Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distinct Neurophysiological Patterns Reflecting Aspects of Syntactic Complexity and Syntactic Repair

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair were investigated by comparing the event-related (brain) potentials (ERPs) for sentences of different syntactic complexity to those containing a syntactic violation. Previous research had shown that both aspects of syntactic processing are reflected in a late positivity (P600). Results from the present reading experiment demonstrate, however, that although both processing aspects elicit a late positivity, they are different in distribution. The repair-related positivity preceded by a negativity displayed a centroparietal distribution, whereas the complexity-related positivity showed a frontocentral scalp distribution. These data indicate that the P600 is not a unitary phenomenon. Moreover, the distributional differences strongly suggest that different neural structures underlie the two aspects of processing, namely syntactic repair and syntactic integration difficulties, most evident when processing syntactically complex sentences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Osterhout, L. (1999). The neurocognition of syntactic processing. In C. M., Brown, & P., Hagoort (Eds.) The Neurocognition of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998a). Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain responses to morphosyntactic violations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 12-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998b). ERPs and domain specifity: Beating a straw horse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 653-672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donchin, E., & Coles, M. (1988). Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? Behavioral Brain Science, 11, 357-374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Featherston, S., Gross, M., Müute, T. F. & Clahsen, H. (2000). Brain potentials in the processing of complex sentences: An ERP study of control and raising constructions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 141-154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (1994). The diagnosis and cure of garden paths. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 407-434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D. (1998). The neurobiology of language processing. In A. D. Friederici (Ed.), Language Comprehension: A Biological Perspective (pp. 263-301). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D., & Frisch, S. (2000). Verb-argument structure processing: The role of verbspecific and argument-specific information. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 476-507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Mecklinger, A. (1996). Temporal structure of syntactic parsing. Early and late event-related brain potential effects elicited by syntactic anomalies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1219-1248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D., Mecklinger, A., Spencer, K. M., Steinhauer, K., & Donchin, E. (2001). Syntactic parsing preferences and their on-line revisions: A spatio temporal analysis of event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 305-323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D., Pfeifer, E., & Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related brain potentials during natural speech processing: Effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations. Cognitive Brain Research, 1, 183-192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D., Steinhauer, K., Mecklinger, A. & Meyer, M. (1998). Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses. Biological Psychology, 47, 193-221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisch, S., & Schlesewsky, M. (2001). The N400 reflects problems of thematic hierarchizing. Neuroreports, 12, 3391-3394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geisser, S., & Greenhouse, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrica, 24, 95-112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, T. C., Stowe, L. A., & Mulder, G. (1997). When syntax meets semantics. Psychophysiology, 34, 660-676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, T C., & Friederici, A. D., (1999). Concerning the automaticity of syntactic processing. Psychophysiology, 36, 126-137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunter, T. C., Friederici, A. D., & Schriefers, H. (2000). Syntactic gender and semantic expectancy: ERPs reveal early autonomy and late interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 556-568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 439-483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(2), 193-204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Processing a second language: Late learner's comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related potentials. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 123-141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahne, A., & Jescheniak, J. D. (2001). What's left if the Jabberwock gets the semantics? An ERP investigation into semantic and syntactic processes during auditory sentence comprehension. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 199-212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopf, J.-M., Bayer, J., Bader, M., & Meng, M. (1998). Event-related brain potentials and case information in syntactic ambiguities. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(2), 264-280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. J. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), 159-201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203-205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutas, M., & Van Petten, C. (1994). Psycholinguistics electrified: Event-related brain potential investigations. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 83-143). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy G., & Wood C. C. (1985). Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: An ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 62, 203-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mecklinger, A., Schriefers, H., Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1995). Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition, 23, 477-494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G. (1996). Incomplete Category Fronting: A Derivational Approach to Remnant Movement in German. Habilitation Thesis, University of Tübingen, (SfS-Report 01-96).

  • Münte, T. F., Heinze, H.-J., & Mangun, G. R. (1993). Dissociation of brain activity related to syntactic and semantic aspects of language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 335-344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Münte, T. F., Matzke, M., & Johannes, S. (1997). Brain activity associated with syntactic incongruencies in words and pseudo-words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 318-329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Münte, T. F., Heinze, H.-J., Matzke, M., Wieringa, B. M., & Johannes, S. (1998). Brain potentials and syntactic violations revisited: No evidence for specificity of the syntactic positive shift. Neuropsychologia, 36, 217-226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neville, H. J., Nicol, J., Barss, A., Forster, K. I., & Garrett, M. F. (1991). Syntactically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 151-165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., McKinnon, R., Bersick, M., & Corey, V. (1996). On the language-specificity of the brain response to syntactic anomalies: Is the syntactic positive shift a member of the P300 family? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 507-526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., & Hagoort, P. (1999). A superficial resemblance does not necessarily mean you are part of the family: Counterarguments to Coulson, King, & Kutas (1998) in the P600/SPS-P300 debate. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 1-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785-804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1993). Event-related potentials and syntactic anomaly: Evidence of anomaly detection during the perception of continuous speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 413-437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 786-803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugg, M. D., & Coles, M. G. H. (1995). The ERP and cognitive psychology: Conceptual issues. In M. D. Rugg & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Electrophysiology of Mind: Event-Related Brain Potentials and Cognition (pp. 27-39). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharbrough, F., Chatrian, G. E., Lesser, R. P., Lüders, H., Nuwer, M., & Picton, T. W. (1991). American Electroencephalographic Society guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 8, 200-202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinhauer, K., Mecklinger, A., Friederici, A. D., & Meyer, M. (1997). Wahrscheinlichkeit und Strategie: Eine EKP-Studie zur Verarbeitung syntaktischer Anomalien [in German]. Zeitschrift für experimentelle Psychologie, 44, 305-331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vos, S. H., Gunter, T. C., Schriefers, H., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Syntactic parsing and working memory: The effects of syntactic complexity, reading span, and concurrent load. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 65-103.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Leipzig, Germany

    Angela D. Friederici & Anja Hahne

  2. Department of Linguistics, University of Potsdam, USA

    Douglas Saddy

Authors
  1. Angela D. Friederici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anja Hahne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Douglas Saddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela D. Friederici.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Friederici, A.D., Hahne, A. & Saddy, D. Distinct Neurophysiological Patterns Reflecting Aspects of Syntactic Complexity and Syntactic Repair. J Psycholinguist Res 31, 45–63 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014376204525

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014376204525

Search

Navigation