Dissociations of lexical function: Semantics, syntax, and morphology

Ostrin, Ruth K.; Tyler, Lorraine K.

doi:10.1080/02643299508252002

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Martin (1995), and exemplified in some of the studies reported here, dramatic differences in language processing abilities across patients have been documented. Consider, for example, the dissociations between syntactic and semantic processing demonstrated in the case studies described earlier (e.g., Breedin & Saffran, 1999;Ostrin & Tyler, 1995). It is perhaps not too surprising that, in general, patients would show the same pattern of difficulty across sentence types as is shown by normal control subjects.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Poor performance on overt judgments of grammaticality might plausibly be attributed to poor metalinguistic abilities, and thus would not necessarily constitute evidence for a disruption of syntactic knowledge. A dissociation between syntax and semantics using online test performance was obtained by Ostrin and Tyler (1995) for a patient JG, who had a left temporo-parietal lesion. JG showed a marked disruption of all syntactic abilities together with relatively preserved lexical-semantic abilities.…”

Section: Case Study Evidence For the Independence Of Semantic And Synmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The neuropsychology of sentence processing: Where do we stand?

Martin

2006

Cognitive Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the early 1980s, sentence comprehension deficits were attributed to a loss of syntactic knowledge in agrammatic Broca's aphasics and to a short-term memory deficit in conduction aphasics. Findings in the remainder of the decade called both of these claims into question and presented general difficulties for the group study approach. Results from case studies support the representational independence of syntactic and semantic information but the interaction of these knowledge sources during processing. Working memory is still considered to provide critical constraints on sentence comprehension, but the capacity involved appears to be largely independent of the phonological storage involved in word list recall. Current computational approaches to sentence comprehension provide the means of accounting for the interaction of multiple sources of information and working memory requirements, but have yet to be tested against neuropsychological findings.

show abstract

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Case Study Evidence For the Independence Of Semantic And Synmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neuropsychology of sentence processing: Where do we stand?

Martin

2006

Cognitive Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In keeping with such an interpretation, Besche et al found evidence of abnormal semantic processing with the preservation of syntactic processing in schizophrenic patients with thought disorders (see also Breedin & Saffran, 1999). Thus, data has begun to emerge from the neuropsychological literature that syntactic processing and semantic processing are distinct processes (see, also, Hodges, Patterson, & Tyler, 1994;Ostrin & Tyler, 1995;and see Martin, 2001, for a review).…”

mentioning

confidence: 82%

Effects of syntactic category assignment on lexical ambiguity resolution in reading: An eye movement analysis

Folk

Morris

2003

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Readers' eye movements were monitored as they read sentences containing lexically ambiguous words whose meanings share a single syntactic category (e.g., calf), lexically ambiguous words whose meanings belong to different syntactic categories (e.g., duck), or unambiguous control words. Information provided prior to the target always unambiguously specified the context-appropriate syntactic-category assignment for the target. Fixation times were longer on ambiguous words whose meanings share a single syntactic category than on controls, both when prior context was semantically consistent with the subordinate interpretation of a biased ambiguous word (Experiment 1) and when prior context was semantically neutral as to the intended interpretation of a balanced ambiguous word (Experiment 2). These ambiguity effects, which resulted from differences in difficulty with meaning resolution, were not found when the ambiguity crossed syntactic categories. These data indicate that, in the absence of syntactic ambiguity, syntactic-category information mediates the semantic-resolution process.

show abstract

“…It is unclear as to whether lexical semantics alone can support thematic role assignment in agrammatism (cf. Ostrin & Tyler, 1995). It is not clear why lexical semantics support sentence comprehension in who and not in which questions.…”

Section: Patterns and Accounts Of Comprehension Of Wh-questionsmentioning

confidence: 95%