The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dissociation of Brain Activity Related to Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Language
Abstract
In psycholinguistic research, there has been considerable interest in understanding the interactions of difFerent types of linguistic information during language processing. For example, does syntactic information interact with semantic or pragmatic information at an early stage of language processing, or only at later stages in order to resolve ambiguities of language? Developing reliable measures of language processes such as syntax and semantics is important to address many of these theoretical issues in psycholinguistics. In the present study, event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded from healthy young subjects while they read pairs of words presented one word at a time. The ERPs for the second word of each pair were compared as a function of whether the preceding word was or was not (1) semantically related (i.e., synonyms; “semantic condition”) or (2) grammatically correct (“syntactic condition”). In the semantic condition the ERPs obtained to words preceded by nonsemantically related words elicited an N400 component that was maximal over centroparietal scalp regions. In contrast, in the syntactic condition the ERPs obtained to words preceded by grammatically incorrect articles or pronouns yielded a negativity with a later onset, and a frontopolar, left hemisphere scalp maximum. This replicates our previous findings of a syntactic negativity in a word pair design that was performed in the German language. Further, the present data provide scalp distributional information, which suggests that the syntactic negativity represents brain processes that are dissociable from the centroparietal N400 component. Thus, these findings provide strong evidence for a separate negative polarity ERP component that indexes syntactic aspects of language processing.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty
Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/016909600386084 · Cited by 993
Dapretto (1999) · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80855-7 · Cited by 655
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., & Cappa, S. F. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.007 · Cited by 594
Mecklinger, A., Schriefers, H., Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1995) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03197249 · Cited by 317
An ERP study of second language learning after childhood: effects of proficiency.
Ojima, S., Nakata, H., & Kakigi, R. (2005) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/0898929055002436 · Cited by 289
Metadata
- Authors
- Münte, T. F., Heinze, H.-J., & Mangun, G. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 1993
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 335-344
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2166496706
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Dissociation of Brain Activity Related to Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Language. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.3.335
- The paper
- Münte, T. F., Heinze, H.-J., & Mangun, G. R. (1993). Dissociation of Brain Activity Related to Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.3.335
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.