Cited by 170Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismCategorization, perception, and languageSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

The boundaries of language and thought in deductive inference

Open access
Monti, Martin M., Parsons, Lawrence M., Osherson, Daniel N.·2009·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Is human thought fully embedded in language, or do some forms of thought operate independently? To directly address this issue, we focus on inference-making, a central feature of human cognition. In a 3T fMRI study we compare logical inferences relying on sentential connectives (e.g., not, or, if … then) to linguistic inferences based on syntactic transformation of sentences involving ditransitive verbs (e.g., give, say, take). When contrasted with matched grammaticality judgments, logic inference alone recruited “core” regions of deduction [Brodmann area (BA) 10p and 8m], whereas linguistic inference alone recruited perisylvian regions of linguistic competence, among others (BA 21, 22, 37, 39, 44, and 45 and caudate). In addition, the two inferences commonly recruited a set of general “support” areas in frontoparietal cortex (BA 6, 7, 8, 40, and 47). The results indicate that logical inference is not embedded in natural language and confirm the relative modularity of linguistic processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0902422106

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables.

    “Although all of the tasks in the language/math/logic localizer contain language stimuli, previous studies have shown that sentences with content words lead to larger responses in the perisylvian fronto-temporal language network than spoken equations or logical statements with variables (Kanjlia et al., 2016; Monti et al., 2009; Monti et al., 2012).”
  • Previous studies have found that responses to language, logic and math when compared to each other were similar to what was observed for each domain relative to independent control conditions.

    “Furthermore, previous studies have found that responses to language, logic and math when compared to each other were similar to what was observed for each domain relative to independent control conditions (e.g. sentences relative to lists of non-words for language, and easy vs. hard logic problems; Kanjlia et al., 2016; Monti et al., 2009, Monti et al., 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M., & Osherson, D. N.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Princeton University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2009-07-28
Volume
106
Issue
30
Pages
12554-12559
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2110980037
Cited by
170
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 14
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Keywords
language and thought, deductive reasoning, logical inference, linguistic inference, syntactic transformation, ditransitive verbs, modularity of language, frontoparietal cortex, perisylvian cortex, Brodmann area 10, caudate nucleus, grammaticality judgment, language of thought
MeSH terms
Cognition, Female, Humans, Language, Logic, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Psycholinguistics, Psychomotor Performance, Semantics, Young Adult

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