The Essence and Influenced Mechanisms of “Semantic P600”

Abstract

Abstract:

Five key factors of the production of semantic P600 effect and their mechanisms were generalized and analyzed: semantic association(s) between the critical word(s) and the argument(s), the latent reparability of the semantic-thematic relationship(s), animacy violation, context, and experiment task(s). Further more on these bases, two correspondent theories either proposed or verified were introduced, two parallel neural processing streams and the extended Argument Dependency Model (eADM). And for the last, future directions were suggested for further research of the semantic P600 effect phenomenon: the combination perspective of factors, the cross-linguistic perspective, the influence of working memory, qualitative distinctions between superficially similar ERP components.

摘要：

总结并分析了影响语义 P600 效应产生与否的五个主要因素及其作用机制：关键词和论元之间的语义关联性；语义-主题关系的潜在可修正性；有生性违例；语境；实验任务。在此基础上，概述了由语义 P600 效应发展而来、或验证了的两个主要理论观点，即“两种并行神经加工流”的观点和扩展论元依附模型。最后还对语义 P600 效应今后的研究方向提出了看法：各种影响因素间的综合性研究；跨语言研究；工作记忆的影响；表面相似 ERP 成分之间的区别研究。

关键词: 语义P600, 论元, 主题角色, 有生性, N400。

Charlie CAI Wang Pei. The Essence and Influenced Mechanisms of “Semantic P600”[J]. Psychological Science, 2012, 35(1): 38-43.

蔡李平王沛. “语义P600”的实质及其影响机制[J]. 心理科学, 2012, 35(1): 38-43.

References

1. Bornkessel, I. (2002). The Argument Dependency Model: A Neurocognitive Approach to Incremental Interpretation . MPI Series in Cognitive Neuroscience. 28. Leipzig. 2. Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The Extended Argument Dependency Model: A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review. 113, 787– 821. 3. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Schlesewsky, M. (2008). An alternative perspective on “semantic P600” effects in language comprehension. Brain Res. Rev., doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.05.003. 4. Burkhardt, P. (2008). The hepatitis called…: electrophysiological evidence for enriched composition. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the German Linguistics Society, Bamberg, Germany. 5. Caplan, D., Alpert, N., and Waters, G. S. (1998). Effects of syntactic structure and propositional number on patterns of regional cerebral blood flow. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(4), 541–552. 6. Caplan, D., and Waters, G. S. (1999). Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 77–126. 7. Chen, E., West, W. C., Waters, G., & Caplan, D. (2005). Determinants of bold signal correlates of processing object-extracted relative clauses. Cortex, (in press). 8. Coulson, S., King, J., Kutas, M. (1998). Expect the unexpected: event-related brain responses to morphosyntactic violations. Lang. Cog. Processes, 13, 21–58. 9. Demiral, S. B., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2008). On the universality of language comprehension strategies: Evidence from Turkish. Cognition, 106, 484–500. 10. Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). A rose by any other name: Long term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 469–495. 11. Fiebach, M., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2002). Separating syntactic memory costs and syntactic integration costs during parsing: The processing of German WH-questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 250–272. 12. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books. 13. Friederici, A., Frisch, S. (2000). Verb argument structure processing: the role of verb-specific and argument-specific information. J. Mem. Lang. 43, 476–507. 14. Friederici, A.D. (1995). The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: a model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain Lang, 50, 259–281. 15. Friederici, A.D., Hahne, A., Mecklinger, A. (1996). Temporal structure of syntactic parsing: early and late event-related brain potential effects. J. Exper. Psychol., Learn., Mem., Cog. 22, 1219–1248. 16. Friedman, D., Simson, R., Ritter, W., Rapin, I. (1975). The late positive component (P300) and information processing in sentences. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 38, 255–262. 17. Frishberg, N. (1972). Navajo object markers and the great chain of being. In: Kimball, J. (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics, vol. 1. Seminar Press, New York, pp. 259–266. 18. Geyer, A., Holcomb, P., Kuperberg, G., Perlmutter, N. (2006). Plausibility and sentence comprehension. An ERP Study. Cogn. Neurosci. Suppl., Abstract. 19. Gina R. Kuperberg. (2007). Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research, 1146, 23–49. 20. Gunter, T.C., Friederici, A.D., Schriefers, H. (2000). Syntactic gender and semantic expectancy: ERPs reveal early autonomy and late interaction. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 12, 556–568. 21. Hagoort, P., Brown, C., Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. In: Garnsey, S.M. (Ed.), Language and Cognitive Processes. Special Issue: Event-Related Brain Potentials in the Study of Language, vol. 8(4). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, pp. 439–483. 22. Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., Petersson, K.M. (2004). Integration of wordmeaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304, 438–441. 23. Hagoort, P., Wassenaar, M., Brown, C. (2003). Real-time semantic compensation in patients with agrammatic comprehension: electrophysiological evidence for multiple-route plasticity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 100, 4340–4345. 24. Hoeks, J.C.J., Stowe, L.A., Doedens, G. (2004). Seeing words in context: the interaction of lexical and sentence level information during reading. Cogn. Brain Res., 19, 59–73. 25. Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Semantic priming and stimulus degradation: Implications for the role of the N400 in language processing. Psychophysiology, 30, 47–61. 26. Jackendoff, R. (1978). Grammar as evidence for conceptual structure. In: Halle, M., Bresnan, J., Miller, G. (Eds.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 201–228. 27. Jens-Max Hopf, Markus Bader, Michael Meng, Josef Bayer. (2003). Is human sentence parsing serial or parallel? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 15(2), 165–177. 28. Just, M. A., and Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), 122–149. 29. Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Lang. Cogn. Processes, 15, 159–201. 30. Kim, A., Osterhout, L. (2005). The independence of combinatory semantic processing: evidence from event-related potentials. J. Mem. Lang., 52, 205–225. 31. Kolk, H.H., Chwilla, D.J., van Herten, M., Oor, P.J. (2003). Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: a study with event-related potentials. Brain Lang., 85, 1–36. 32. Kuperberg, G.R., Caplan, D., Sitnikova, T., Eddy, M., Holcomb, P. (2006). Neural correlates of processing syntactic, semantic and thematic relationships in sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 489–530. 33. Kuperberg, G.R., Ditman, T., Kreher, D.A., Goldberg, T., in press. Approaches to understanding languange dysfunction in neuropsychiatric disorders: Insights from the study of schizophrenia. In: Wood, S., Allen, N., Pantelis, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Neuropsychology of Mental Illness. Cambridge Univ. Press. 34. Kuperberg, G.R., Kreher, D.A., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D.N., Holcomb, P.J. (2007). The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentence: evidence from event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 100, 223–237. 35. Kuperberg, G.R., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D., Holcomb, P.J. (2003). Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cogn. Brain Res., 17, 117–129. 36. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463–470. 37. Kutas, M., Hillyard, S.A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203–205. 38. Kutas, M., Hillyard, S.A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161–163. 39. Marta Kutas, Cyma K. Van Petten, Robert Kluender. (2006). Psycholinguistics Electrified II (1994-2005). In: M.A. Gernsbacher & M. Traxler (Eds.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd edition. New York: Elsevier Press. 40. Neville, H.J., Nicol, J.L., Barss, A., Forster, K.I., Garrett, M.F. (1991). Syntactically based sentence processing classes: evidence from event-related brain potentials. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 3, 151–165. 41. Nieuwland, M.S., van Berkum, J.J.A. (2005). Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary semantic change deafness in discourse comprehension. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 691–701. 42. Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806. 43. Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 739–773. 44. Osterhout, L. (1997). On the brain response to syntactic anomalies: manipulations of word position and word class reveal individual differences. Brain Lang., 59, 494–522. 45. Osterhout, L., Hagoort, P. (1999). A superficial resemblance does not necessarily mean you are part of the family: counterarguments to Coulson, King and Kutas (1998) in the P600/SPS-P300 debate. Lang. Cogn. Processes, 14, 1–14. 46. Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P.J. (1992). Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. J. Mem. Lang., 31, 785–806. 47. Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P.J., Swinney, D.A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. J. Exper. Psychol., Learn., Mem., Cogn., 20, 786–803. 48. Osterhout, L., Kim, A., Kuperberg, G.R. (2007). The neurobiology of sentence comprehension. In: Spivey, M., Joannisse, M., McRae, K. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Psycholinguistics. To appear in. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. 49. Philipp, M. et al. (2008). The role of animacy in the real time comprehension of Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from auditory event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.09.005. 50. R?sler, F., Putz, P., Friederici, A., Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related potentials while encountering semantic and syntactic constraint violations. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 5, 345–362. 51. Ryan C.N., Elisabet Service, John F. Connolly, Colin S. Hawco. (2005). The influence of increased working memory load on semantic neural systems: a high-resolution event-related brain potential study. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 177–191. 52. Sandra H. Vos , Angela D. Friederici. (2003). Intersentential syntactic context effects on comprehension: the role of working memory. Cognitive Brain Research, 16 (1), 111–122. 53. Schlesewsky, M., Bornkessel, I. (2004). On incremental interpretation: degrees of meaning accessed during sentence comprehension. Language, 114, 1213–1234. 54. So, D., and Siegel, L. S. (1997). Learning to read Chinese: Semantic, syntactic, phonological and working memory skills in normally achieving and poor Chinese readers. Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal, 1(9), 1–21. 55. van Berkum, J.J.A., Hagoort, P., Brown, C.M. (1999). Sematic integration in sentences and discourse: evidence from the N400. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 11, 657–671. 56. van Herten, M., Chwilla, D.J., Kolk, H.H. (2006). When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 18, 1181–1197. 57. van Herten, M., Kolk, H.H., Chwilla, D.J. (2005). An ERP study of P600 effects elicited by semantic anomalies. Cogn. Brain Res., 22, 241–255. 58. Weckerly, J., & Kutas, M. (1999). An electrophysiological analysis of animacy effects in the processing of object relative sentences. Psychophysiology, 36(5), 559–570. 59. Weckerly, J., Kutas, M. (1999). An electrophysiological analysis of animacy effects in the processing of object relative sentences. Psychophysiology, 36, 559–570. 60. Young, R.W., Morgan, W. (1987). The Navajo Language: A Grammar and Colloquial Dictionary. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.