Lexical prediction via forward models: N400 evidence from German Sign Language

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 51, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 2224-2237

  Hosemann, Jana ^a   Herrmann, Annika ^a   Steinbach, Markus ^a   Bornkessel Schlesewsky, Ina ^b   Schlesewsky, Matthias ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^b PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^c JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Event related potentials; Forward model; Language comprehension; Late positivity; N400; Sign language

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; MALE; POSITIVE FEEDBACK; PREDICTION; SEMANTICS; SIGN LANGUAGE;

EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; FORWARD MODEL; LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION; LATE POSITIVITY; N400; SIGN LANGUAGE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BRAIN; COMPREHENSION; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SIGN LANGUAGE;

EID: 84883438848     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.07.013     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Battison, R., (1978). Lexical Borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press (Reprinted 2003, Linstok Press).
2. Benedicto E., Brentari D. Where did all the arguments go? Argument-changing properties of classifiers in ASL. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2004, 22:743-810.
3. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Kretzschmar F., Tune S., Wang L., Genç S., Philipp M., et al. Think globally: cross-linguistic variation in electrophysiological activity during sentence comprehension. Brain and Language 2011, 117:133-152.
4. Bourguignon N., Drury J.E., Valois D., Steinhauer K. Decomposing animacy reversals between agents and experiencers: an ERP study. Brain and Language 2012, 122:179-189.
5. Brentari D. A prosodic model of sign language phonology 1998, MIT-Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Brentari D. Phonology. Sign language. An international handbook 2012, 21-54. de Gruyter Mouton, Berlin. R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, B. Woll (Eds.).
7. Brouwer H., Fitz H., Hoeks J.C.J. Getting real about semantic illusions: rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension. Brain Research 2012, 1446:127-143.
8. Camblin C.C., Gordon P.C., Swaab T.Y. The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 56:103-128.
9. Capek C.M., Grossi G., Newman A.J., McBurney S.L., Corina D., Roeder B. Brains systems mediating semantic and syntactic processing in deaf native signers: biological invariance and modality specificity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 2009, 106:8784-8789.
10. Carreiras M., Gutiérrez-Sigut E., Baquero S., Corina D. Lexical processing in Spanish Sign Language (LSE). Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 58:100-122.
11. Corina, D. (2000). Some observations regarding paraphasia in American Sign Language. In: K. Emmorey, & H. Lane (Eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima (pp. 493-507). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Connolly J.F., Phillips N.A. Event-related potential components reflect phonological and semantic processing of the terminal word of spoken sentences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1994, 6:256-266.
13. Coulson S., King J.W., Kutas M. ERPs and domain specificity: beating a straw horse. Language and Cognitive Processes 1998, 13:653-672.
14. DeLong K.A., Urbach T.P., Kutas M. Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience 2005, 8:1117-1121.
15. Dikker S., Pylkkänen L. Before the N400: effects of lexical-semantic violations in visual cortex. Brain and Language 2011, 118:23-28.
16. Dikker S., Rabagliati H., Farmer T.A., Pylkkänen L. Early occipital sensitivity to syntactic category is based on form typicality. Psychological Science 2010, 21:629-634.
17. Federmeier K.D., Kutas M., Schul R. Age-related and individual differences in the use of prediction during language comprehension. Brain and Language 2010, 115:149-161.
18. Federmeier K.D., Laszlo S. Time for meaning: electrophysiology provides insights into the dynamics of representation and processing in semantic memory. Psychology of learning and motivation 2009, vol. 51:1-44. Academic Press, Burlington.
19. Federmeier K.D. Thinking ahead: the role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:491-505.
20. Grosvald M., Gutierrez E., Hafer S., Corina D. Dissociating linguistic and non-linguistic gesture processing: electrophysiological evidence from American sign language. Brain and Language 2012, 121:12-24.
21. Gutiérrez E., Müller O., Baus C., Carreiras M. Electrophysiological evidence for phonological priming in Spanish Sign Language lexical access. Neuropsychologia 2012, 50:1335-1346.
22. Gutiérrez E, Williams D., Grosvald M., Corina D. Lexical access in American Sign Langugae: an ERP investigation of effects of semantics and phonology. Brain Research 2012, 1468:63-83.
23. Gunter T.C., Friederici A.D., Schriefers H. Syntactic gender and semantic expectancy: ERPs reveal early autonomy and late interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000, 12:556-568.
24. Hoeks J.C.J., Stowe L.A., Doedens G. Seeing words in context: the interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. Cognitive Brain Research 2004, 19:59-73.
25. Hohenberger A., Happ D., Leuninger H. Modality-dependent aspects of sign language production: evidence from slips of the hands and their repairs in German Sign Language. Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages 2002, 112-142. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. R.P. Meier, K. Cormier, D. Quinto-Pozos (Eds.).
26. Huynh H., Feldt L.S. Conditions under which the mean-square ratios in repeated measurement designs have exact F-distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1970, 65:1582-1589.
27. Kim A., Osterhout L. The independence of combinatory semantic processing: evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language 2005, 52:205-225.
28. Kolk H.H.J., Chwilla D.J., van Herten M., Oor P.J. Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: a study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language 2003, 85:1-36.
29. Kretzschmar, F. (2010). The electrophysiological reality of parafoveal processing: On the validity of language-related ERPs in natural reading. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Marburg.
30. Kuperberg G.R., Sitnikova T., Caplan D., Holcomb P. Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 17:117-129.
31. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A., Gazzaniga M.S. Processing of semantic anomaly by right and left hemispheres of commissurotomy patients. Brain 1988, 111:553-576.
32. Kutas M., Neville H.J., Holcomb P.J. A preliminary comparison of the N400 response to semantic anomalies during reading, listening and signing. The London Symposia (EEG Suppl) 1987, 39:325-330. Elsevier Science Publishers.
33. Lau E., Phillips C., Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2008, 9(12):920-933.
34. Lawrence, M. A. (2012). ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.1-1. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez.
35. Liddell S., Johnson R. American Sign Language: the phonological base 1989, 64:195-277. Sign Language Studies.
36. Marentette P.F., Mayberry R.I. Principles for an emerging phonological system: a case study in early American Sign Language acquisition. Language acquisition by eye 2000, 71-90. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. C. Chamberlain, J. Morford, R. Mayberry (Eds.).
37. Meier R.P. Why different, why the same? Explaining effects and non-effects of modality upon linguistic structure in sign and speech. Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages 2002, 1-25. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. R.P. Meier, K. Cormier, D. Quinto-Pozos (Eds.).
38. Morgan G., Barrett-Jones S., Stonehan H. The first signs of language: phonological development in British Sign Language. Applied Psycholinguistics 2007, 28:3-22.
39. Neville H.J., Coffey S.A., Lawson D.S., Fischer A., Emmorey K., Bellugi U. Neural systems mediating American Sign Language: effects of sensory experience and age of acquisition. Brain and Language 1997, 57:285-308.
40. Nieuwenhuis S., Aston-Jones G., Cohen J.D. Decision making, the P3, and the locus coerulus-norepinephrine system. Psychological Bulletin 2005, 131:510-532.
41. Orfanidou E., Adam R., McQueen J.M., Morgan G. Making sense of nonsense in British Sign Language (BSL): the contribution of different phonological parameters to sign recognition. Memory & Cognition 2009, 37:302-315.
42. Otten M., Nieuwland M.S., van Berkum J.J.A. Great expectations: specific lexical anticipation influences the processing of spoken language. BMC Neuroscience 2007, 8:89.
43. Padden C., Perlmutter D. American Sign Language and the architecture of phonological theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1987, 5:335-375.
44. Pfau R., Quer J. Nonmanuals: their prosodic and grammatical roles. Sign Languages 2010, 381-402. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. D. Brentari (Ed.).
45. Pickering M.J., Garrod S. Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2007, 11:105-110.
46. R Development Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria http://www.R-project.org/.
47. Rauschecker J.P., Scott S.K. Maps and streams in the auditory cortex: nonhuman primates illuminate human speech processing. Nat. Neurosci. 2009, 12(6):718-724.
48. Roehm D., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Rösler F., Schlesewsky M. To predict or not to predict: influences of task and strategy on the processing of semantic relations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 19:1259-1274.
49. Sandler W. Phonological representation of the sign: linearity and nonlinearity in sign language phonology 1989, Foris, Dordrecht.
50. Sandler W., Lillo-Martin D. Sign language and linguistic universals 2006, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
51. Sanford A.J., Leuthold H., Bohan J., Sanford A.J.S. Anomalies at the borderline of awareness: an ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2011, 93:514-523.
52. Sassenhagen, J., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (submitted). The P600-as-P3 hypothesis revisited: Single-trial analyses reveal that the late EEG positivity following linguistically deviant material is reaction time aligned. Manuscript submitted for publication.
53. Stokoe W. Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Studies in linguistics, Occasional papers, 8 1960, Linstok Press, Silver Spring, MD.
54. Stroud C., Phillips C. Examining the evidence for an independent semantic analyzer: an ERP study in Spanish. Brain and Language 2012, 120:108-126.
55. Supalla, T., 1982. Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation. University of California, San Diego.
56. Van Berkum J.J.A., Brown C., Zwitserlood P., Kooijman V., Hagoort P. Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2005, 31:443-467.
57. van den Brink D., Brown C.M., Hagoort P. Electrophysiological evidence for early contextual influences during spoken-word recognition: N200 versus N400 effects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2001, 13(7):967-985.
58. Wicha N.Y.Y., Moreno E.M., Kutas M. Anticipating words and their gender: an event-related brain potential study of semantc integration, gender expectancy, and gender agreement in Spanish sentence reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2004, 16:1271-1288.
59. Wilbur R.B. Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. The signs of language revisited: Festschrift for Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima 2000, 213-241. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. H. Lane, K. Emmorey (Eds.).
60. Zwitzerlood, I. (2003). Classifying hand configurations in Nederlandse Gebarentaal (sign language of the Netherlands). Ph.D. dissertation. Utrecht University. Utrecht: LOT.
61. Zwitzerlood I. Classifiers. Sign language. An international handbook 2012, 158-186. de Gruyter Mouton, Berlin. R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, B. Woll (Eds.).