Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Segregating Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Processing in the Human Brain: an fMRI Investigation of Different Word Types

Open access
Friederici, A. D., Opitz, B., von Cramon, D. Y.·2000·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

The processing of single words that varied in their semantic (concrete/abstract word) and syntactic (content/function word) status was investigated under different task demands (semantic/ syntactic task) in an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment. Task demands to a large degree determined which subparts of the neuronal network supporting word processing were activated. Semantic task demands selectively activated the left pars triangularis of the inferior frontal gyrus (BA 45) and the posterior part of the left middle/superior temporal gyrus (BA 21/22/37). In contrast, syntactic processing requirements led to an increased activation in the inferior tip of the left frontal operculum (BA 44) and the cortex lining the junction of the inferior frontal and inferior precentral sulcus (BA 44/6). Moreover, for these latter areas a word class by concreteness interaction was observed when a syntactic judgement was required. This interaction can be interpreted as a prototypicality effect: non-prototypical members of a word class, i.e. concrete function words and abstract content words, showed a larger activation than prototypical members, i.e. abstract function words and concrete content words. The combined data suggest that the activation pattern underlying word processing is predicted neither by syntactic class nor semantic concreteness but, rather, by task demands focusing either on semantic or syntactic aspects. Thus, our findings that semantic and syntactic aspects of processing are both functionally distinct and involve different subparts of the neuronal network underlying word processing support a domain-specific organization of the language system.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cercor/10.7.698

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 317

Metadata

Authors
Friederici, A. D., Opitz, B., & von Cramon, D. Y.
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2000-07-01
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
698-705
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2137660908
Cited by
317
References
3
FWCI
8.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Segregating Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Processing in the Human Brain: an fMRI Investigation of Different Word Types. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/cercor/10.7.698
The paper
Friederici, A. D., Opitz, B., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2000). Segregating Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Processing in the Human Brain: an fMRI Investigation of Different Word Types. Cerebral Cortex. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/10.7.698

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.