Neural correlates of noncanonical syntactic processing revealed by a picture‐sentence matching task

Abstract

It remains controversial whether the left inferior frontal gyrus subserves syntactic processing or short-term memory demands. Here we devised a novel picture-sentence matching task involving Japanese sentences with different structures to clearly contrast syntactic reanalysis processes. Using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), activations under three main conditions were directly compared: a canonical/subject-initial active sentence (AS), a noncanonical/subject-initial passive sentence (PS), and a noncanonical/object-initial scrambled sentence (SS). We found that activation in the dorsal region of the left inferior frontal gyrus (dF3t) was enhanced more by the noncanonical processing under the PS and SS conditions than by the canonical processing under the AS condition, and this enhancement was independent of domain-general factors, such as general memory demands and task difficulty. Moreover, the left posterior superior/middle temporal gyrus (pSTG/ MTG) showed more enhanced responses to object-initial sentences under the SS condition than to subject-initial sentences under the AS and PS conditions, which were not significantly affected by task difficulty. Furthermore, activation in the left lateral premotor cortex (LPMC) increased under the AS, PS, and SS conditions, in that order. It is possible that task difficulty affects the left LPMC, but the three distinct activations patterns suggest that these frontal and temporal regions work in concert to process syntactic structures, with their respective contributions dynamically regulated by linguistic requirements. Hum Brain Mapp 29: [1015][1016][1017][1018][1019][1020][1021][1022][1023][1024][1025][1026][1027] 2008. V V C 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Gray or White? – The Contribution of Gray Matter in a Glioma to Language Deficits

“…However, there was no significant difference among the normal controls' error rates under the main conditions (p > 0.7). The resuls from the normal controls is consistent with our previous results (Kinno et al 2008). These significant errors were observed in spite of the patient's normal verbal and nonverbal IQs (Table 1; range: 86-113 within 1 SD of ± 15; one sample t-test for the difference from 100: verbal, t (20) =1.2, p = 0.25 and nonverbal, t (20) = 0.51, p = 0.62).…”

“…In our fMRI study with the same paradigm, we have reported that a localized activation in the left posterior superior / middle temporal gyrus (L. pSTG/MTG) was also enhanced for SS when compared with AS and PS (Kinno et al, 2008). Other fMRI studies have also reported that this region was activated by contrasting object-initial vs. subject-initial sentences (Bornkessel et al, 2005), as well as by contrasting sentences with syntactic / semantic anomaly and normal sentences (Suzuki & Sakai, 2003).…”

“…It was therefore mandatory to analyze the three main conditions and SC separately. Moreover, the analyses also match with our fMRI study (Kinno et al, 2008), in which SC was used as a separate control. In the sections 3.1-3.3, we focus on the main conditions of AS, PS, and SS, and the results of SC are presented in the section 3.4.…”

“…For SC, symbol-mismatched and action-mismatched sentences were presented equally often, requiring the sentences to be read completely in order for the participants to arrive at a correct judgment. In addition to the picture-sentence matching task, we used a visual control task (VC), which required neither word nor sentence processing, as a baseline condition (Kinno et al, 2008). For VC, the same sets of pictures used in the picture-sentence matching task were presented, together with a string of jumbled letters taken from a single sentence in which the symbols (○, □, or ∆) and "kanji" appeared at the same positions in the string as in the picturesentence matching task.…”

Eye Gaze Behavior at Turn Transition: How Aphasic Patients Process Speakers' Turns during Video Observation

“…Moreover, activity in the left superior temporal gyrus seems to be modulated by syntactic complexity (Newman, Ikuta, & Burns, 2010;Friederici, Makuuchi, & Bahlmann, 2009;Kinno, Kawamura, Shioda, & Sakai, 2008;Cooke et al, 2002;Just et al, 1996) and word frequency (Graves et al, 2008). However, this area seems to be involved not only in language processing but also in audiovisual integration (Stevenson & James, 2009;Beauchamp, Lee, Argall, & Martin, 2004;Calvert, Campbell, & Brammer, 2000) and face processing (Haxby, Petit, Ungerleider, & Courtney, 2000).…”