Competition between Mutually Exclusive Object States in Event Comprehension

Abstract

Successful language comprehension requires one to correctly match symbols in an utterance to referents in the world, but the rampant ambiguity present in that mapping poses a challenge. Sometimes the ambiguity lies in which of two (or more) types of things in the world are under discussion (i.e., lexical ambiguity); however, even a word with a single sense can have an ambiguous referent. This ambiguity occurs when an object can exist in multiple states. Here, we consider two cases in which the presence of multiple object states may render a single-sense word ambiguous. In the first case, one must disambiguate between two states of a single object token in a short discourse. In the second case, the discourse establishes two different tokens of the object category. Both cases involve multiple object states: These states are mutually exclusive in the first case, whereas in the second case, these states can logically exist at the same time. We use fMRI to contrast same-token and different-token discourses, using responses in left posterior ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (pVLPFC) as an indicator of conflict. Because the left pVLPFC is sensitive to competition between multiple, incompatible representations, we predicted that state ambiguity should engender conflict only when those states are mutually exclusive. Indeed, we find evidence of conflict in same-token, but not different-token, discourses. Our data support a theory of left pVLPFC function in which general conflict resolution mechanisms are engaged to select between multiple incompatible representations that arise in many kinds of ambiguity present in language.

Finding features, figuratively

“…Our data fit within a flexible theory of conceptual structure in which concepts refer to unique combinations of properties that are dynamically changed, activated, or strengthened depending on semantic context (Musz & Thompson-Schill, 2015), event context (Hindy et al, 2012; 2015; Solomon et al, 2015), primed sensory modality (Pecher et al, 2004), or motor experience (Yee et al, 2013). We show that using a decompositional view of concepts in conjunction with a radical, unified view of figurative language comprehension holds up in empirical data, and is neurally plausible.…”

“…Our hypothesis on the role of LIFG in metaphor comprehension stems from prior findings that this region is recruited for selecting between multiple, competing representations (e.g., Thompson-Schill et al, 1997; 1998; 1999; Bedny et al, 2009; Hindy et al, 2012; 2015; Solomon et al, 2015). Stroop-conflict is a useful way to assess sensitivity to this general form of competition.…”

Keeping the Result in Sight and Mind: General Cognitive Principles and Language‐Specific Influences in the Perception and Memory of Resultative Events

“…During the events’ final unfolding, people were indeed more attentive when it was not entirely clear what would happen next, specifically, in relation to the object in the event; as mentioned above, the specific video ending affected the end state of the object in resultative, but not non‐resultative events, while keeping the variability concerning the dynamics of the action (ceased or ongoing) constant across event types. We take these findings to show cognitive prominence of object states: Recent views put forward the idea that event end states and object affordances, specifically, degree of state change, are central dimensions in event processing and understanding (Altmann, ; Hindy, Altmann, Solomon, & Thompson‐Schill, ; Solomon et al., ). This fits with the proposal that action concepts in the brain by default include information on the effect of the action on the patient involved.…”

The influence of state change on object representations in language comprehension

“…So far, there is limited empirical evidence of the encoding of object state-change in language comprehension (but see Altmann, 2017;Hindy, Altmann, Kalenik, & Thompson-Schill, 2012;Solomon, Hindy, Altmann, & Thompson-Schill, 2015). Hindy et al (2012) revealed that reading sentences that described a change of state provides a challenge to our cognitive system; multiple representations of the object in different states may be activated and we have to choose the situationally appropriate one.…”