Is there a difference between stripy journeys and stripy ladybirds? The N400 response to semantic and world-knowledge violations during sentence processing

IF 1.4 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Brain and Cognition Pub Date : 2016-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.bandc.2016.01.001
Carolin Dudschig, Claudia Maienborn, Barbara Kaup
{"title":"Is there a difference between stripy journeys and stripy ladybirds? The N400 response to semantic and world-knowledge violations during sentence processing","authors":"Carolin Dudschig,&nbsp;Claudia Maienborn,&nbsp;Barbara Kaup","doi":"10.1016/j.bandc.2016.01.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The distinction between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge is particularly relevant because it is related to the principle of compositionality during sentence comprehension. Hagoort, Hald, Bastiaansen, and Petersson (2004) challenged the distinction between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge. Here, we investigate how linguistic and non-linguistic violations are processed in a setting adapted from Hagoort et al., whilst in contrast to Hagoort, keeping the critical word identical. In line with the findings by Hagoort et al., our results showed largest N400 amplitudes for semantic violations (‘Journeys are stripy’), followed by non-linguistic world-knowledge violations (‘Ladybirds are stripy’) and contingent sentences (‘Trousers are stripy’), and finally by correct sentences (‘Zebras are stripy’). Traditional fractional area and relative criterion measures of peak and onset latencies showed no effect of violation type. Interestingly, the semantic violation condition crossed a fixed criterion earlier than the word-knowledge violation condition. In conclusion, our data suggests that the question regarding the distinction between linguistic- and non-linguistic knowledge in terms of language integration remains open. Implications for future studies addressing the difference between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55331,"journal":{"name":"Brain and Cognition","volume":"103 ","pages":"Pages 38-49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bandc.2016.01.001","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027826261630001X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

The distinction between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge is particularly relevant because it is related to the principle of compositionality during sentence comprehension. Hagoort, Hald, Bastiaansen, and Petersson (2004) challenged the distinction between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge. Here, we investigate how linguistic and non-linguistic violations are processed in a setting adapted from Hagoort et al., whilst in contrast to Hagoort, keeping the critical word identical. In line with the findings by Hagoort et al., our results showed largest N400 amplitudes for semantic violations (‘Journeys are stripy’), followed by non-linguistic world-knowledge violations (‘Ladybirds are stripy’) and contingent sentences (‘Trousers are stripy’), and finally by correct sentences (‘Zebras are stripy’). Traditional fractional area and relative criterion measures of peak and onset latencies showed no effect of violation type. Interestingly, the semantic violation condition crossed a fixed criterion earlier than the word-knowledge violation condition. In conclusion, our data suggests that the question regarding the distinction between linguistic- and non-linguistic knowledge in terms of language integration remains open. Implications for future studies addressing the difference between linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
条纹旅行和条纹瓢虫之间有区别吗?N400对句子加工过程中语义和世界知识违规的反应
语言知识和非语言知识之间的区别尤其重要,因为它与句子理解中的组合性原则有关。Hagoort, Hald, Bastiaansen和Petersson(2004)对语言知识和非语言知识之间的区别提出了挑战。在这里,我们研究了在Hagoort等人改编的环境中如何处理语言和非语言违规,而与Hagoort相反,保持关键字相同。与Hagoort等人的发现一致,我们的结果显示,语义违反(“旅程是条纹的”)的N400振幅最大,其次是非语言世界知识违反(“瓢虫是条纹的”)和偶然句(“裤子是条纹的”),最后是正确的句子(“斑马是条纹的”)。传统的分数面积和相对标准测量的峰值和起始潜伏期对侵犯类型没有影响。有趣的是,语义冲突条件比词知识冲突条件更早地跨越了一个固定的标准。总之,我们的数据表明,在语言整合方面,关于语言知识和非语言知识之间的区别的问题仍然没有解决。本文还讨论了语言和非语言知识之间的差异对未来研究的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Brain and Cognition
Brain and Cognition 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Brain and Cognition is a forum for the integration of the neurosciences and cognitive sciences. B&C publishes peer-reviewed research articles, theoretical papers, case histories that address important theoretical issues, and historical articles into the interaction between cognitive function and brain processes. The focus is on rigorous studies of an empirical or theoretical nature and which make an original contribution to our knowledge about the involvement of the nervous system in cognition. Coverage includes, but is not limited to memory, learning, emotion, perception, movement, music or praxis in relationship to brain structure or function. Published articles will typically address issues relating some aspect of cognitive function to its neurological substrates with clear theoretical import, formulating new hypotheses or refuting previously established hypotheses. Clinical papers are welcome if they raise issues of theoretical importance or concern and shed light on the interaction between brain function and cognitive function. We welcome review articles that clearly contribute a new perspective or integration, beyond summarizing the literature in the field; authors of review articles should make explicit where the contribution lies. We also welcome proposals for special issues on aspects of the relation between cognition and the structure and function of the nervous system. Such proposals can be made directly to the Editor-in-Chief from individuals interested in being guest editors for such collections.
期刊最新文献
Neural substrates of Indian classical percussive Improvisation: A case study investigation of tabla virtuoso Zakir Hussain. Lexical brain responses in 10-year-old children are impaired in dyslexia: An FPVS-EEG study Editorial Board Informational complexity as a neural marker of cognitive reserve Cognitive neural mechanisms of face-to-face interpersonal synchronous stepping: An fNIRS study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1