Cited by 182Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationLanguage Development and Disorders

Brain embodiment of syntax and grammar: Discrete combinatorial mechanisms spelt out in neuronal circuits

Pulvermüller, Friedemann·2010·Brain and Language

Abstract

Neuroscience has greatly improved our understanding of the brain basis of abstract lexical and semantic processes. The neuronal devices underlying words and concepts are distributed neuronal assemblies reaching into sensory and motor systems of the cortex and, at the cognitive level, information binding in such widely dispersed circuits is mirrored by the sensorimotor grounding of form and meaning of symbols. Recent years have seen the emergence of evidence for similar brain embodiment of syntax. Neurophysiological studies have accumulated support for the linguistic notion of abstract combinatorial rules manifest as functionally discrete neuronal assemblies. Concepts immanent to the theory of abstract automata could be grounded in observations from modern neuroscience, so that it became possible to model abstract pushdown storage - which is critical for building linguistic tree structure representations - as ordered dynamics of memory circuits in the brain. At the same time, neurocomputational research showed how sequence detectors already known from animal brains can be neuronally linked so that they merge into larger functionally discrete units, thereby underpinning abstract rule representations that syntactically bind lexicosemantic classes of morphemes and words into larger meaningful constituents. Specific predictions of brain-based grammar models could be confirmed by neurophysiological and brain imaging experiments using MEG, EEG and fMRI. Neuroscience and neurocomputa…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.08.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The plural suffix -s and the -'s clitic marking the genitive case are important because they encode grammatical categories, are syntactically relevant, and are fully productive in that they can be attached regularly to any word of the appropriate class.

    “In summary, I argue that the plural suffix -s and the -’s clitic marking the genitive case are important because they encode grammatical categories, are syntactically relevant and are fully productive in that they can be attached regularly to any word of the appropriate class [47] (see also [28]).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 182 · Cited by 182

Authors
Pulvermüller, F.
Venue
Brain and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
112
Issue
3
Pages
167-179
ISSN
0093-934X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019455361
Cited by
182
References
182
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Language (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
syntax, grammar, cell assemblies, pushdown automata, memory circuits, sensorimotor grounding, abstract machines, tree structure representation, neurocomputational model
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Biological Evolution, Humans, Linguistics, Mental Processes, Neural Pathways

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review