Neural basis of semantic and syntactic interference in sentence comprehension

Abstract

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.

Components of the Language-Ready Brain

“…It may be the case that effects in these languagerelated regions are due to these processes. Previous research points to a role for the posterior temporal lobe in working memory and cognitive control (Hickok et al, 2003;Glaser et al, 2013) and the angular gyrus in semantic processing (Binder et al, 2009;Price et al, 2015), consistent with this speculation.…”

Verbal short-term memory capacities and executive function in semantic and syntactic interference resolution during sentence comprehension: Evidence from aphasia

“…an interaction between semantic and syntactic interference, with greater syntactic interference in the high than low semantic interference condition. Such an interaction has been reported in some (Van Dyke, 2007) but not all (Glaser et al, 2013;Segaert et al, 2012;Tan et al, 2017) prior studies with young subjects. However, in the current study, the interaction is hard to interpret given the near ceiling accuracy in the low syntactic interference conditions.…”

“…However, numerous studies have demonstrated that it is the degree of interference from nontarget elements during integration, rather than the distance across which integrations occur, that determines comprehension difficulty (Glaser, Martin, Van Dyke, Hamilton, & Tan, 2013;Lewis & Vasishth, 2005;McElree, 2000;McElree, 2015;Segaert et al, 2012;Van Dyke & Lewis, 2003;Van Dyke & McElree, 2011). To accommodate these findings, the cue-based parsing approach adopts recent general models of WM termed embedded processes models, that assume WM consists of the activated portion of long-term memory, together with a very limited capacity for the focus of attention (i.e., from 1-2 items).…”

The ventrolateral prefrontal cortex facilitates processing of sentential context to locate referents

“…In a recent study, Zhu et al (2013) reported that both anterior and posterior parts of VLPFC showed increased activation during semantic integration, but only the posterior part showed sensitivity to congruency in the Stroop task (see also Fedorenko, Behr, & Kanwisher, 2011). Another study found that while BA45 responded to conflict in both semantic and syntactic domains, BA47’s activity was associated only with semantic conflict (Glaser et al, 2013). Finally, Hagoort (2005) proposed that posterior VLPFC supports phonological and syntactic processing.…”