Cargando…

Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence

BACKGROUND: The present study examines the involvement of syntactic and semantic/conceptual processes in the comprehension of pronouns in Dutch using the technique of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) replicating and extending an earlier study in German. Dutch and German are closely related and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lamers, Monique J, Jansma, Bernadette M, Hammer, Anke, Münte, Thomas F
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2446385/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18588672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-9-55
_version_ 1782156863430721536
author Lamers, Monique J
Jansma, Bernadette M
Hammer, Anke
Münte, Thomas F
author_facet Lamers, Monique J
Jansma, Bernadette M
Hammer, Anke
Münte, Thomas F
author_sort Lamers, Monique J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The present study examines the involvement of syntactic and semantic/conceptual processes in the comprehension of pronouns in Dutch using the technique of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) replicating and extending an earlier study in German. Dutch and German are closely related and share the same logic in referring to non-diminutive and diminutive NPs (i.e. adding an affix which changes the syntactic gender into neutral). Both languages separate male (hij/er (he)) and female pronouns (zij/sie (she)), as well as a pronoun that refers to an entity of neutral gender, (het/es (it)). However, the neutral pronoun het in Dutch is not only a pronoun, it also is the article of a neutral noun. To investigate the influence of this word class ambiguity on pronoun resolution, as well as to establish the generality of the finding of the German study we manipulated syntactic and biological gender congruency between a personal pronoun and its antecedent in Dutch. RESULTS: In Dutch, sentences with the word-class (pronoun/article) ambiguous pronoun het elicited an early negative shift (150–280 ms) which continued in the time frame of the N400. For sentences with a syntactically and biologically incongruent pronoun a P600 (in absence of an N400) was obtained, which was independent of the morphological form of the referent. CONCLUSION: The neurophysiological pattern found for Dutch stimuli was clearly different from the German study, indicating that the processing of pronouns in these two languages differs. This can be explained in terms of language specific characteristics concerning the word class ambiguous neutral pronoun het. Moreover, in contrast to the findings in the German study, there was no clear effect caused by the morphological form of the referent. Additionally, in Dutch, the pronoun resolution in sentences with a non-diminutive antecedent seems to reflect processes of revision (P600 in absence of an N400), whereas for German evidence was found for clear involvement of conceptual/semantic processes as well as structure building processes (N400/P600 complex).
format Text
id pubmed-2446385
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24463852008-07-09 Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence Lamers, Monique J Jansma, Bernadette M Hammer, Anke Münte, Thomas F BMC Neurosci Research Article BACKGROUND: The present study examines the involvement of syntactic and semantic/conceptual processes in the comprehension of pronouns in Dutch using the technique of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) replicating and extending an earlier study in German. Dutch and German are closely related and share the same logic in referring to non-diminutive and diminutive NPs (i.e. adding an affix which changes the syntactic gender into neutral). Both languages separate male (hij/er (he)) and female pronouns (zij/sie (she)), as well as a pronoun that refers to an entity of neutral gender, (het/es (it)). However, the neutral pronoun het in Dutch is not only a pronoun, it also is the article of a neutral noun. To investigate the influence of this word class ambiguity on pronoun resolution, as well as to establish the generality of the finding of the German study we manipulated syntactic and biological gender congruency between a personal pronoun and its antecedent in Dutch. RESULTS: In Dutch, sentences with the word-class (pronoun/article) ambiguous pronoun het elicited an early negative shift (150–280 ms) which continued in the time frame of the N400. For sentences with a syntactically and biologically incongruent pronoun a P600 (in absence of an N400) was obtained, which was independent of the morphological form of the referent. CONCLUSION: The neurophysiological pattern found for Dutch stimuli was clearly different from the German study, indicating that the processing of pronouns in these two languages differs. This can be explained in terms of language specific characteristics concerning the word class ambiguous neutral pronoun het. Moreover, in contrast to the findings in the German study, there was no clear effect caused by the morphological form of the referent. Additionally, in Dutch, the pronoun resolution in sentences with a non-diminutive antecedent seems to reflect processes of revision (P600 in absence of an N400), whereas for German evidence was found for clear involvement of conceptual/semantic processes as well as structure building processes (N400/P600 complex). BioMed Central 2008-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC2446385/ /pubmed/18588672 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-9-55 Text en Copyright © 2008 Lamers et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lamers, Monique J
Jansma, Bernadette M
Hammer, Anke
Münte, Thomas F
Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title_full Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title_fullStr Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title_full_unstemmed Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title_short Differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
title_sort differences in the processing of anaphoric reference between closely related languages: neurophysiological evidence
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2446385/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18588672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-9-55
work_keys_str_mv AT lamersmoniquej differencesintheprocessingofanaphoricreferencebetweencloselyrelatedlanguagesneurophysiologicalevidence
AT jansmabernadettem differencesintheprocessingofanaphoricreferencebetweencloselyrelatedlanguagesneurophysiologicalevidence
AT hammeranke differencesintheprocessingofanaphoricreferencebetweencloselyrelatedlanguagesneurophysiologicalevidence
AT muntethomasf differencesintheprocessingofanaphoricreferencebetweencloselyrelatedlanguagesneurophysiologicalevidence