Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation

被引:318
作者
Kaan, E
Swaab, TY
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Brain Imaging & Anal Ctr, Durham, NC 27710 USA
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Davis, CA 95616 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1162/089892903321107855
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
One of the core aspects of human sentence processing is the ability to detect errors and to recover from erroneous analysis through revision of ambiguous sentences and repair of ungrammatical sentences. In the present study, we used event-related potentials (ERPs) to help identify the nature of these processes by directly comparing ERPs to complex ambiguous sentence structures with and without grammatical violations, and to simpler unambiguous sentence structures with and without grammatical violations. In ambiguous sentences, preference of syntactic analysis was manipulated such that in one condition, the structures agreed with the preferred analysis, and in another condition, a nonpreferred but syntactically correct analysis (garden path) was imposed. Nonpreferred ambiguous structures require revision, whereas ungrammatical structures require repair. We found that distinct ERPs reflected different characteristics of syntactic processing. Specifically, our results are consistent with the idea that a positivity with a posterior distribution across the scalp (posterior P600) is an index of syntactic processing difficulty, including repair and revision, and that a frontally distributed positivity (frontal P600) is related to ambiguity resolution and/or to an increase in discourse level complexity.
引用
收藏
页码:98 / 110
页数:13
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], REANALYSIS SENTENCE
[2]   BROKEN AGREEMENT [J].
BOCK, K ;
MILLER, CA .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, 23 (01) :45-93
[3]   Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain response to morphosyntactic violations [J].
Coulson, S ;
King, JW ;
Kutas, M .
LANGUAGE AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES, 1998, 13 (01) :21-58
[4]   ERPs and domain specificity: Beating a straw horse [J].
Coulson, S ;
King, JW ;
Kutas, M .
LANGUAGE AND COGNITIVE PROCESSES, 1998, 13 (06) :653-672
[5]   CROSS-LINGUISTIC DIFFERENCES IN PARSING - RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF THE LATE CLOSURE STRATEGY IN SPANISH [J].
CUETOS, F ;
MITCHELL, DC .
COGNITION, 1988, 30 (01) :73-105
[6]   Agreement checking in comprehension: Evidence from relative clauses [J].
Deevy, PL .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH, 2000, 29 (01) :69-79
[7]  
Fodor J.D., 1998, Reanalysis in sentence processing, P101, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-94-015-9070-9_4
[8]   Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair [J].
Friederici, AD ;
Hahne, A ;
Saddy, D .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH, 2002, 31 (01) :45-63
[9]   Temporal structure of syntactic parsing: Early and late event-related brain potential effects [J].
Friederici, AD ;
Hahne, A ;
Mecklinger, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1996, 22 (05) :1219-1248
[10]   THE TIME-COURSE OF SYNTACTIC ACTIVATION DURING LANGUAGE PROCESSING - A MODEL-BASED ON NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL DATA [J].
FRIEDERICI, AD .
BRAIN AND LANGUAGE, 1995, 50 (03) :259-281