Untitled

Braze, David; Shankweiler, Donald; Ni, Weijia; Palumbo, Laura Conway

doi:10.1023/a:1014324220455

Cited by 84 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this time-course difference is consistent with other studies showing semantic effects later than the region containing the anomaly (Boland & Blodgett, 2001; Braze, Shankweiler, Ni, & Palumbo, 2002; Ni, Fodor, Crain, & Shankweiler, 1998), the low temporal resolution of fMRI makes the difference in the current study more difficult to interpret. One possibility is that the semantic interference effect observed during questions was in fact due to a continuation of processing that started during sentence reading but was not complete until past the end of the sentence.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Neural basis of semantic and syntactic interference in sentence comprehension

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the cue-based parsing approach (Lewis, Vasishth, & Van Dyke, 2006), sentence comprehension difficulty derives from interference from material that partially matches syntactic and semantic retrieval cues. In a 2 (low vs. high semantic interference) × 2 (low vs. high syntactic interference) fMRI study, greater activation was observed in left BA 44/45 for high versus low syntactic interference conditions following sentences and in BA 45/47 for high versus low semantic interference following comprehension questions. A conjunction analysis showed BA45 associated with both types of interference, while BA47 was associated with only semantic interference. Greater activation was also observed in the left STG in the high interference conditions. Importantly, the results for the LIFG could not be attributed to greater working memory capacity demands for high interference conditions. The results favor a fractionation of LIFG wherein BA45 is associated with post-retrieval selection and BA47 with controlled retrieval of semantic information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Neural basis of semantic and syntactic interference in sentence comprehension

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the data on regressions were insufficient to support this finding, previous eye-tracking studies on comprehension during text reading (Braze et al, 2002;Rayner & Morris, 1991; Figure 5. Comparison between music with key signature, music with accidentals, and language with congruent and incongruent stimuli relating to a) proportion of fixations in the last bar or verb area; b) mean fixation duration in the last bar or verb area (FD); and, c) trial duration (TD).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…All dependent variables were calculated for each participant for each area and material. For the linguistic stimuli, each target sentence was divided into six ROI, each comprising an average of two words, as used in the study of Braze et al (2002). See Figure 2d for an example of ROI separation for linguistic stimuli.…”

Section: Eye-movement Recordingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Eye movement patterns during the processing of musical and linguistic syntactic incongruities.

Ahken

Comeau

Hébert

et al. 2012

Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested that music and language share syntax-supporting brain mechanisms. Consequently, violations of syntax in either domain may have similar effects. The present study examined the effects of syntactic incongruities on eye movements and reading time in both music and language domains. In the music notation condition, the syntactic incongruities violated the prevailing musical tonality (i.e., the last bar of the incongruent sequence was a nontonic chord or nontonic note in the given key). In the linguistic condition, syntactic incongruities violated the expected grammatical structure (i.e., sentences with anomalies carrying the progressive -ing affix or the past tense inflection). Eighteen pianists were asked to sight-read and play musical phrases (music condition) and read sentences aloud (linguistic condition). Syntactic incongruities in both domains were associated with an increase in the mean proportion and duration of fixations in the target region of interest, as well as longer reading duration. The results are consistent with the growing evidence of a shared network of neural structures for syntactic processing, while not ruling out the possibility of independent networks for each domain.

show abstract

“…Analysis of region 4 data was included because some eye-tracking studies of Complement Coercion have found “spillover” effects (e.g., Traxler et al, 2002). Region 5 was analyzed, because some types of semantic processing have been shown to modulate end-of-sentence “wrap-up” effects (Braze, Shankweiler, Ni, & Palumbo 2002). Table 5 provides regional summaries of eye-movement measures by verb condition.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complement Coercion

Katsika

Braze

Deo³

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although Complement Coercion has been systematically associated with computational cost, there remains a serious confound in the experimental evidence built up in previous studies. The confound arises from the fact that lexico-semantic differences within the set of verbs assumed to involve coercion have not been taken into consideration. From among the set of verbs that have been reported to exhibit complement coercion effects we identified two clear semantic classes - aspectual verbs and psychological verbs. We hypothesize that the semantic difference between the two should result in differing processing profiles. Aspectual predicates (begin) trigger coercion and processing cost while psychological predicates (enjoy) do not. Evidence from an eye-tracking experiment supports our hypothesis. Coercion costs are restricted to aspectual predicates while no such effects are found with psychological predicates. These findings have implications for how these two kinds of predicates might be lexically encoded as well as for whether the observed interpolation of eventive meaning can be attributed to type-shifting (e.g. McElree et al., 2001) or to pragmatic-inferential processes (e.g. De Almeida, 2004).

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 84 publications

References 21 publications

Neural basis of semantic and syntactic interference in sentence comprehension

Neural basis of semantic and syntactic interference in sentence comprehension

Eye movement patterns during the processing of musical and linguistic syntactic incongruities.

Complement Coercion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About