scholarly journals Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelina Fedorenko ◽  
Idan Blank ◽  
Matthew Siegelman ◽  
Zachary Mineroff
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Opposite Pattern ◽  
Word Meanings ◽  
Neural Architecture ◽  
Temporal Language ◽  
Language Network

AbstractTo understand what you are reading now, your mind retrieves the meanings of words and constructions from a linguistic knowledge store (lexico-semantic processing) and identifies the relationships among them to construct a complex meaning (syntactic or combinatorial processing). Do these two sets of processes rely on distinct, specialized mechanisms or, rather, share a common pool of resources? Linguistic theorizing, empirical evidence from language acquisition and processing, and computational modeling have jointly painted a picture whereby lexico-semantic and syntactic processing are deeply inter-connected and perhaps not separable. In contrast, many current proposals of the neural architecture of language continue to endorse a view whereby certain brain regions selectively support syntactic/combinatorial processing, although the locus of such “syntactic hub”, and its nature, vary across proposals. Here, we searched for selectivity for syntactic over lexico-semantic processing using a powerful individual-subjects fMRI approach across three sentence comprehension paradigms that have been used in prior work to argue for such selectivity: responses to lexico-semanticvs.morpho-syntactic violations (Experiment 1); recovery from neural suppression across pairs of sentences differing in only lexical itemsvs.only syntactic structure (Experiment 2); and same/different meaning judgments on such sentence pairs (Experiment 3). Across experiments, both lexico-semantic and syntactic conditions elicited robust responses throughout the left fronto-temporal language network. Critically, however, no regions were more strongly engaged by syntactic than lexico-semantic processing, although some regions showed the opposite pattern. Thus, contra many current proposals of the neural architecture of language, syntactic/combinatorial processing is not separable from lexico-semantic processing at the level of brain regions—or even voxel subsets—within the language network, in line with strong integration between these two processes that has been consistently observed in behavioral and computational language research. The results further suggest that the language network may be generally more strongly concerned with meaning than syntactic form, in line with the primary function of language—to share meanings across minds.

scholarly journals High-level language brain regions are sensitive to sub-lexical regularities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamar I Regev ◽  
Josef Affourtit ◽  
Xuanyi Chen ◽  
Abigail E Schipper ◽  
Leon Bergen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
High Level Language ◽  
Word Meanings ◽  
Sound Patterns ◽  
Core Language ◽  
High Level ◽  
Language Network

A network of left frontal and temporal brain regions supports 'high-level' language processing-including the processing of word meanings, as well as word-combinatorial processing-across presentation modalities. This 'core' language network has been argued to store our knowledge of words and constructions as well as constraints on how those combine to form sentences. However, our linguistic knowledge additionally includes information about sounds (phonemes) and how they combine to form clusters, syllables, and words. Is this knowledge of phoneme combinatorics also represented in these language regions? Across five fMRI experiments, we investigated the sensitivity of high-level language processing brain regions to sub-lexical linguistic sound patterns by examining responses to diverse nonwords-sequences of sounds/letters that do not constitute real words (e.g., punes, silory, flope). We establish robust responses in the language network to visually (Experiment 1a, n=605) and auditorily (Experiments 1b, n=12, and 1c, n=13) presented nonwords relative to baseline. In Experiment 2 (n=16), we find stronger responses to nonwords that obey the phoneme-combinatorial constraints of English. Finally, in Experiment 3 (n=14) and a post-hoc analysis of Experiment 2, we provide suggestive evidence that the responses in Experiments 1 and 2 are not due to the activation of real words that share some phonology with the nonwords. The results suggest that knowledge of phoneme combinatorics and representations of sub-lexical linguistic sound patterns are stored within the same fronto-temporal network that stores higher-level linguistic knowledge and supports word and sentence comprehension.

scholarly journals Syntactic and Semantic Modulation of Neural Activity during Auditory Sentence Comprehension

2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 665-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Humphries ◽  
Jeffrey R. Binder ◽  
David A. Medler ◽  
Einat Liebenthal
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Lobe ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Functional Neuroimaging ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Imaging Study ◽  
Angular Gyrus ◽  
Semantic Structure ◽  
Word Lists

In previous functional neuroimaging studies, left anterior temporal and temporal-parietal areas responded more strongly to sentences than to randomly ordered lists of words. The smaller response for word lists could be explained by either (1) less activation of syntactic processes due to the absence of syntactic structure in the random word lists or (2) less activation of semantic processes resulting from failure to combine the content words into a global meaning. To test these two explanations, we conducted a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in which word order and combinatorial word meaning were independently manipulated during auditory comprehension. Subjects heard six different stimuli: normal sentences, semantically incongruent sentences in which content words were randomly replaced with other content words, pseudoword sentences, and versions of these three sentence types in which word order was randomized to remove syntactic structure. Effects of syntactic structure (greater activation to sentences than to word lists) were observed in the left anterior superior temporal sulcus and left angular gyrus. Semantic effects (greater activation to semantically congruent stimuli than either incongruent or pseudoword stimuli) were seen in widespread, bilateral temporal lobe areas and the angular gyrus. Of the two regions that responded to syntactic structure, the angular gyrus showed a greater response to semantic structure, suggesting that reduced activation for word lists in this area is related to a disruption in semantic processing. The anterior temporal lobe, on the other hand, was relatively insensitive to manipulations of semantic structure, suggesting that syntactic information plays a greater role in driving activation in this area.

scholarly journals The language network is recruited but not required for non-verbal event semantics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna A. Ivanova ◽  
Zachary Mineroff ◽  
Vitor Zimmerer ◽  
Nancy Kanwisher ◽  
Rosemary Varley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Control Task ◽  
Semantic Task ◽  
Line Drawings ◽  
Patient Interactions ◽  
Perceptual Control ◽  
Semantic Plausibility ◽  
Temporal Language ◽  
Language Network

AbstractThe ability to combine individual meanings into complex representations of the world is often associated with language. Yet people also construct combinatorial event-level representations from non-linguistic input, e.g. from visual scenes. Here, we test whether the language network in the human brain is involved in and necessary for semantic processing of nonverbal events. In Experiment 1, we scanned participants with fMRI while they performed a semantic plausibility judgment task vs. a difficult perceptual control task on sentences and line drawings that describe/depict simple agent-patient interactions. We found that the language network responded robustly during the semantic task but not during the perceptual control task. This effect was observed for both sentences and pictures (although the response to sentences was stronger). Thus, language regions in healthy adults are engaged during a semantic task performed on pictorial depictions of events. But is this engagement necessary? In Experiment 2, we tested two individuals with global aphasia, who have sustained massive damage to perisylvian language areas and display severe language difficulties, against a group of age-matched control participants. Individuals with aphasia were severely impaired on a task of matching sentences and pictures. However, they performed close to controls in assessing the plausibility of pictorial depictions of agent-patient interactions. Overall, our results indicate that the left fronto-temporal language network is recruited but not necessary for semantic processing of nonverbal events.

scholarly journals The universal language network: A cross-linguistic investigation spanning 45 languages and 11 language families.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dima Ayyash ◽  
Saima Malik-Moraleda ◽  
Jeanne Gallee ◽  
Josef Affourtit ◽  
Malte Hoffman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Cognitive Neuroscience ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Functional Integration ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
European Languages ◽  
Universal Language ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Temporal Language ◽  
Language Network

To understand the architecture of human language, it is critical to examine diverse languages; yet most cognitive neuroscience research has focused on a handful of primarily Indo-European languages. Here, we report a large-scale investigation of the fronto-temporal language network across 45 languages and establish the cross-linguistic generality of its key functional properties, including general topography, left-lateralization, strong functional integration among its brain regions, and functional selectivity for language processing. 

scholarly journals The Small and Efficient Language Network of Polyglots and Hyper-polyglots

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-76
Author(s):  
Olessia Jouravlev ◽  
Zachary Mineroff ◽  
Idan A Blank ◽  
Evelina Fedorenko
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Default Mode Network ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Neural Architecture ◽  
Initial Characterization ◽  
The One ◽  
Multiple Languages ◽  
Language Network

Abstract Acquiring a foreign language is challenging for many adults. Yet certain individuals choose to acquire sometimes dozens of languages and often just for fun. Is there something special about the minds and brains of such polyglots? Using robust individual-level markers of language activity, measured with fMRI, we compared native language processing in polyglots versus matched controls. Polyglots (n = 17, including nine “hyper-polyglots” with proficiency in 10–55 languages) used fewer neural resources to process language: Their activations were smaller in both magnitude and extent. This difference was spatially and functionally selective: The groups were similar in their activation of two other brain networks—the multiple demand network and the default mode network. We hypothesize that the activation reduction in the language network is experientially driven, such that the acquisition and use of multiple languages makes language processing generally more efficient. However, genetic and longitudinal studies will be critical to distinguish this hypothesis from the one whereby polyglots’ brains already differ at birth or early in development. This initial characterization of polyglots’ language network opens the door to future investigations of the cognitive and neural architecture of individuals who gain mastery of multiple languages, including changes in this architecture with linguistic experiences.

Cognitive and Physiological Substrates of Impaired Sentence Processing in Parkinson's Disease

1993 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 480-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray Grossman ◽  
Susan Carvell ◽  
Stephen Gollomp ◽  
Matthew B. Stern ◽  
Martin Reivich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Frontal Cortex ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Left Caudate ◽  
Regional Cerebral Glucose Metabolism

Sentence comprehension is a complex process involving at least a grammatical processor and a procedural component that supports language computations. One type of cerebral architecture that may underlie sentence processing is a network of distributed brain regions. We report two experiments designed to evaluate the cognitive and physiological substrate of sentence processing diaculties in nondemented patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). In the first experiment, patients answered simple questions about sentences that varied in their computational demands. Group and individual patient analyses indicated that PD patients are significantly compromised on this task, and that their difficulties become more prominent as the computational demands of the sentences increase. We manipulated the set of sentences to stress performance aspects of sentence processing. PD patients were compromised in their ability to detect errors in the presence and nature of a sentence's grammatical morphemes, suggesting a deficit in selective attention, but their ability to answer questions about a sentence was not afFected by short-term memory factors. In the second experiment, positron emission tomography was used to correlate this pattern of sentence comprehension impairment with regional cerebral glucose metabolism (rCMRgl) obtained at rest in a representative subset of these PD patients. Grammatical comprehension and attention in sentence processing correlated significantly with mesial frontal rCMRgl. Regression analyses confirmed the central role of left mesial frontal cortex, and identified a subsidiary role for left caudate in overall sentence comprehension, for left dorsolateral frontal cortex in grammatical processing, and for bilateral dorsolateral frontal cortex in attending to the presence of grammatical features. We conclude that compromised mesial frontal functioning underlies in part the sentence processing deficit of these patients, and these data illustrate one method for mapping portions of a sentence processing mechanism onto a distributed cerebral architecture.

Similarity of Computations Across Domains Does Not Imply Shared Implementation: The Case of Language Comprehension

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 526-534
Author(s):  
Evelina Fedorenko ◽  
Cory Shain
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Cognitive Operations ◽  
High Level ◽  
General Circuits ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Language Network

Understanding language requires applying cognitive operations (e.g., memory retrieval, prediction, structure building) that are relevant across many cognitive domains to specialized knowledge structures (e.g., a particular language’s lexicon and syntax). Are these computations carried out by domain-general circuits or by circuits that store domain-specific representations? Recent work has characterized the roles in language comprehension of the language network, which is selective for high-level language processing, and the multiple-demand (MD) network, which has been implicated in executive functions and linked to fluid intelligence and thus is a prime candidate for implementing computations that support information processing across domains. The language network responds robustly to diverse aspects of comprehension, but the MD network shows no sensitivity to linguistic variables. We therefore argue that the MD network does not play a core role in language comprehension and that past findings suggesting the contrary are likely due to methodological artifacts. Although future studies may reveal some aspects of language comprehension that require the MD network, evidence to date suggests that those will not be related to core linguistic processes such as lexical access or composition. The finding that the circuits that store linguistic knowledge carry out computations on those representations aligns with general arguments against the separation of memory and computation in the mind and brain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document