On the cross-linguistic validity of electrophysiological correlates of morphosyntactic processing: A study of case and agreement violations in Basque

Díaz, Begoña; Sebastián‐Gallés, Núria; Erdocia, Kepa; Mueller, Jutta L.; Laka, Itziar

doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.12.003

Cited by 27 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different from this type of violation, Mueller, Hirotani, and Friederici (2007) investigated sentences in which case-assignment violations were triggered by illicit sequences of case-marked nouns. However, Díaz et al (2011) reported only a P600 effect in response to a sequence of two ergative marked NPs in Basque, a pattern that was also reported by Bise and Sakamoto (2011) in response to a sequence of two accusative-marked NPs in Japanese. The results of the experiment showed that a sequence of NPs with the same case marker elicited a biphasic N400-P600 pattern at the second NP.…”

Section: Syntactic Revision Processes Required By Garden-pathsupporting

confidence: 74%

15. Processing of syntactic and semantic information in the human brain: Evidence from ERP studies in Japanese

Sakamoto¹

2015

Handbook of Japanese Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Syntactic Revision Processes Required By Garden-pathsupporting

confidence: 74%

15. Processing of syntactic and semantic information in the human brain: Evidence from ERP studies in Japanese

Sakamoto¹

2015

Handbook of Japanese Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our results, however, do not straightforwardly map onto extant neurocognitive models of syntactic processing [Bornkessel‐Schlesewsky and Schlesewsky,2009a,b; Friederici and Kotz,2003]. These models predict that number and case violations elicit activations in brain regions that are assumed to play a role in generating P600 effects [see Díaz et al,2011, who report P600 effects for similar case and number agreement violations in Basque], in particular the left posterior superior temporal gyrus and possibly the basal ganglia. It is therefore possible that medial and bilateral parietal regions and perhaps dorsolateral regions also contribute to P600 effects [Folia et al2009; Kuperberg et al,2003,2008; Nieuwland et al,2007].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Brain regions that process case: Evidence from basque

Nieuwland¹,

Martin²,

Carreiras³

2011

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this event-related fMRI study was to investigate the cortical networks involved in case processing, an operation that is crucial to language comprehension yet whose neural underpinnings are not well-understood. What is the relationship of these networks to those that serve other aspects of syntactic and semantic processing? Participants read Basque sentences that contained case violations, number agreement violations or semantic anomalies, or that were both syntactically and semantically correct. Case violations elicited activity increases, compared to correct control sentences, in a set of parietal regions including the posterior cingulate, the precuneus, and the left and right inferior parietal lobules. Number agreement violations also elicited activity increases in left and right inferior parietal regions, and additional activations in the left and right middle frontal gyrus. Regions-ofinterest analyses showed that almost all of the clusters that were responsive to case or number agreement violations did not differentiate between these two. In contrast, the left and right anterior inferior frontal gyrus and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex were only sensitive to semantic violations. Our results suggest that whereas syntactic and semantic anomalies clearly recruit distinct neural circuits, case, and number violations recruit largely overlapping neural circuits and that the distinction between the two rests on the relative contributions of parietal and prefrontal regions, respectively. Furthermore, our results are consistent with recently reported contributions of bilateral parietal and dorsolateral brain regions to syntactic processing, pointing towards potential extensions of current neurocognitive theories of language. Hum Brain Mapp 33:2509-2520,

show abstract

“…In the initial study, Zawiszewski and Friederici (2009) time interval, which they took to be an N400 effect. In a subsequent study, Díaz et al (2011) examined the effects of S-V and O-V number agreement violations as participants listened to transitive sentences in Basque. They found that both S-V and O-V number agreement violations elicited a P600 effect, but an early posterior negativity was found in the O-V conditions only;…”

Section: Previous Erp Studies On Agreement Processing In Basquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research has looked at different languages to examine and compare how the brain processes agreement that (i) involves different features, including number (De Vincenzi et al, 2003;Hagoort, Brown, & Groothusen, 1993;Kutas & Hillyard, 1983), gender (Barber & Carreiras, 2005;Hagoort & Brown, 1999), person (FrenckMestre, Osterhout, McLaughlin, & Foucart, 2008;Hinojosa, Martín-Loeches, Casado, Muñoz, & Rubia, 2003) as well as comparisons across features (Alemán Bañón, Fiorentino, & Gabriele, 2012;Alemán Bañón & Rothman, 2016;Barber & Carreiras, 2003, 2005Hagoort, 2003;Mancini, Molinaro, Rizzi, & Carreiras, 2011;Martín-Loeches, Nigbur, Casado, Hohlfeld, & Sommer, 2006;Nevins, Dillon, Malhotra, & Phillips, 2007;Silva-Pereyra & Carreiras, 2007;Zawiszewski, Santesteban, & Laka, 2016) and (ii) occurs between different constituents (Barber & Carreiras, 2005;Díaz, Sebastián-Gallés, Erdocia, Mueller, & Laka, 2011;Zawiszewski & Friederici, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of subject-case marking on agreement processing: ERP evidence from Basque

Chow

Nevins

Carreiras

2018

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous cross-linguistic research has found that comprehenders are immediately sensitive to various kinds of agreement violations across languages. We focused on Basque, a verb-final ergative language with both subject-verb (S-V) and object-verb (O-V) agreement. We compared the effects of S-V agreement violations on comprehenders' event-related brain potentials (ERPs) in transitive sentences (where O-V agreement is present, and the subject is ergative) and intransitive sentences (where O-V agreement is absent, and the subject is absolutive). We observed a P600 effect in both cases, but only violations with intransitive subjects elicited an early posterior negativity. Such a qualitative difference suggests that distinct neurocognitive mechanisms are involved in processing agreement with transitive subjects (which are marked with ergative case) vs. intransitive subjects (which bear absolutive case). Building on theoretical proposals that in languages such as Basque, true agreement occurs with absolutive subjects but not with ergative subjects, we submit that the early posterior negativity may be an electrophysiological signature for true agreement.

show abstract

On the cross-linguistic validity of electrophysiological correlates of morphosyntactic processing: A study of case and agreement violations in Basque

Cited by 27 publications

References 53 publications

15. Processing of syntactic and semantic information in the human brain: Evidence from ERP studies in Japanese

15. Processing of syntactic and semantic information in the human brain: Evidence from ERP studies in Japanese

Brain regions that process case: Evidence from basque

Effects of subject-case marking on agreement processing: ERP evidence from Basque

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About