Syntactic Processing

■ How do native listeners process grammatical errors that are frequent in non-native speech? We investigated whether the neu-ral correlates of syntactic processing are modulated by speaker identity. ERPs to gender agreement errors in sentences spoken by a native speaker were compared with the same errors spoken by a non-native speaker. In line with previous research, gender violations in native speech resulted in a P600 effect (larger P600 for violations in comparison with correct sentences), but when the same violations were produced by the non-native speaker with a foreign accent, no P600 effect was observed. Control sentences with semantic violations elicited comparable N400 effects for both the native and the non-native speaker, confirming no general integration problem in foreign-accented speech. The results demonstrate that the P600 is modulated by speaker identity , extending our knowledge about the role of speakerʼs characteristics on neural correlates of speech processing. ■

In this study, I report three experiments that examined whether words from one language of bilinguals can use the syntactic features form the other language, and how such syntactic co-activation might influence syntactic processing. In other words, I examined whether there are any cases in which an inherent syntactic feature a lexical item is inhibited and the syntactic feature that belongs to the other language is used, instead. In the non-switch condition in Experiments 1 and 2, Persian-English bilinguals described pictures using an adjective-noun string from the same language requested. In the switch condition, they used a noun and an adjective from the other language. In the switch condition in Experiment 3, participants used only the adjective of a noun phrase from the other language. The results showed that bilinguals may inhibit the activation of a word’s syntactic feature and use the syntactic property from the other language, instead (e.g., pirāhane (shirt-N) black). As the combinatorial node (the node that specifies different kinds of syntactic structures in which a word can be used) of a used adjective retains activation at least temporarily, bilinguals are more likely to use the same combinatorial node even with an adjective from the other language. Cross-language syntactic interference increased in the switch conditions. Moreover, more inappropriate responses were observed when switching from bilinguals’ L2 to L1. The results also revealed that different experimental contexts may lead to different patterns of the control mechanism. The results will be interpreted in terms of Hartsuiker and Pickering’s (2008) model of syntactic representation.

Sentence understanding is affected by recent experience. An important open question is whether this reflects adaptation to the statistics of the input. Support for this hypothesis comes from the recent finding that listeners can simultaneously learn and maintain the syntactic statistics of multiple talkers (Kamide, 2012). We attempt—and fail—to replicate this finding. This calls into questions whether recency effects in sentence processing originate in the same adaptive mechanisms operating during speech perception (for which talker-specific adaptation is well-established).

Recently processed syntactic information is likely to play a fundamental role in online sentence comprehension. For example, there is now a good deal of evidence that the processing of a syntactic structure (the target) is facilitated if the same structure was processed on the immediately preceding trial (the prime), a phenomenon known as structural priming. However, compared to structural priming in production, structural priming in comprehension remains relatively understudied. We investigate an aspect of structural priming in comprehension that is comparatively well understood in production, but has received little attention in comprehension: the cumulative effect of structural primes on subsequently processed sentences. We further ask whether this effect is modulated by lexical overlap between preceding primes and the target. In three self-paced reading experiments, we find that structural priming effects in comprehension are cumulative and of similar magnitude both with and without lexical overlap. We discuss the relevance of our results to questions about the relationship between recent experience and online language processing.

This review chapter aims at presenting an overview of the seminal and the most recent behavioral and neuroimaging studies on the implementation of syntactic processes in the brain. More specifically, the present study seeks to provide an understanding of the most recent findings in relation to how syntactic processing takes place behaviorally and also concerning its cortical representation. Traditionally, syntactic processing has been investigated by comparing sentences with ambiguities and sentences without ambiguities; sentences with grammatical errors and sentences without grammatical errors; and sentences with more versus less complex syntactic structures. Different models have sought to explain how parsing occurs: serial models have posited that syntax is computed before word meanings while interactive models have suggested that syntax and semantics are computed simultaneously. Behavioral research has found evidence for both views. Lesion studies have led researchers to suggest that Broca’s area (left inferior frontal gyrus) would be responsible for syntax. With the advent of functional neuroimaging tools (as well as event-related potentials, ERPs) for language studies, researchers could examine the healthy brain at work. These tools have allowed research to go beyond the simple dissociations offered by lesion studies to study the organization of the brain. ERPs characterize the time course of a language process whereas fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) and PET (positron-emission tomography) provide the necessary spatial resolution to determine the neural loci of language processing. These technological tools have challenged what we knew about syntactic processing, since they have been showing “the language system is organized into a large number of relatively small, but tightly clustered and interconnected modules with unique contributions to language processing” (BOOKHEIMER, 2002, p.152). The studies reviewed in the chapter are all consistent with the role that Broca’s area plays in syntactic processing, although “they fail to converge on a single region within the inferior frontal cortex” (NEWMAN et al., 2003, p.297). Differences may have arisen from differences in the demands of the tasks, design of the studies as well as the statistical methods applied in each experiment. The studies, as a group, seem to implicate the classical left-hemisphere language areas (inferior frontal and superior temporal regions) and their right homologues for syntactic processing, but as expected, activation in these regions is not specific to syntactic processing. There is large venue for future research, such as to elucidate which aspects of syntactic processing are subserved by which areas of the brain and under what circumstances. Future studies should take into account individual differences and different languages, as well as studying sentence processing within a much broader perspective, reconciling previous results and leading to more detailed models and theories.
Keywords: syntactic processing; reading comprehension; literature review

ORCs are generally found to be more difficult than SRCs in L1 English processing literature. This eye-tracking study tests this asymmetry in L2 English in terms of reading patterns and accuracy, and reports longer overall reading times, regressions and lower comprehension accuracy for ORCs. This indicates processing ORCs is more difficult for L2 English speakers with L1 Turkish. The incremental processing of the RCs by L2 speakers reflects delayed effects of difficulty, contrasting with previous findings in L1 literature. The findings provide further evidence for the processing disadvantage posed by ORCs, and highlight the differences between L1 and L2 processing dynamics.

Sentence understanding is affected by recent experience. An important open question is whether this reflects adaptation to the statistics of the input. Support for this hypothesis comes from the recent finding that listeners can simultaneously learn and maintain the syntactic statistics of multiple talkers (Kamide, 2012). We attempt—and fail—to replicate this finding. This calls into questions whether recency effects in sentence processing originate in the same adaptive mechanisms operating during speech perception (for which talker-specific adaptation is well-established).

It has been shown that prosody contributes to the contrast between declarativity and interrogativity, notably in interrogative utterances lacking lexico-syntactic features of interrogativity. Accordingly, it may be proposed that prosody plays a role in marking wh-in-situ questions in which the interrogativity feature (the wh-phrase) does not move to sentence-initial position, as, for example, in Persian. This paper examines whether prosody distinguishes Persian wh-in-situ questions from declaratives in the absence of the interrogativity feature in the sentence-initial position. To answer this question, a production experiment was designed in which wh-questions and declaratives were elicited from Persian native speakers. On the basis of the results of previous studies, we hypothesize that prosodic features mark wh-in-situ questions as opposed to declaratives at both the local (pre- and post-wh part) and global level (complete sentence). The results of the current study confirm our hy...