Supramodal Sentence Processing in the Human Brain: FMRI Evidence for the Influence of Syntactic Complexity in More Than 200 Participants

Overview

Journal Neurobiol Lang (Camb)

Specialty Neurology

Date 2023 May 22

PMID 37215341

Authors

Julia Udden

Annika Hulten

Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen

Nietzsche Lam

Karin Harbusch

Antal van den Bosch

Gerard Kempen

Karl Magnus Petersson

Peter Hagoort

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study investigated two questions. One is: To what degree is sentence processing beyond single words independent of the input modality (speech vs. reading)? The second question is: Which parts of the network recruited by both modalities is sensitive to syntactic complexity? These questions were investigated by having more than 200 participants read or listen to well-formed sentences or series of unconnected words. A largely left-hemisphere frontotemporoparietal network was found to be supramodal in nature, i.e., independent of input modality. In addition, the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) and the left posterior middle temporal gyrus (LpMTG) were most clearly associated with left-branching complexity. The left anterior temporal lobe showed the greatest sensitivity to sentences that differed in right-branching complexity. Moreover, activity in LIFG and LpMTG increased from sentence onset to end, in parallel with an increase of the left-branching complexity. While LIFG, bilateral anterior temporal lobe, posterior MTG, and left inferior parietal lobe all contribute to the supramodal unification processes, the results suggest that these regions differ in their respective contributions to syntactic complexity related processing. The consequences of these findings for neurobiological models of language processing are discussed.

Citing Articles

Connectivity of Fronto-Temporal Regions in Syntactic Structure Building During Speaking and Listening.

Giglio L, Sharoh D, Ostarek M, Hagoort P Neurobiol Lang (Camb). 2024; 5(4):922-941.

PMID: 39439740 PMC: 11495677. DOI: 10.1162/nol_a_00154.

Conversational production and comprehension: fMRI-evidence reminiscent of but deviant from the classical Broca-Wernicke model.

Arvidsson C, Torubarova E, Pereira A, Udden J Cereb Cortex. 2024; 34(3).

PMID: 38501383 PMC: 10949358. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhae073.

Diverging neural dynamics for syntactic structure building in naturalistic speaking and listening.

Giglio L, Ostarek M, Sharoh D, Hagoort P Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(11):e2310766121.

PMID: 38442171 PMC: 10945772. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2310766121.

Neural correlates of pronoun processing: An activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis.

El Ouardi L, Yeou M, Faroqi-Shah Y Brain Lang. 2023; 246:105347.

PMID: 37847932 PMC: 11305457. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2023.105347.

IDLaS-NL - A platform for running customized studies on individual differences in Dutch language skills via the Internet.

Hintz F, Shkaravska O, Dijkhuis M, van t Hoff V, Huijsmans M, van Dongen R Behav Res Methods. 2023; 56(3):2422-2436.

PMID: 37749421 PMC: 10991024. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02156-8.

References

Favier S, Huettig F . Long-term written language experience affects grammaticality judgements and usage but not priming of spoken sentences. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2021; 74(8):1378-1395. PMC: 8261784. DOI: 10.1177/17470218211005228. View

Bahlmann J, Schubotz R, Friederici A . Hierarchical artificial grammar processing engages Broca's area. Neuroimage. 2008; 42(2):525-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.249. View

Stromswold K, Caplan D, Alpert N, Rauch S . Localization of syntactic comprehension by positron emission tomography. Brain Lang. 1996; 52(3):452-73. DOI: 10.1006/brln.1996.0024. View

Tyler L, Shafto M, Randall B, Wright P, Marslen-Wilson W, Stamatakis E . Preserving syntactic processing across the adult life span: the modulation of the frontotemporal language system in the context of age-related atrophy. Cereb Cortex. 2009; 20(2):352-64. PMC: 2803734. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp105. View

Brennan J, Nir Y, Hasson U, Malach R, Heeger D, Pylkkanen L . Syntactic structure building in the anterior temporal lobe during natural story listening. Brain Lang. 2010; 120(2):163-73. PMC: 2947556. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2010.04.002. View

Nichols T, Brett M, Andersson J, Wager T, Poline J . Valid conjunction inference with the minimum statistic. Neuroimage. 2005; 25(3):653-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.005. View

Nelson M, El Karoui I, Giber K, Yang X, Cohen L, Koopman H . Neurophysiological dynamics of phrase-structure building during sentence processing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017; 114(18):E3669-E3678. PMC: 5422821. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1701590114. View

Lopopolo A, van den Bosch A, Petersson K, Willems R . Distinguishing Syntactic Operations in the Brain: Dependency and Phrase-Structure Parsing. Neurobiol Lang (Camb). 2023; 2(1):152-175. PMC: 10174354. DOI: 10.1162/nol_a_00029. View

Bozic M, Tyler L, Ives D, Randall B, Marslen-Wilson W . Bihemispheric foundations for human speech comprehension. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107(40):17439-44. PMC: 2951426. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1000531107. View

10.

Schoffelen J, Oostenveld R, Lam N, Udden J, Hulten A, Hagoort P . A 204-subject multimodal neuroimaging dataset to study language processing. Sci Data. 2019; 6(1):17. PMC: 6472396. DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0020-y. View

11.

Lambon Ralph M, Ehsan S, Baker G, Rogers T . Semantic memory is impaired in patients with unilateral anterior temporal lobe resection for temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain. 2012; 135(Pt 1):242-58. PMC: 3267985. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awr325. View

12.

Santi A, Grodzinsky Y . fMRI adaptation dissociates syntactic complexity dimensions. Neuroimage. 2010; 51(4):1285-93. PMC: 2909752. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.034. View

13.

Snijders T, Vosse T, Kempen G, van Berkum J, Petersson K, Hagoort P . Retrieval and unification of syntactic structure in sentence comprehension: an FMRI study using word-category ambiguity. Cereb Cortex. 2008; 19(7):1493-503. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhn187. View

14.

Pallier C, Devauchelle A, Dehaene S . Cortical representation of the constituent structure of sentences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(6):2522-7. PMC: 3038732. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1018711108. View

15.

Nieuwland M, van Berkum J . Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: evidence from ERPs. Brain Res. 2006; 1118(1):155-67. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.08.022. View

16.

Wilson S, Bautista A, McCarron A . Convergence of spoken and written language processing in the superior temporal sulcus. Neuroimage. 2017; 171:62-74. PMC: 5857434. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.068. View

17.

Binder J, Desai R, Graves W, Conant L . Where is the semantic system? A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cereb Cortex. 2009; 19(12):2767-96. PMC: 2774390. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp055. View

18.

Constable R, Pugh K, Berroya E, Mencl W, Westerveld M, Ni W . Sentence complexity and input modality effects in sentence comprehension: an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2004; 22(1):11-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.01.001. View

19.

Meltzer J, McArdle J, Schafer R, Braun A . Neural aspects of sentence comprehension: syntactic complexity, reversibility, and reanalysis. Cereb Cortex. 2009; 20(8):1853-64. PMC: 2901020. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp249. View

20.

Gibson E . Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition. 1998; 68(1):1-76. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00034-1. View