» Articles » PMID: 37023480

Non-literal Language Processing is Jointly Supported by the Language and Theory of Mind Networks: Evidence from a Novel Meta-analytic FMRI Approach

Overview
Journal Cortex
Date 2023 Apr 6
PMID 37023480
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Going beyond the literal meaning of language is key to communicative success. However, the mechanisms that support non-literal inferences remain debated. Using a novel meta-analytic approach, we evaluate the contribution of linguistic, social-cognitive, and executive mechanisms to non-literal interpretation. We identified 74 fMRI experiments (n = 1,430 participants) from 2001 to 2021 that contrasted non-literal language comprehension with a literal control condition, spanning ten phenomena (e.g., metaphor, irony, indirect speech). Applying the activation likelihood estimation approach to the 825 activation peaks yielded six left-lateralized clusters. We then evaluated the locations of both the individual-study peaks and the clusters against probabilistic functional atlases (cf. anatomical locations, as is typically done) for three candidate brain networks-the language-selective network (Fedorenko, Behr, & Kanwisher, 2011), which supports language processing, the Theory of Mind (ToM) network (Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003), which supports social inferences, and the domain-general Multiple-Demand (MD) network (Duncan, 2010), which supports executive control. These atlases were created by overlaying individual activation maps of participants who performed robust and extensively validated 'localizer' tasks that selectively target each network in question (n = 806 for language; n = 198 for ToM; n = 691 for MD). We found that both the individual-study peaks and the ALE clusters fell primarily within the language network and the ToM network. These results suggest that non-literal processing is supported by both i) mechanisms that process literal linguistic meaning, and ii) mechanisms that support general social inference. They thus undermine a strong divide between literal and non-literal aspects of language and challenge the claim that non-literal processing requires additional executive resources.

Citing Articles

Examining Specific Theory-of-Mind Aspects in Amnestic and Non-Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: Their Relationships with Sleep Duration and Cognitive Planning.

Batzikosta A, Moraitou D, Steiropoulos P, Papantoniou G, Kougioumtzis G, Katsouri I Brain Sci. 2025; 15(1).

PMID: 39851425 PMC: 11763451. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci15010057.


The language network as a natural kind within the broader landscape of the human brain.

Fedorenko E, Ivanova A, Regev T Nat Rev Neurosci. 2024; 25(5):289-312.

PMID: 38609551 DOI: 10.1038/s41583-024-00802-4.


Dissociating language and thought in large language models.

Mahowald K, Ivanova A, Blank I, Kanwisher N, Tenenbaum J, Fedorenko E Trends Cogn Sci. 2024; 28(6):517-540.

PMID: 38508911 PMC: 11416727. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.011.


Intracranial recordings reveal high-frequency activity in the human temporal-parietal cortex supporting non-literal language processing.

Soni S, Overton J, Kam J, Pexman P, Prabhu A, Garza N Front Neurosci. 2024; 17:1304031.

PMID: 38260011 PMC: 10800947. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1304031.


Cognitive Neuroscience Perspectives on Language Acquisition and Processing.

Prystauka Y, DeLuca V, Luque A, Voits T, Rothman J Brain Sci. 2023; 13(12).

PMID: 38137061 PMC: 10741862. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13121613.


References
1.
Brownell H, Potter H, Bihrle A, Gardner H . Inference deficits in right brain-damaged patients. Brain Lang. 1986; 27(2):310-21. DOI: 10.1016/0093-934x(86)90022-2. View

2.
Lisofsky N, Kazzer P, Heekeren H, Prehn K . Investigating socio-cognitive processes in deception: a quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Neuropsychologia. 2014; 61:113-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.06.001. View

3.
Channon S, Watts M . Pragmatic language interpretation after closed head injury: relationship to executive functioning. Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2006; 8(4):243-60. DOI: 10.1080/135468000344000002. View

4.
Ivanova A, Srikant S, Sueoka Y, Kean H, Dhamala R, OReilly U . Comprehension of computer code relies primarily on domain-general executive brain regions. Elife. 2020; 9. PMC: 7738192. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.58906. View

5.
Brett M, Johnsrude I, Owen A . The problem of functional localization in the human brain. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002; 3(3):243-9. DOI: 10.1038/nrn756. View