Processing lexical semantic and syntactic information in first and second language: fMRI evidence from German and Russian - PubMed (original) (raw)

Processing lexical semantic and syntactic information in first and second language: fMRI evidence from German and Russian

Shirley-Ann Rüschemeyer et al. Hum Brain Mapp. 2005 Jun.

Abstract

We introduce two experiments that explored syntactic and semantic processing of spoken sentences by native and non-native speakers. In the first experiment, the neural substrates corresponding to detection of syntactic and semantic violations were determined in native speakers of two typologically different languages using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The results show that the underlying neural response of participants to stimuli across different native languages is quite similar. In the second experiment, we investigated how non-native speakers of a language process the same stimuli presented in the first experiment. First, the results show a more similar pattern of increased activation between native and non-native speakers in response to semantic violations than to syntactic violations. Second, the non-native speakers were observed to employ specific portions of the frontotemporal language network differently from those employed by native speakers. These regions included the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), superior temporal gyrus (STG), and subcortical structures of the basal ganglia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1

Time‐courses (showing percent signal change over time), direct contrast images (showing significance levels over each group of participants), and penetrance maps (showing the number of participants with significant activation increase in each voxel) for native speakers of German and Russian. Values in the direct contrast images indicated by the color bar indicate statistical significance. Values in the penetrance maps refer to numbers of individuals. The upper panel depicts those areas showing increased levels of activation for syntactically incorrect sentences (SYN) in comparison to correct sentences (COR). Increased activation levels correlating with syntactic violations are seen in left anterior to mid‐superior temporal gyrus (STG). The lower panel depicts those areas showing increased levels of activation for semantically incorrect sentences (SEM) in comparison to correct sentences (COR). Increased activation correlating with semantic violations is seen in left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG; BA45/47). Percent signal change in STG is greater than in IFG.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Experiment 1: Mean percent signal change and standard error for native speakers of German and Russian in each of the ROIs discussed. L STG, left superior temporal gyrus; L IFG, left inferior frontal gyrus.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Direct contrast maps of native vs. non‐native speakers of German listening to correct (COR), semantically anomalous (SEM), and syntactically anomalous (SYN) sentences. Left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG; A) shows increased activation for non‐native speakers of German in all conditions (see time‐courses). Due to increased activation of IFG in the SEM condition in native speakers as well, no significant difference is observed in IFG in the direct contrast between native and non‐native speakers in the final panel. Bilateral caudate nucleus (B) is also activated significantly more by non‐native speakers in all conditions. Left superior temporal gyrus (STG; C) shows greater levels of activation for native speakers than for non‐native speakers.

Figure 4

Figure 4

Experiment 2: Mean percent signal change and standard error for native (L1) and non‐native (L2) speakers of German in each of the ROIs discussed: inferior frontal gyrus (IFG); left caudate nucleus (LCN); right caudate nucleus (RCN); left superior temporal gyrus (LSTG); and right superior temporal gyrus (RSTG).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abutalebi J, Cappa S, Perani D (2001): The bilingual brain as revealed by functional neuroimaging. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 4: 179–190.
    1. Angrilli A, Penolazzi B, Vespignani F, De Vincenzi M, Job R, Ciccarelli L, Palomba D, Stegagno L (2002): Cortical brain responses to semantic incongruity and syntactic violation in Italian language: an event‐related potentials study. Neurosci Lett 322: 5–8. - PubMed
    1. Ben‐Shachar M, Hendler T, Kahn I, Ben‐Bashar D, Grodzinsky Y (2003): The neural reality of syntactic transformations: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Psychol Sci 14: 433–440. - PubMed
    1. Binder J, Frost J, Hammeke T, Cox R, Rao S, Prieto T (1997): Human brain language areas identified by functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci 17: 353–362. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Binder J, Frost J, Hammeke T, Bellgowan P, Springer J, Kaufman J, Possing E (2000): Human temporal lobe activation by speech and nonspeech sounds. Cereb Cortex 10: 512–528. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources