Cross-modal representation of spoken and written word meaning in left pars triangularis

Liuzzi, Antonietta Gabriella; Bruffaerts, Rose; Peeters, Ronald; Adamczuk, Katarzyna; Keuleers, Emmanuel; Deyne, Simon De; Storms, Gerrit; Dupont, Patrick; Vandenberghe, Rik

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.02.032

Cited by 47 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, dividing our large study sample into six subsets, we could directly quantify the consistency and generalizability of these activity patterns. The spatial distribution of the supramodal activation is in line with the known involvement of left-hemispheric areas, including parts of the left temporal cortex, left inferior parietal lobe, as well as the prefrontal cortex (Chee et al, 1999;Homae et al, 2002;Constable et al, 2004;Spitsyna et al, 2006;Lindenberg and Scheef, 2007;Vigneau et al, 2011;Braze et al, 2011;Liuzzi et al, 2017). The involvement of both the STG and IFG fits predictions from the memory, unification, and con-trol model (MUC), in which activity reverberating within a posterior-frontal network (Baggio and Hagoort, 2011;Hagoort, 2017) is thought to be crucial for language processing.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…We observed modality-independent activity in the dorsal frontal cortex in addition to more widely reported inferior parts of the frontal cortex (Michael et al, 2001;Homae et al, 2002;Marinkovic et al, 2003;Constable et al, 2004;Jobard et al, 2007;Lindenberg and Scheef, 2007). This could be because we used linguistically rich sentence material of varying syntactic complexity as opposed to single words (Chee et al, 1999;Booth et al, 2002;Marinkovic et al, 2003;Vartiainen et al, 2009;Liuzzi et al, 2017) or short phrases (Carpentier et al, 2001;Braze et al, 2011;Bemis and Pylkkänen, 2013). Indeed, discrepancies with respect to frontal lobe involvement in modality-independent processing seem to mainly arise from differences in stimulus material and task demands (Braze et al, 2011).…”

Section: Beyond the Core Language Network And The Single Word Levelmentioning

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensory Modality-Independent Activation of the Brain Network for Language

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The meaning of a sentence can be understood, whether presented in written or spoken form. Therefore, it is highly probable that brain processes supporting language comprehension are at least partly independent of sensory modality. To identify where and when in the brain language processing is independent of sensory modality, we directly compared neuromagnetic brain signals of 200 human subjects (102 males) either reading or listening to sentences. We used multiset canonical correlation analysis to align individual subject data in a way that boosts those aspects of the signal that are common to all, allowing us to capture word-by-word signal variations, consistent across subjects and at a fine temporal scale. Quantifying this consistency in activation across both reading and listening tasks revealed a mostly left-hemispheric cortical network. Areas showing consistent activity patterns included not only areas previously implicated in higher-level language processing, such as left prefrontal, superior and middle temporal areas, and anterior temporal lobe, but also parts of the control network as well as subcentral and more posterior temporal-parietal areas. Activity in this supramodal sentence-processing network starts in temporal areas and rapidly spreads to the other regions involved. The findings indicate not only the involvement of a large network of brain areas in supramodal language processing but also that the linguistic information contained in the unfolding sentences modulates brain activity in a word-specific manner across subjects. Author contributions: A.H., P.H., and J.-M.S. designed research; A.H. and J.-M.S. performed research; J.-M.S. contributed unpublished reagents/analytic tools; S.A., A.M., and J.-M.S. analyzed data; S.A. and J.-M.S. wrote the paper.This work was supported by The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO Vidi: 864.14.011, awarded to J.-M.S.). We thank Phillip Alday for providing helpful comments. The brain can extract meaning from written and spoken messages alike. This requires activity of both brain circuits capable of processing sensory modality-specific aspects of the input signals as well as coordinated brain activity to extract modalityindependent meaning from the input. Using traditional methods, it is difficult to disentangle modality-specific activation from modality-independent activation. In this work, we developed and applied a multivariate methodology that allows for a direct quantification of sensory modality-independent brain activity, revealing fast activation of a wide network of brain areas, both including and extending beyond the core network for language.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Beyond the Core Language Network And The Single Word Levelmentioning

confidence: 77%

Sensory Modality-Independent Activation of the Brain Network for Language

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As compared with 1‐word sequences (i.e., one word followed by a hashtag symbol), reading 2‐word sequences engaged increased processing of lexical information regardless of the sequence structure of the stimuli. As several studies have shown that the left inferior frontal gyrus plays a role in phonological and lexico‐semantic processing in word recognition (Liuzzi et al, ; Vigneau et al, ), the greater activation in these areas might be attributed to the increased demands of linguistic processing that were induced by the second word. Notably, the greater activation in the left insula corresponds to the findings in an earlier imaging study that had examined visual word recognition using a similar experimental paradigm in German (Zaccarella & Friederici, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Universal neural basis of structure building evidenced by network modulations emerging from Broca's area: The case of Chinese

Zaccarella

Friederici

2018

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The basic steps in building up language involve binding words of different categories into a hierarchical structure. To what extent these steps are universal or differ across languages is an open issue. Here we examine the neural dynamics of phrase structure building in Chinese—a language that in contrast to other languages heavily depends on contextual semantic information. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging and dynamic causal modeling to identify the relevant brain regions and their dynamic relations. Language stimuli consisted of syntax‐driving determiners, semantics‐embedded classifiers, and nonverbal symbols making up for two‐component sequences manipulated by the factors structure (phrase/list) and number of words (2‐word/1‐word). Processing phrases compared with word lists elicited greater activation in the anterior part of Broca's area, Brodmann area (BA) 45, and the left posterior superior/middle temporal gyri (pSTG/pMTG), while processing two words against one word led to stronger involvement of the left BA 45, BA 44, and insula. Differential network modulations emerging from subparts of Broca's area revealed that phrasal construction in particular highly modulated the direct connection from BA 44 to left pMTG, suggesting BA 44’s primary role in phrase structure building. Conversely, the involvement of BA 45 rather appears sensitive to the reliance on lexico‐semantic information in Chinese. Against the background of previous findings from other languages, the present results indicate that phrase structure building has a universal neural basis within the left fronto‐temporal network. Most importantly, they provide the first evidence demonstrating that the structure‐building network may be modulated by language‐specific characteristics.

show abstract

“…including parts of left temporal cortex, left inferior parietal lobe, as well as portions of 319 prefrontal cortex [48], [10], [11], [7], [30], [29], [42], [23]. The involvement of both STG 320 and IFG also fits with predictions from the Memory, Unification and Control model 321 (MUC), in which activity reverberating within a posterior-frontal network ( [2], [18]) is 322 thought to be crucial for adequate language processing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 62%

“…Our results indicate that there is a certain degree 414 of overlap across modalities in the temporal window within which supramodal cortical 415 areas are activated. It is possible, that we were able to observe more temporally extensive 416 activation, for instance, activity related to unification processes, given that we used longer 417 sentences as compared to using words [10], [31], [6], [30], [47] or short phrases [3], [8], [7]. In 418 addition, any overlap may have been amplified as a necessary consequence of the MCCA 419 procedure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory-modality independent activation of the brain network for language

Arana

Marquand

Hultén

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The meaning of a sentence can be understood, whether presented in written or spoken form. Therefore it is highly probable that brain processes supporting language comprehension are at least partly independent of sensory modality. To identify where and when in the brain language processing is independent of sensory modality, we directly compared neuromagnetic brain signals of 200 human subjects (102 males) either reading or listening to sentences. We used multiset canonical correlation analysis to align individual subject data in a way that boosts those aspects of the signal that are common to all, allowing us to capture word-by-word signal variations, consistent across subjects and at a fine temporal scale. Quantifying this consistency in activation across both reading and listening tasks revealed a mostly left hemispheric cortical network. Areas showing consistent activity patterns include not only areas previously implicated in higher-level language processing, such as left prefrontal, superior & middle temporal areas and anterior temporal lobe, but also parts of the control-network as well as subcentral and more posterior temporal-parietal areas. Activity in this supramodal sentence processing network starts in temporal areas and rapidly spreads to the other regions involved. The findings do not only indicate the involvement of a large network of brain areas in supramodal language processing, but also indicate that the linguistic information contained in the unfolding sentences modulates brain activity in a word-specific manner across subjects.Introduction 1 Language can be realized in different modalities: amongst others through writing or 2 in speech. Depending on whether the sensory input modality is visual or auditory, 3 different dedicated networks of brain areas are activated in order to derive meaning 4 from the physical stimulus. Besides the obvious differences in the recruitment of brain 5 circuits that process low-level sensory information, differences in linguistic features across 6 sensory modalities prompt a differential activation of brain areas involved in higher-order 7 1/30 processing as well. For instance, speech is enriched with meaningful prosodic cues, 8 but also requires a coarticulated signal to be parsed into individual words. Written 9 text contains cues in the form of punctuation and spaces, and has the advantage of 10 instantaneous availability of full information compared to the temporally unfolding nature 11 of speech. If text is presented word-by-word, as was done in the present as well as many 12 previous studies, the temporal structure of auditory stimulation can be approximated. 13Nonetheless, the auditory information necessary for word recognition is still temporally 14 distributed, whereas in the visual modality, the entire wordform is instantly available 15 on screen.These, and other, differences are paralleled in the brain's response, and thus 16 the sensory modality in which language stimuli are presented determines the dominant 17 spatiotemporal patterns that will be elic...

show abstract

Cross-modal representation of spoken and written word meaning in left pars triangularis

Cited by 47 publications

References 93 publications

Sensory Modality-Independent Activation of the Brain Network for Language

Sensory Modality-Independent Activation of the Brain Network for Language

Universal neural basis of structure building evidenced by network modulations emerging from Broca's area: The case of Chinese

Sensory-modality independent activation of the brain network for language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About