Anaphoric reference to quantified antecedents: An event-related brain potential study

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 49, Issue 13, 2011, Pages 3786-3794

  Filik, Ruth ^a   Leuthold, Hartmut ^b   Moxey, Linda M ^c   Sanford, Anthony J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Language comprehension; N400; Optimality theory; Pronoun resolution; Quantifiers; Supposition denial theory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LINGUISTICS; NORMAL HUMAN; READING; VOLUNTEER; WAVEFORM;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 80755181004     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.043     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M. An alternative perspective on " semantic P600" effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews 2008, 59:55-73.
2. Brunia C.H.M. CNV and SPN: Indices of anticipatory behavior. The bereitschafts potential 2003, 207-228. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York. M. Jahanshahi, M. Hallett (Eds.).
3. Burkhardt P. Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms. Brain and Language 2006, 98:159-168.
4. Burkhardt P. The P600 reflects cost of new information in discourse memory. Neuroreport 2007, 18:1851-1854.
5. Burkhardt P., Roehm D. Differential effects of saliency: An event-related brain potential study. Neuroscience Letters 2007, 413:115-120.
6. Callahan S.M. Processing anaphoric constructions: Insights from electrophysiological studies. Journal of Neurolinguistics 2008, 21:231-266.
7. Dien J., Santuzzi A.M. Application of repeated measures ANOVA to high-density ERP datasets: A review and tutorial. Event-related potentials: A method handbook. 2005, 57-82. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. T.C. Handy (Ed.).
8. Donchin E., Coles M.G.H. Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1988, 11:354-356.
9. Dwivedi V.D, Phillips N.A., Laguë-Beauvais M., Baum S.R. An electrophysiological study of mood, modal context, and anaphora. Brain Research 2006, 1117:135-153.
10. Fiebach C.J., Schlesewsky M., Friederici A.D. Separating syntactic memory costs during parsing: the processing of German WH-questions. Journal of Memory and Language 2002, 47:250-272.
11. Filik R., Leuthold H. Processing local pragmatic anomalies in fictional contexts: Evidence from the N400. Psychophysiology 2008, 45:554-558.
12. Filik R., Moxey L.M. The on-line processing of written irony. Cognition 2010, 116:421-436.
13. Filik R., Sanford A.J. When is cataphoric reference recognised?. Cognition 2008, 107:1112-1121.
14. Filik R., Sanford A.J., Leuthold H. Processing pronouns without antecedents: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:1315-1326.
15. Garnham A. Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora 2001, Psychology Press, Hove.
16. Gernsbacher M.A. Comprehending conceptual anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes 1991, 6:81-105.
17. Gordon P.C, Hendrick R., Ledoux K., Yang C.L. Processing of reference and the structure of language: An analysis of complex noun phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes 1999, 14:353-379.
18. Hagoort P., Brown C.M., Osterhout L. The neurocognition of syntactic processing. The Neurocognition of Language 1999, 273-316. Oxford University Press, New York. C.M. Brown, P. Hagoort (Eds.).
19. Hagoort P., Hald L., Bastiaansen M., Petersson K.M. Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science 2004, 304:438-441.
20. Hendriks P., de Hoop H. Optimality theoretic semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 2001, 24:1-32.
21. Ille N., Berg P., Scherg M. Artifact correction of the ongoing EEG using spatial filters based on artifact and brain signal topographies. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 2002, 19:113-124.
22. Kaan E., Dallas A.C., Barkley C.M. Processing bare quantifiers in discourse. Brain Research 2007, 1146:199-209.
23. Kaan E., Swaab T.Y. Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15:98-110.
24. Kaup B., Kelter S., Habel C. Representing referents of plural expressions and resolving plural anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes 2002, 17:405-450.
25. Koh S., Clifton C. Resolution of the antecedent of a plural pronoun: Ontological categories and predicate symmetry. Journal of Memory and Language 2002, 46:830-844.
26. Kolk H., Chwilla D. Late positivities in unusual situations. Brain and Language 2007, 100:257-261.
27. Kuperberg G.R Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research 2007, 1146:23-49.
28. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980, 207:203-205.
29. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature 1984, 307:161-163.
30. Kutas M., Federmeier K.D. Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology 2011, 62:621-647.
31. Lau E.F., Philips C., Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature 2008, 9:920-933.
32. Ledoux K., Camblin C.C. The neural mechanisms of coreference. Language and Linguistics Compass 2008, 2:1013-1037.
33. Leuthold, H., Filik, R., Murphy, K., & Mackenzie, I. The on-line processing of socio-emotional information in prototypical scenarios: Inferences from brain potentials. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, in press. doi:10.1093/scan/nsr029.
34. Loveless N.E., Sanford A.J. Slow potential correlates of preparatory set. Biological Psychology 1974, 1:303-314.
35. Moxey L.M. Effects of what is expected on the focussing properties of quantifiers: A test of the presupposition-denial account. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 55:422-439.
36. Moxey L.M., Filik R. The effects of character desire on focus patterns and pronominal reference following quantified statements. Discourse Processes 2010, 47:588-616.
37. Moxey L.M., Filik R., Paterson K.B. On-line effects of what is expected on the resolution of plural pronouns. Language and Cognitive Processes 2009, 24:843-875.
38. Moxey L.M, Sanford A.J. Communicating quantities: A psychological perspective 1993, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, UK.
39. Moxey L.M., Sanford A.J., Sturt P., Morrow L.I. Constraints on the formation of plural reference objects: The influence of role, conjunction, and type of description. Journal of Memory and Language 2004, 51:346-364.
40. Nieuwland M.S, Van Berkum J.J.A. The neurocognition of referential ambiguity in language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 2008, 2:603-630.
41. Nouwen R. Complement anaphora and interpretation. Journal of Semantics 2003, 20:73-113.
42. Paterson K.B., Sanford A.J., Moxey L.M., Dawydiak E. Quantifier polarity and referential focus during reading. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 39:290-306.
43. Poesio M., Sturt P., Artstein R., Filik R. Underspecification and anaphora: Theoretical issues and preliminary evidence. Discourse Processes 2006, 42:157-175.
44. Prince A., Smolensky P. Optimality: From neural networks to universal grammar. Science 1997, 275:1604-1610.
45. Sanford A.J., Filik R " They" as a gender unspecified singular pronoun: Eye-tracking reveals a processing cost. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2007, 60:171-178.
46. Sanford A.J., Filik R., Emmott C., Morrow I. They're digging up the road aga. The processing cost of " Institutional They" Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:372-380.
47. Sanford A.J., Dawydiak E., Moxey L.M. A unified account of quantifier perspective effects in discourse. Discourse Processes 2007, 44:1-32.
48. Sanford A.J., Moxey L.M. Complement focus and reference phenomena. Processing and acquisition of reference 2011, 381-402. MIT Press, MIT. E. Gibson, N. Pearlmutter (Eds.).
49. Sanford A.J., Moxey L.M., Paterson K.B. Attentional focussing with quantifiers in production and comprehension. Memory & Cognition 1996, 24:144-155.
50. Streb J., Rösler F., Henninghausen E. Event-related responses to pronoun and proper name anaphors in parallel and nonparallel discourse structures. Brain and Language 1999, 70:273-286.
51. Streb J., Henninghausen E., Rösler F. Different anaphoric expressions are investigated by event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2004, 33:175-201.
52. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Experimental designs using ANOVA 2007, Thomson Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA.
53. Van Berkum J.J.A., Hagoort P., Brown C.M. Semantic integration in sentences and discourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1999, 11:657-671.