Hierarchical artificial grammar processing engages Broca's area

Bahlmann, Jörg; Schubotz, Ricarda Ines; Friederici, Angela D.

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.249

Cited by 233 publications

(280 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

255

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken together, we suggest that there is a quantitative difference (e.g., in terms of minimal memory requirements) in processing sequences with adjacent and nonadjacent dependencies, but that the nature of the underlying sequence processing is the same. This suggestion appears consistent with the position of Bahlmann et al (2008) 2 . Below, we review some of the literature supporting our position and then discuss the empirical findings in the light of some theoretical issues related to computability and the relevance of the Chomsky hierarchy for neurobiological mechanisms underlying syntax, since, in the final analysis, whatever operations linguists propose, these must ultimately be embedded in brain circuitry (Hornstein, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Friederici and colleagues (2006) argue that their FMRI findings (p. 2458) ''show that the processing of these two sequence types [generated by a ''finite state" and a ''phrase structure" grammar, respectively] is supported by different areas in the human brain" and that their results (p. 2460) ''indicate a functional differentiation between two cytoarchitectonically and phylogenetically different brain areas in the left frontal cortex ["frontal operculum" and ''BA 44"]". Similar reasoning is found in Friederici, Bahlmann et al (2006), Friederici, Fiebach, Schlesewsky, Bornkessel, and von Cramon (2006), Bahlmann et al (2008), and Makuuchi et al (2009) 1 . In the context of these FMRI findings and suggestions, we raise the question whether Broca's region (or subregions) is specifically related to syntactic movement operations or the processing of hierarchically nested non-adjacent dependencies?…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…1 Bahlmann et al (2008, p. 532): ''This finding indicates that Broca's area is particularly engaged in processing hierarchical as compared to non-hierarchical grammars, a finding further supporting the idea formulated in a previous study (Friederici, Bahlmann et al 2006", p. 533): ''Rather, the notion put forward here is that Broca's area subserves the processing of hierarchical structures in the domain of grammar"; Makuuchi et al (2009, p. 8362): ''If the processing of PSG is fundamental to human language, the questions about how the brain implements this faculty arise. The left pars opercularis (LPO), a posterior part of Broca's area, was found as a neural correlate of the processing of A n B n sequences in human studies by an artificial grammar learning paradigm comprised of visually presented syllables (Bahlmann et al, 2008;Friederici, Bahlmann et al 2006", and p. 8367): these ''2 studies therefore strongly suggest that LPO is a candidate brain area for the processor of PSG (i.e., hierarchical structures)".…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In fact, dynamic functional Table 2 Overlap between the activated clusters in the listed studies and the clusters that we found activated in this region for the NG vs. G contrast. Columns 1-3: The [x, y, z] coordinates and the function labeling are taken from the studies: Makuuchi et al (2009), Bahlmann et al (2008, Friederici, Bahlmann et al (2006), Friederici, Fiebach et al (2006), Santi and Grodzinsky (2007a), Ben-Shachar et al (2003, 2004. Santi and Grodzinsky (2007b) reported the coordinates [À50 32 6] and [À50 33 8], but since this is a fixed-effects study we did not further analyze this here.…”

Section: Dynamic Functional Modularity and The Role Of The Left Infermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular the syntactic feature of center-or nested embedding has been the focus of recent research (Bahlmann, Schubotz, & Friederici, 2008;Fitch & Hauser, 2004;Friederici, Bahlmann, Heim, Schubotz, & Anwander, 2006;Makuuchi, Bahlmann, Anwander, & Friederici, 2009). In the linguistic and psycholinguistic literature, the Chomsky hierarchy is most often formulated in terms of formal grammars.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

What artificial grammar learning reveals about the neurobiology of syntax

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tIn this paper we examine the neurobiological correlates of syntax, the processing of structured sequences, by comparing FMRI results on artificial and natural language syntax. We discuss these and similar findings in the context of formal language and computability theory. We used a simple right-linear unification grammar in an implicit artificial grammar learning paradigm in 32 healthy Dutch university students (natural language FMRI data were already acquired for these participants). We predicted that artificial syntax processing would engage the left inferior frontal region (BA 44/45) and that this activation would overlap with syntax-related variability observed in the natural language experiment. The main findings of this study show that the left inferior frontal region centered on BA 44/45 is active during artificial syntax processing of well-formed (grammatical) sequence independent of local subsequence familiarity. The same region is engaged to a greater extent when a syntactic violation is present and structural unification becomes difficult or impossible. The effects related to artificial syntax in the left inferior frontal region (BA 44/45) were essentially identical when we masked these with activity related to natural syntax in the same subjects. Finally, the medial temporal lobe was deactivated during this operation, consistent with the view that implicit processing does not rely on declarative memory mechanisms that engage the medial temporal lobe. In the context of recent FMRI findings, we raise the question whether Broca's region (or subregions) is specifically related to syntactic movement operations or the processing of hierarchically nested non-adjacent dependencies in the discussion section. We conclude that this is not the case. Instead, we argue that the left inferior frontal region is a generic on-line sequence processor that unifies information from various sources in an incremental and recursive manner, independent of whether there are any processing requirements related to syntactic movement or hierarchically nested structures. In addition, we argue that the Chomsky hierarchy is not directly relevant for neurobiological systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Dynamic Functional Modularity and The Role Of The Left Infermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

What artificial grammar learning reveals about the neurobiology of syntax

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Neurobiology of Structure‐Dependency in Natural Language Grammar

Tettamanti

Perani

2012

The Handbook of the Neuropsychology of Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disentangling syntax and intelligibility in auditory language comprehension

Friederici

Kotz

Scott

et al. 2009

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of the neural basis of spoken language comprehension typically focus on aspects of auditory processing by varying signal intelligibility, or on higher-level aspects of language processing such as syntax. Most studies in either of these threads of language research report brain activation including peaks in the superior temporal gyrus (STG) and/or the superior temporal sulcus (STS), but it is not clear why these areas are recruited in functionally different studies. The current fMRI study aims to disentangle the functional neuroanatomy of intelligibility and syntax in an orthogonal design. The data substantiate functional dissociations between STS and STG in the left and right hemispheres: first, manipulations of speech intelligibility yield bilateral mid-anterior STS peak activation, whereas syntactic phrase structure violations elicit strongly left-lateralized mid STG and posterior STS activation. Second, ROI analyses indicate all interactions of speech intelligibility and syntactic correctness to be located in the left frontal and temporal cortex, while the observed right-hemispheric activations reflect less specific responses to intelligibility and syntax. Our data demonstrate that the mid-to-anterior STS activation is associated with increasing speech intelligibility, while the mid-to-posterior STG/STS is more sensitive to syntactic information within the speech.

show abstract

Hierarchical artificial grammar processing engages Broca's area

Cited by 233 publications

References 47 publications

What artificial grammar learning reveals about the neurobiology of syntax

What artificial grammar learning reveals about the neurobiology of syntax

The Neurobiology of Structure‐Dependency in Natural Language Grammar

Disentangling syntax and intelligibility in auditory language comprehension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About