Neurocognitive mechanisms of verb argument structure processing

Thompson, Cynthia K.; Meltzer‐Asscher, Aya

doi:10.1075/lfab.10.07tho

Cited by 23 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current results suggest a subtle refinement of Thompson & Meltzer-Asscher’s (2014) model of argument structure processing with regard to the role of the left IFG. Our model emphasizes its role in processing complex sentences, particularly sentences with syntactic movement and/or non-canonical argument mapping.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Several studies have investigated the psycholinguistic and neural correlates of different aspects of argument structure complexity discussed above (see Thompson & Meltzer-Asscher, 2014, for a review). Neuroimaging studies with cognitively healthy participants have found differential activation patterns based on the number of thematic roles in sentence contexts, although these patterns vary across studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thompson & Meltzer-Asscher (2014) proposed a neurocognitive model of argument structure processing at both the word and sentence level, based on the extant literature examining the neural mechanisms of verb processing. The model encompasses three functions: (1) access to stored lexical information (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How the brain processes different dimensions of argument structure complexity: Evidence from fMRI

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Verbs are central to sentence processing, as they encode argument structure (AS) information, i.e., information about the syntax and interpretation of the phrases accompanying them. The behavioral and neural correlates of AS processing have primarily been investigated in sentence-level tasks, requiring both verb processing and verb-argument integration. In the current functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we investigated AS processing using a lexical decision task requiring only verb processing. We examined three aspects of AS complexity: number of thematic roles, number of thematic options, and mapping (non)canonicity (unaccusative vs. unergative and transitive verbs). Increased number of thematic roles elicited greater activation in the left posterior perisylvian regions claimed to support access to stored AS representations. However, the number of thematic options had no neural effects. Further, unaccusative verbs elicited longer response times and increased activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus, reflecting the processing cost of unaccusative verbs and, more generally, supporting the role of the IFG in noncanonical argument mapping.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How the brain processes different dimensions of argument structure complexity: Evidence from fMRI

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scores of the agrammatic individuals on the Northwestern Naming Battery (NNB, Thompson & Weintraub (2014) (also see Thompson, Lukic, King, Mesulam, & Weintraub, 2012b) indicated a significant advantage in noun naming over verb naming (noun M = 90.9%, verb M = 82.7%, paired-samples t (13) = 2.24, p = .004). Verb naming was found to be impaired also on the Verb Naming Test (VNT) of the NAVS, with mean correct naming at 73%.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…fewer correct sentences are produced with ditransitive and transitive verbs than with intransitive verbs (Dragoy & Bastiaanse, 2010; Thompson et al, 1997). Thompson & Meltzer-Asscher (2014) propose a neurocognitive model of verb argument structure processing, arguing that this processing is subserved by three left-lateralized regions: the angular gyrus (AG), the IFG, and the posterior middle and superior temporal gyri (MTG and STG, respectively). While the AG is a crucial region for representation of lexical argument structure information, the IFG is involved in syntactic structure building necessitated by the projection of arguments (as well as in syntactic movement, when it occurs), and the posterior MTG and STG play a role in the integration of the verb with its arguments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The forgotten grammatical category: Adjective use in agrammatic aphasia

Meltzer‐Asscher

Thompson

2014

Journal of Neurolinguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In contrast to nouns and verbs, the use of adjectives in agrammatic aphasia has not been systematically studied. However, because of the linguistic and psycholinguistic attributes of adjectives, some of which overlap with nouns and some with verbs, analysis of adjective production is important for testing theories of word class production deficits in agrammatism. Aims The objective of the current study was to compare adjective use in agrammatic and healthy individuals, focusing on three factors: overall adjective production rate, production of predicative and attributive adjectives, and production of adjectives with complex argument structure. Method & Procedures Narratives elicited from 14 agrammatic and 14 control participants were coded for open class grammatical category production (i.e., nouns, verbs, adjectives), with each adjective also coded for its syntactic environment (attributive/predicative) and argument structure. Outcomes & Results Overall, agrammatic speakers used adjectives in proportions similar to that of cognitively healthy speakers. However, they exhibited a greater proportion of predicative adjectives and a lesser proportion of attributive adjectives, compared to controls. Additionally, agrammatic participants produced adjectives with less complex argument structure than controls. Conclusions The overall normal-like frequency of adjectives produced by agrammatic speakers suggests that agrammatism does not involve an inherent difficulty with adjectives as a word class or with predication, or that it entails a deficit in processing low imageability words. However, agrammatic individuals’ reduced production of attributive adjectives and adjectives with complements extends previous findings of an adjunction deficit and of impairment in complex argument structure processing, respectively, to the adjectival domain. The results suggest that these deficits are not tied to a specific grammatical category.

show abstract

Predicting the brain activation pattern associated with the propositional content of a sentence: Modeling neural representations of events and states

Wang

Cherkassky

Just

2017

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even though much has recently been learned about the neural representation of individual concepts and categories, neuroimaging research is only beginning to reveal how more complex thoughts, such as event and state descriptions, are neurally represented. We present a predictive computational theory of the neural representations of individual events and states as they are described in 240 sentences. Regression models were trained to determine the mapping between 42 neurally plausible semantic features (NPSFs) and thematic roles of the concepts of a proposition and the fMRI activation patterns of various cortical regions that process different types of information. Given a semantic characterization of the content of a sentence that is new to the model, the model can reliably predict the resulting neural signature, or, given an observed neural signature of a new sentence, the model can predict its semantic content. The models were also reliably generalizable across participants. This computational model provides an account of the brain representation of a complex yet fundamental unit of thought, namely, the conceptual content of a proposition. In addition to characterizing a sentence representation at the level of the semantic and thematic features of its component concepts, factor analysis was used to develop a higher level characterization of a sentence, specifying the general type of event representation that the sentence evokes (e.g., a social interaction versus a change of physical state) and the voxel locations most strongly associated with each of the factors. Hum Brain Mapp 38:4865-4881, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Neurocognitive mechanisms of verb argument structure processing

Cited by 23 publications

References 80 publications

How the brain processes different dimensions of argument structure complexity: Evidence from fMRI

How the brain processes different dimensions of argument structure complexity: Evidence from fMRI

The forgotten grammatical category: Adjective use in agrammatic aphasia

Predicting the brain activation pattern associated with the propositional content of a sentence: Modeling neural representations of events and states

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About