The Automatic but Flexible and Content-Dependent Nature of Syntax

Overview

Journal Front Hum Neurosci

Specialty Neurology

Date 2021 Jun 28

PMID 34177488

Citations 3

Authors

Laura Jimenez-Ortega

Esperanza Badaya

Pilar Casado

Sabela Fondevila

David Hernandez-Gutierrez

Francisco Munoz

Jose Sanchez-Garcia

Manuel Martin-Loeches

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Syntactic processing has often been considered an utmost example of unconscious automatic processing. In this line, it has been demonstrated that masked words containing syntactic anomalies are processed by our brain triggering event related potential (ERP) components similar to the ones triggered by conscious syntactic anomalies, thus supporting the automatic nature of the syntactic processing. Conversely, recent evidence also points out that regardless of the level of awareness, emotional information and other relevant extralinguistic information modulate conscious syntactic processing too. These results are also in line with suggestions that, under certain circumstances, syntactic processing could also be flexible and context-dependent. However, the study of the concomitant automatic but flexible conception of syntactic parsing is very scarce. Hence, to this aim, we examined whether and how masked emotional words (positive, negative, and neutral masked adjectives) containing morphosyntactic anomalies (half of the cases) affect linguistic comprehension of an ongoing unmasked sentence that also can contain a number agreement anomaly between the noun and the verb. ERP components were observed to emotional information (EPN), masked anomalies (LAN and a weak P600), and unmasked ones (LAN/N400 and P600). Furthermore, interactions in the processing of conscious and unconscious morphosyntactic anomalies and between unconscious emotional information and conscious anomalies were detected. The findings support, on the one hand, the automatic nature of syntax, given that syntactic components LAN and P600 were observed to unconscious anomalies. On the other hand, the flexible, permeable, and context-dependent nature of the syntactic processing is also supported, since unconscious information modulated conscious syntactic components. This double nature of syntactic processing is in line with theories of automaticity, suggesting that even unconscious/automatic, syntactic processing is flexible, adaptable, and context-dependent.

Citing Articles

The Conscious Side of 'Subliminal' Linguistic Priming: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Visibility Measures.

Hernandez-Gutierrez D, Sorrel M, Shanks D, Vadillo M J Cogn. 2025; 8(1):13.

PMID: 39803184 PMC: 11720476. DOI: 10.5334/joc.419.

Unpleasant words can affect the detection of morphosyntactic errors: An ERP study on individual differences.

Vieitez L, Padron I, Diaz-Lago M, de Dios-Flores I, Fraga I Psychophysiology. 2024; 61(12):e14663.

PMID: 39086024 PMC: 11579219. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.14663.

The bigger your pupils, the better my comprehension: an ERP study of how pupil size and gaze of the speaker affect syntactic processing.

Jimenez-Ortega L, Casado-Palacios M, Rubianes M, Martinez-Mejias M, Casado P, Fondevila S Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2024; 19(1).

PMID: 38918898 PMC: 11246839. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsae047.

Patterns of hemispheric asymmetry provide evidence dissociating the semantic and syntactic P600.

Leckey M, Troyer M, Federmeier K Neuropsychologia. 2022; 179:108441.

PMID: 36539059 PMC: 9839550. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2022.108441.

References

Ansorge U, Kunde W, Kiefer M . Unconscious vision and executive control: how unconscious processing and conscious action control interact. Conscious Cogn. 2014; 27:268-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.05.009. View

Brusini P, Dehaene-Lambertz G, van Heugten M, DE Carvalho A, Goffinet F, Fievet A . Ambiguous function words do not prevent 18-month-olds from building accurate syntactic category expectations: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia. 2016; 98:4-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.08.015. View

Molinaro N, Barber H, Carreiras M . Grammatical agreement processing in reading: ERP findings and future directions. Cortex. 2011; 47(8):908-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.02.019. View

Kiefer M . Executive control over unconscious cognition: attentional sensitization of unconscious information processing. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012; 6:61. PMC: 3311241. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00061. View

Fields E, Kuperberg G . Having your cake and eating it too: Flexibility and power with mass univariate statistics for ERP data. Psychophysiology. 2019; 57(2):e13468. PMC: 7269415. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13468. View

OLDFIELD R . The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971; 9(1):97-113. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4. View

Magne C, Jordan D, Gordon R . Speech rhythm sensitivity and musical aptitude: ERPs and individual differences. Brain Lang. 2016; 153-154:13-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2016.01.001. View

Hinojosa J, Albert J, Fernandez-Folgueiras U, Santaniello G, Lopez-Bachiller C, Sebastian M . Effects of negative content on the processing of gender information: an event-related potential study. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2014; 14(4):1286-99. DOI: 10.3758/s13415-014-0291-x. View

Herbert C, Junghofer M, Kissler J . Event related potentials to emotional adjectives during reading. Psychophysiology. 2008; 45(3):487-98. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00638.x. View

10.

Holt D, Lynn S, Kuperberg G . Neurophysiological correlates of comprehending emotional meaning in context. J Cogn Neurosci. 2008; 21(11):2245-62. PMC: 3143819. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2008.21151. View

11.

Steinhauer K, Drury J . On the early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) in syntax studies. Brain Lang. 2011; 120(2):135-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.07.001. View

12.

Rothermich K, Schmidt-Kassow M, Schwartze M, Kotz S . Event-related potential responses to metric violations: rules versus meaning. Neuroreport. 2010; 21(8):580-4. DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32833a7da7. View

13.

Hauser M, Chomsky N, Fitch W . The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?. Science. 2002; 298(5598):1569-79. DOI: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1569. View

14.

Verhees M, Chwilla D, Tromp J, Vissers C . Contributions of emotional state and attention to the processing of syntactic agreement errors: evidence from P600. Front Psychol. 2015; 6:388. PMC: 4391228. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00388. View

15.

Friederici A, Kotz S . The brain basis of syntactic processes: functional imaging and lesion studies. Neuroimage. 2003; 20 Suppl 1:S8-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.09.003. View

16.

Pulvermuller F, Shtyrov Y, Hasting A, Carlyon R . Syntax as a reflex: neurophysiological evidence for early automaticity of grammatical processing. Brain Lang. 2007; 104(3):244-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2007.05.002. View

17.

Jimenez-Ortega L, Garcia-Milla M, Fondevila S, Casado P, Hernandez-Gutierrez D, Martin-Loeches M . Automaticity of higher cognitive functions: neurophysiological evidence for unconscious syntactic processing of masked words. Biol Psychol. 2014; 103:83-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.08.011. View

18.

Padron I, Fraga I, Acuna-Farina C . Processing gender agreement errors in pleasant and unpleasant words: An ERP study at the sentence level. Neurosci Lett. 2019; 714:134538. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2019.134538. View

19.

Molinaro N, Barber H, Caffarra S, Carreiras M . On the left anterior negativity (LAN): The case of morphosyntactic agreement: a reply to Tanner et al. Cortex. 2014; 66:156-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2014.06.009. View

20.

DeLong K, Quante L, Kutas M . Predictability, plausibility, and two late ERP positivities during written sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia. 2014; 61:150-62. PMC: 4124880. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.06.016. View