Skip to main content
Log in

Neural bases of syntax–semantics interface processing

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Neurodynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The binding problem—question of how information between the modules of the linguistic system is integrated during language processing—is as yet unresolved. The remarkable speed of language processing and comprehension (Pulvermüller et al. 2009) suggests that at least coarse semantic information (e.g. noun animacy) and syntactically-relevant information (e.g. verbal template) are integrated rapidly to allow for coarse comprehension. This EEG study investigated syntax–semantics interface processing during word-by-word sentence reading. As alpha-band neural activity serves as an inhibition mechanism for local networks, we used topographical distribution of alpha power to help identify the timecourse of the binding process. We manipulated the syntactic parameter of verbal event structure, and semantic parameter of noun animacy in reduced relative clauses (RRCs, e.g. “The witness/mansion seized/protected by the agent was in danger”), to investigate the neural bases of interaction between syntactic and semantic networks during sentence processing. The word-by-word stimulus presentation method in the present experiment required manipulation of both syntactic structure and semantic features in the working memory. The results demonstrated a gradient distribution of early components (biphasic posterior P1–N2 and anterior N1–P2) over function words “by” and “the”, and the verb, corresponding to facilitation or conflict resulting from the syntactic (telicity) and semantic (animacy) cues in the preceding portion of the sentence. This was followed by assimilation of power distribution in the α band at the second noun. The flattened distribution of α power during the mental manipulation with high demand on working memory—thematic role re-assignment—demonstrates a state of α equilibrium with strong functional coupling between posterior and anterior regions. These results demonstrate that the processing of semantic and syntactic features during sentence comprehension proceeds in highly integrated fashion using gating of attentional resources to facilitate rapid comprehension, with attentional suppression of global alpha power to facilitate interaction of local networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Telicity is also sometimes referred to as a semantic feature, depending on its realization in a specific language (cf. Malaia et al. 2013b). In contemporary Engish, it is treated as syntactic feature (Kratzer 2004).

References

  • Clifton C Jr, Traxler MJ, Taha Mohamed M, Williams RS, Morris RK, Rayner K (2003) The use of thematic role information in parsing: syntactic processing autonomy revisited. J Mem Lang 49(3):317–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daneman M, Carpenter PA (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 19(4):450–466

  • Ferreira F, Patson ND (2007) The ‘good enough’approach to language comprehension. Lang Linguist Compass 1(1–2):71–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grewe T, Bornkessel I, Zysset S, Wiese R, Yves von Cramon D, Schlesewsky M (2006) Linguistic prominence and Broca’s area: the influence of animacy as a linearization principle. Neuroimage 32(3):1395–1402

  • Haegens S, Osipova D, Oostenveld R, Jensen O (2010) Somatosensory working memory performance in humans depends on both engagement and disengagement of regions in a distributed network. Hum Brain Mapp 31(1):26–35

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hahne A, Friederici A (1999) Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: early automatic and late controlled processes. J Cogn Neurosci 11(2):194–205

  • Haupt FS, Schlesewsky M, Roehm D, Friederici AD, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I (2008) The status of subject-object reanalyses in the language comprehension architecture. J Mem Lang 59(1):54–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirotani M, Makuuchi M, Rüschemeyer SA, Friederici AD (2011) Who was the agent? The neural correlates of reanalysis processes during sentence comprehension. Hum Brain Mapp 32(11):1775–1787

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff R (2007) A parallel architecture perspective on language processing. Brain Res 1146:2–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen O, Mazaheri A (2010) Shaping functional architecture by oscillatory alpha activity: gating by inhibition. Front Hum Neurosci 4:186

  • King J, Kutas M (1995) Who did what and when? Using word-and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. J Cogn Neurosci 7(3):376–395

  • Klimesch W (1997) EEG-alpha rhythms and memory processes. Int J Psychophysiol 26(1–3):319–340

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer A (2004) Telicity and the meaning of objective case. In: Guéron J, Lecarme J (eds) The Syntax of time. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 389–424

  • Kuperberg GR, Kreher DA, Sitnikova T, Caplan DN, Holcomb PJ (2007) The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentences: evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Lang 100(3):223–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lai G, Mangels JA (2007) Cueing effects on semantic and perceptual categorization: ERPs reveal differential effects of validity as a function of processing stage. Neuropsychologia 45(9):2038–2050

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levin B (1993) English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation. University of Chicago press

  • Luck SJ, Kappenman ES (2011) ERP components and selective attention. In: The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components, p 295

  • MacGregor LJ, Pulvermüller F, van Casteren M, Shtyrov Y (2012) Ultra-rapid access to words in the brain. Nature commun 3:711

  • Malaia E (2014) It still isn’t over: event boundaries in language and perception. Lang Linguist Compass 8(3):89–98

  • Malaia E, Carnes T (in press) Improving reading strategy for comprehension: does recall compete with working memory manipulation? J Edu Human Dev

  • Malaia E, Newman S (in press) Neural bases of event knowledge and syntax integration in comprehension of complex sentences. Neurocase. doi:10.1080/13554794.2014.989859

  • Malaia E, Wilbur RB (2011) Motion capture signatures of telic and atelic events in ASL predicates. Lang Speech 55(3):407–421

  • Malaia E, Wilbur RB, Weber-Fox C (2009) ERP evidence for telicity effects on syntactic processing in garden-path sentences. Brain Lang 108(3):145–158

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Malaia E, Wilbur RB, Weber-Fox C (2012) Effects of verbal event structure on online thematic role assignment. J Psycholinguist Res 41(5):323–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Malaia E, Wilbur RB, Weber-Fox C (2013a) Event end-point primes the undergoer argument: a look at neurobiological bases of event structure. In: Gehrke B, Arsenijevic B (eds) Subatomic semantics of event predicates. Springer, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, pp 231–248

  • Malaia E, Wilbur RB, Milković M (2013b) Kinematic parameters of signed verbs. J Speech Lang Hear Res 56(5):1677–1688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Malaia E, Gonzalez-Castillo J, Weber-Fox C, Talavage TM, Wilbur RB (2014) Neural processing of verbal event structure: temporal and functional dissociation between telic and atelic verbs. In: Mandouilidou C, de Ameida R (eds) Cognitive science perspectives on verb representation and processing. Springer, Lausanne, pp 131–140

  • Nakano H, Saron C, Swaab TY (2009) Speech and span: working memory capacity impacts the use of animacy but not of world knowledge during spoken sentence comprehension. J Cogn Neurosci 22(12):2886–2898

  • Neville H, Nicol J, Barss A, Forster K, Garrett M (1991) Syntactically based sentence processing classes: evidence from event-related brain potentials. J Cogn Neurosci 3(2):151–165

  • Newman S, Malaia E, Seo R, Hu C (2013) The effect of individual differences in working memory capacity on sentence comprehension: an fMRI study. Brain Topography 26(3):458–467

  • Obleser J, Weisz N (2012) Suppressed alpha oscillations predict intelligibility of speech and its acoustic details. Cereb Cortex 22(11):2466–2477

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9(1):97–113

  • Osterhout L, Holcomb PJ, Swinney DA (1994) Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 20(4):786

  • Pulvermüller F, Shtyrov Y, Hauk O (2009) Understanding in an instant: neurophysiological evidence for mechanistic language circuits in the brain. Brain Lang 110(2):81–94

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ramchand GC (2008) Verb meaning and the lexicon: a first phase syntax. Cambridge University Press, vol 116

  • Recchia G, Jones MN (2009) More data trumps smarter algorithms: comparing pointwise mutual information with latent semantic analysis. Behav Res Methods 41(3):647–656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Renault B, Ragot R, Lesevre N, Remond A (1982) Onset and offset of brain events as indices of mental chronometry. Science 215(4538):1413–1415

  • Sauseng P, Klimesch W, Doppelmayr M, Pecherstorfer T, Freunberger R, Hanslmayr S (2005) EEG alpha synchronization and functional coupling during top-down processing in a working memory task. Hum Brain Mapp 26(2):148–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend DJ, Bever TG (2001) Sentence comprehension: the integration of habits and rules. MIT Press, Cambridge, vol 1950

  • Voytek B, Canolty RT, Shestyuk A, Crone NE, Parvizi J, Knight RT (2010) Shifts in gamma phase–amplitude coupling frequency from theta to alpha over posterior cortex during visual tasks. Front Hum Neurosci 4:191

  • Weckerly J, Kutas M (1999) An electrophysiological analysis of animacy effects in the processing of object relative sentences. Psychophysiology 36(5):559–570

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff S, Schlesewsky M, Hirotani M, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I (2008) The neural mechanisms of word order processing revisited: electrophysiological evidence from Japanese. Brain Lang 107(2):133–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yamada Y, Neville HJ (2007) An ERP study of syntactic processing in English and nonsense sentences. Brain Res 1130(1):167–180

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evguenia Malaia.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Animate, telic stimulus sentences with reduced relative clauses

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Malaia, E., Newman, S. Neural bases of syntax–semantics interface processing. Cogn Neurodyn 9, 317–329 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11571-015-9328-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11571-015-9328-2

Keywords

Navigation