. Clifton C, Carlson K, Frazier L. Informative prosodic boundaries. Lang Speech 2002; 45:87-114.
7. Frazier L, Carlson K, Clifton C. Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension. Trends Cogn Sci 2006; 10:244-249.
8. Kjelgaard MM, Speer SR. Prosodic facilitation and interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity. J Mem Lang 1999; 40:153-194.
9. Marslen-Wilson WD, Tyler LK,Warren P, Grenier P, Lee CS. Prosodic effects in minimal attachment. Q J Exp Psychol 1992; 45:73-87.
10. Schafer AJ, Speer SR, Waren P, White DS. Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. J Psycholinguist Res 2000; 29:169-182.
11. Stirling L, Wales R. Does prosody support or direct sentence processing? Lang Cogn Process 1996; 11:193-212.
12. Kerkhofs R, Vonk W, Schriefers H, Chwilla DJ. Discourse, syntax, and prosody: The brain reveals an immediate interaction. J Cogn Neurosci 2007; 19:1421-1434.
13. Steinhauer K, Alter K, Friederici AD. Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nat Neurosci 1999; 2:191-196.
14. Steinhauer K. Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain Lang 2003; 86:142-164.
15. Burkhardt P, Fanselow G, Schlesewsky M. Effects of (in)transitivity on structure building and agreement. Brain Res 2007; 1163:100-110.
16. Garnsey SM, Pearlmutter NJ, Myers E, Lotocky MA. The contribution of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. J Mem Lang 1997; 37:58-93.
17. Jennings F, Randall B, Tyler LK. Graded effects of verb subcategory p on parsing: Support for constraint-satisfaction models. Lang Cogn Process 1997; 12:485-504. (Pubitemid 127467047)
18. Mitchell DC, Holmes VM. The role of specific information about the verb in parsing sentences with local structural ambiguity. J Mem Lang 1985; 24:542-559.
19. Osterhout L, Holcomb PJ, Swinney DA. Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1994; 20:786-803.
20. Staub A. The parser doesn't ignore intransitivity, after all. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 2007; 33:550-569.
21. Trueswell JC, Tanenhaus MK, Kello C. Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 1993; 19:528-553.
22. Lapata M, Keller F, Schulte IM,Walde S. Verb frame frequency as a predictor of verb bias. J Psycholinguist Res 2001; 30:419-435.
23. Jasper HH. The 10-20 electrode system of the International Federation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1958; 10:371.
24. Steinhauer K, Friederici AD. Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: the closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. J Psycholinguist Res 2001; 30:267-295.
25. Frazier L, Rayner K. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cogn Psychol 1982; 14:178-210.