Argument Structure violation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Methods Effective functional connectivity of phonological and semantic processing processing during word reading Cheryl M. Capek 1,2, Simandeep Poonian.
Advertisements

Emmanuel A Stamatakis Centre for Speech, Language and the Brain, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge School of Psychological.
Working Memory and Nativelikeness in the Processing of Focus Structure Robert Reichle 1 Annie Tremblay 2 Caitlin Coughlin 2 1 Department of Foreign Languages.
18 and 24-month-olds use syntactic knowledge of functional categories for determining meaning and reference Yarden Kedar Marianella Casasola Barbara Lust.
Hagoort, P., Brown, C.M., Groothusen, J. (1993) The Syntactic Positive Shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing.
Experiment 2: MEG Study Materials and Methods: 11 right-handed subjects with 20:20 vision were run. 3 subjects’ data was discarded because of poor performance.
SYNTAX 1 DAY 30 – NOV 6, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
The Timecourse of Morphological Processing: Base and surface frequency effects in speed-accuracy tradeoff designs Jennifer Vannest University of Michigan.
Grasping ideas with the motor system: Semantic somatotopy in idiom comprehension Véronique Boulenger MRC Cognitive and Brain Sciences Unit, Cambridge (UK)
Sonority as a Basis for Rhythmic Class Discrimination Antonio Galves, USP. Jesus Garcia, USP. Denise Duarte, USP and UFGo. Charlotte Galves, UNICAMP.
Sex Differences in Visual Field Lateralization: Where are they? Christine Chiarello 1, Laura K. Halderman 1, Suzanne Welcome 1, Janelle Julagay 1 & Christiana.
Second Language Proficiency Places Cognitive Constraints on Sentence Processing Noriko Hoshino Department of Psychology The Pennsylvania State University.
Influence of Word Class Proportion on Cerebral Asymmetries for High and Low Imagery Words Christine Chiarello 1, Connie Shears 2, Stella Liu 3, and Natalie.
Early effects of morphological complexity on visual evoked fields in MEG Eytan Zweig & Liina Pylkkänen New York University 80 th Annual LSA meeting, January.
Neuromagnetic Evidence for the Timing of Lexical Activation: An MEG Component Sensitive to Phonotactic Probability but Not to Neighborhood Density Sarah.
Introduction To know how perceptual and attentional processes and properties of words guide the eyes through a sentence, the following issues are particularly.
Experimental study of morphological priming: evidence from Russian verbal inflection Tatiana Svistunova Elizaveta Gazeeva Tatiana Chernigovskaya St. Petersburg.
Word category and verb-argument structure information in the dynamics of parsing Frisch, Hahne, and Friedericie (2004) Cognition.
SYNTAX 8 ON-LINE PROCESSING DAY 37 – NOV 22, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
By Peter Dang and Kyle Dennison.  Ability to acquire language is a unique and essential human trait  Chomsky’s Universal Grammar The human brain contains.
Susceptibility Induced Loss of Signal: Comparing PET and fMRI on a Semantic Task Devlin et al. (in press)
Visual Word Form Recognition: An MEG study using Masked Priming Heejeong Ko 1, Michael Wagner 1, Linnaea Stockall 1, Sid Kouider 2, Alec Marantz 1 1 Department.
Iconicity, Frequency, and Sign length effects in TSL lexical processing Yi-Hsuan Chiu Cognitive Neuropsychology Laboratory, National Yang-Ming University,
Electrophysiological evidence for the role of animacy and lexico-semantic associations in processing nouns within passive structures Martin Paczynski 1,
Morphology A Closer Look at Words By: Shaswar Kamal Mahmud.
The Influence of Feature Type, Feature Structure and Psycholinguistic Parameters on the Naming Performance of Semantic Dementia and Alzheimer’s Patients.
Magnetoencephalography Papanicolaou 1998 Fundamentals of Functional Brain Imaging.
Words in the brain Slide #1 김 민 경 Chap 4. Words in the brain.
Introduction Chapter 1 Foundations of statistical natural language processing.
The brain at rest. Spontaneous rhythms in a dish Connected neural populations tend to synchronize and oscillate together.
MORPHOLOGY definition; variability among languages.
Acknowledgement Work supported by NINDS (grant NS39845), NIMH (grants MH42900 and 19116) and the Human Frontier Science Program Methods Fullhead.
Neural correlates of morphological decomposition in a morphologically rich language : An fMRI study Lehtonen, M., Vorobyev, V.A., Hugdahl, K., Tuokkola.
Orienting Attention to Semantic Categories T Cristescu, JT Devlin, AC Nobre Dept. Experimental Psychology and FMRIB Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford,
PET Count  Word Frequency effects (coefficients) were reliably related to activation in both the striate and ITG for older adults only.  For older adults,
D. Cheyne 1, J. Martinez-Trujillo 2, E. Simine 2, W. Gaetz 1, J. Tsotsos 2 1 Neuromagnetic Imaging Laboratory, Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute,
Willems, Oostenveld, & Hagoort (2008)  EEG tends to be oscillatory  Composed of several different frequency bands  Fourier Decomposition  Theta (4-6.
The Effect of Language Modality
Investigating the combined effects of word frequency and contextual predictability on eye movements during reading Christopher J. Hand Glasgow Language.
Synchronisation in the ventral stream supports complex semantic processing: evidence from MEG Alex Clarke Centre for Speech, Language & the Brain.
Performance-Related Sustained and Anticipatory Activity in Human Medial Temporal Lobe during Delayed Match-to-Sample Rosanna K. Olsen,1 Elizabeth A. Nichols,1.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Fall Level High-rising Fall Level High-rising
First Analysis : 68 Scouts from Desikan-Killiany
Meghan E. Martz, PhD, Robert A. Zucker, PhD, Mary M. Heitzeg, PhD
Evoked Response Potential (ERP) and Face Stimuli N170: negative-going potential at 170 ms Largest over the right parietal lobe,
Volume 60, Issue 4, Pages (November 2008)
Volume 56, Issue 6, Pages (December 2007)
Syntactic Processing Depends on Dorsal Language Tracts
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages e4 (March 2018)
Volume 64, Issue 4, Pages (November 2009)
Noriko Hoshino Department of Psychology
Jason Samaha, Bradley R. Postle  Current Biology 
Roman F. Loonis, Scott L. Brincat, Evan G. Antzoulatos, Earl K. Miller 
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages (April 2003)
Volume 24, Issue 13, Pages (July 2014)
Audiovisual Integration of Letters in the Human Brain
Learning Letters in Adulthood
Common ERPs BCS204 Week 5.2 2/13/2019.
Josef Parvizi, Anthony D. Wagner  Neuron 
Jean-Rémi King, Niccolo Pescetelli, Stanislas Dehaene  Neuron 
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages (October 2018)
Sébastien Marti, Jean-Rémi King, Stanislas Dehaene  Neuron 
Figure 1 Summary of patient-level SC-FC analysis pipeline
Sharon L. Thompson-Schill, Mark D'Esposito, Irene P. Kan  Neuron 
Anthony D. Wagner, Anat Maril, and Daniel L. Schacter
Conserved Sequence Processing in Primate Frontal Cortex
Volume 42, Issue 4, Pages (May 2004)
Cortical Mechanisms Specific to Explicit Visual Object Recognition
Dynamic Statistical Parametric Mapping
Theta phase synchronization between the hippocampus and the prefrontal cortex during decision making in the postlearning phase. Theta phase synchronization.
Presentation transcript:

Argument Structure violation Processing of lexical category and argument structure information in deverbal adjectives: An MEG study on Greek Kyriaki Neophytou1*, Christina Manouilidou2, Linnaea Stockall3 and Alec Marantz1,4 1New York University Abu Dhabi, 2University of Patras, 3Queen Mary University of London, 4New York University *Corresponding Author: kyriaki.neophytou@nyu.edu Visual, form-based morphological decomposition Left Fusiform Gyrus TP (p<0.0) from 100-200ms Temporal-Occipital lobe (Letter string – fROI, [2]) TP (p=0.05), 100-200ms Syntactic category check Anterior Temporal Lobe (ATL) Violation Type (p=0.144), 200-300ms Lexical access: Stem Look-up OF (Surface frequency - fROI) Stem frequency (p<0.0), 300-415ms Recombination – Semantic Composition MTG Surface frequency (p=0.01), 300-385ms OF(Surface frequency - fROI) Suffix Type (p=0.001), 300-500ms Violation Type (p=0.018), 425-500ms Research Question MEG Results – Across Suffixes MEG Results – Within Suffixes* How are lexical category violations and verb argument structure violations processed in deverbal adjectives in Greek? STG -menos: Gram > ArgStr (p=0.013), 295-435ms OF -menos: ArgStr > Cat (p=0.043), 380-495ms -menos: Cat > Gram (p=0.040), 305-500ms -simos: Cat > Gram (p=0.020), 380-500ms  TP from stem to word (and not surface frequency) modulate brain responses in the left fusiform gyrus, from 100-200 ms  Not all suffixes show the same pattern of activity  -menos yields most of the statistically significant differences in the within-suffix comparisons ENGLISH Category violation *re-blue(Adj.) re- requires verb Argument Structure violation *re-sleep (Intransitive Verb) re- requires an internal argument taking verb GREEK lahano-tos (cabbage-able) (Noun) -tos requires a verb tremi-tos (tremble-able) (Intransitive Verb) -tos requires an internal argument taking verb Violation Type (ArgStr and Cat violations) show the predicted effects in the ATL (although not statistically significant) -menos, Cat -menos, ArgStr -simos, Cat -simos, ArgStr -tos, Cat -tos, ArgStr Hypothesis & Predictions The lexical category of the stem is assessed before its argument structure [1]. Thus, we expect increased early brain activity for category violations followed by increased brain activity for argument structure violations, cross-linguistically. Previous Work Obligatory, early decomposition [2, 3] ~170ms post stimulus onset (PSO) in the left Fusiform gyrus: significant effect of Transition Probability (TP) from stem to word and lemma frequency Syntactic Category Determination [4] ~200ms PSO in the Anterior Temporal Lobe (ATL): significant effect of Noun/Verb entropy Lexical access [5,6] ~300-400ms PSO in the left Superior/Middle Temporal Gyrus (STG/MTG): significant effect of stem frequency and derivational family entropy, distinct processing of syntactic category and argument structure constraints Semantic wellformdness [6,7] ~300-500ms PSO in the left STG/MTG and the Orbitofrontal cortex (OF): significant effects of semantic coherence    Stem frequency shows a significant effect in the OF, but not in the temporal lobe *No statistically significant effects were found for -tos Behavioral Results Acceptance Rates: ArgStr (30-38%) > Cat (6-10%) Response Times (RTs): ArgStr(m=1227.7ms)>Cat(m=1146.1ms)> Gram(m=984.1ms)  Surface frequency shows a significant effect in the MTG -menos, Cat -menos, ArgStr -simos, Cat -simos, ArgStr -tos, Cat -tos, ArgStr Conclusions ArgStr violations are harder to process, compared to Cat violations (higher acceptance rate and higher RTs) [1] Evidence (TP effects) supporting early visual morphological decomposition processes in the left fusiform gyrus (M170) Evidence that the first step in lexical access is stem look up (stem frequency effect), followed by recombination (surface frequency effect) Violation Type evokes the predicted brain activity pattern: Cat>ArgStr in the early processing window in the ATL, and ArgStr>Cat in the later window in the OF The differences between the Violation Types vary among the 3 suffixes, requiring further investigation Material Suffix Grammatical Ungrammatical Category violation (Cat) Argument Structure violation (ArgStr) -simos ananeo-simos (renewable) varel-imos (barrel-able) gela-simos (laugh-able) -tos sevas-tos (respectable) lahano-tos (cabbage-able) tremi-tos (tremble-able) -menos lavo-menos (wounded) ahino-menos (urchin-able) argi-menos (be late-able)  Both the Suffix Type and the Violation Type significantly modulate the activity in the OF: ArgStr violations evoke greater activity compared to the Cat violations -150 illegal & 75 legal items (25 items per category) -75 fillers (legal adjectives) References Methods | Data Analysis (MEG Data) [1] Manouilidou & Stockall, 2014. Italian Journ. of Ling., 26. [2] Tarkiainen et al., 1999. Brain, 122. [3] Gwilliams, Lewis & Marantz, 2016. NeuroImage, 132. [4] King, Linzen & Marantz, 2015. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002477 [5] Fruchter & Marantz, 2015. Brain and Language, 143. [6] Stockall et al., 2015. Poster at SNL 2015. [7] Pylkkänen, Oliveri & Smart, 2009. Lang. & Cogn. Processes, 24. 20 Greek native speakers Lexical Decision Task 208 channel KIT MEG system 1000Hz sampling rate 200Hz online LPF Within-Suffix and Between-Violation Types comparisons Eeelbrain - Python package -Spatiotemporal cluster tests over anatomical ROIs -Temporal Cluster tests over functional ROIs (fROIs) Effects of lexical variables Lme4 – R package -Linear Mixed-Effects Models    Supported by the NYU Abu Dhabi Institute, Grant G1001