ERPs reveal sensitivity to hypothetical contexts in spoken discourse

NeuroReport

Volumn 21, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 791-795

  Dwivedi, Veena D ^a,c   Drury, John E ^c   Molnar, Monika ^c   Phillips, Natalie A ^b,c   Baum, Shari ^c   Steinhauer, Karsten ^c  

^a BROCK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (Canada)

^c MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

anaphora; event related potentials; hypothetical events; modal auxiliary; N400; P600; pronouns; semantics; spoken language; syntax

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISCOURSE ANALYSIS; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEMALE; FRONTAL CORTEX; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; SEMANTICS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VERBAL COMMUNICATION; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED RESPONSE; PHYSIOLOGY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; SPEECH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77954954459     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32833cae0d     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Van Dijk TA, Kintsch W. Strategies in discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press; 1983.
2. Johnson-Laird PN. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1983.
3. Zwaan RA, Radvansky GA. Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychol Bull 1998; 123:162-185.
4. Karttunen L. Discourse referents. In: McCawley J, editor. Syntax and semantics: Vol.7. New York: Academic Press; 1976. pp, 363-385.
5. Haviland S, Clark H. What's new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. J Verb Learn Verb Be 1974; 13:512-521.
6. Roberts C. Modal subordination and pronominal anaphora in discourse. Linguist Philos 1989; 12:683-721.
7. Roberts C. Anaphora in intensional contexts. In: Lappin S, editor. Handbook of semantic theory. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishers; 1996, pp. 215-246.
8. Dwivedi VD. Modality and discourse processing. In: Montrul S, Kessler Robb M, editors. McGill working papers in linguistics 12. Montreal: McGill University; 1996, pp. 17-52.
9. Chierchia G, McConnell-Ginet S. Meaning and Grammar: An introduction to semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1990.
10. Dwivedi VD, Phillips NA, Laguë-Beauvais M, Baum SR. An electrophysiological study of mood, modal context, and anaphora. Brain Res 2006; 1117:135-153.
11. Kaan E, Swaab TY. Electrophysiological evidence for serial sentence processing: a comparison between non-preferred and ungrammatical continuations. Cogn Brain Res 2003; 17:621-635.
12. Kaan E, Swaab TY. Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. J Cogn Neurosci 2003; 15:110.
13. Friederici AD, Hahne A, Saddy D. Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair. J Psycholinguist Res 2002; 31:45-63.
14. Hagoort P, Brown CM, Osterhout L. The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In: Brown CM, Hagoort P, editors. The neurocognition of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999, pp. 273-316.
15. Briggs G, Nebes R. Patterns of hand preference in a student population. Cortex 1975; 11:230-238.
16. Kutas M, Hillyard SA. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980; 207:203-205.
17. Kutas M, Federmeier KD. Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends Cogn Sci 2000; 4:463-470.
18. Van Berkum JJA, Hagoort P, Brown CM. Semantic integration in sentences and discourse: Evidence from the N400. J Cogn Neurosci 1999; 11:657-671.
19. Lau EF, Phillips C, Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nat Rev Neurosci 2008; 9:920-933.
20. Shao J, Neville H. Analyzing semantic processing using event-related potentials. Newslett Center Res Lang 1998; 11:3-20.
21. Steinhauer K, Drury JE, Portner P, Walenski M, Ullman MT. Syntax, concepts, and logic in the temporal dynamics of language comprehension: evidence from event-related potentials. Neuropsychologia 2010; 48:1525-1542.
22. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I, Schlesewsky M. An alternative perspective on 'semantic P600' effects in language comprehension. Brain Res Rev 2008; 59:55-73.
23. Kuperberg G. Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: challenges to syntax. Brain Res 2007; 1146:23-49.
24. Chow HM, Kaup B, Raabe M, Greenlee MW. Evidence of fronto-temporal interactions for strategic inference processes during language comprehension. Neuroimage 2008; 40:940-954.
25. Dwivedi VD, Phillips NA, Einagel S, Baum SR. The neural underpinnings of semantic ambiguity and anaphora. Brain Res 2010; 1311:93-109.