There is no opposition between Formal and Cognitive Semantics

Language and Cognitive Processes

Hagoort

2011

202

164

At least three cognitive brain components are necessary in order for us to be able to produce and comprehend language: a Memory repository for the lexicon, a Unification buffer where lexical information is combined into novel structures, and a Control apparatus presiding over executive function in language. Here we describe the brain networks that support Memory and Unification in semantics. A dynamic account of their interactions is presented, in which a balance between the two components is sought at each word-processing step. We use the theory to provide an explanation of the N400 effect

Section: Unification the Formal Waymentioning

confidence: 99%

The balance between memory and unification in semantics: A dynamic account of the N400

Language and Cognitive Processes

Hagoort

2011

202

164

“…That is, semantic representations for verbs such as Initiates(start, a, t) and the unification operation itself find their motivation in the evolutionary link between the semantics of tense, aspect, and event structure on the one hand, and planning on the other (Steedman, 2002). The Event Calculus is, in fact, a planning formalism, which has found successful applications to the semantics of tense, aspect, and event structure (Hamm, Kamp, & van Lambalgen, 2006;van Lambalgen & Hamm, 2004). In brief, three arguments justify our preference for unification over type-shifting as a framework in which to try to make sense of experimental data: A link with the notions of unification and binding in neuroscience, cognitive plausibility through a connection to planning and an ontology that does not involve a hierarchy of types, and success in modeling linguistic phenomena.…”

Section: Enriched Composition Vs Simple Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coercion and Compositionality

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Choma

Lambalgen

et al. 2010

Abstract■ Research in psycholinguistics and in the cognitive neuroscience of language has suggested that semantic and syntactic processing are associated with different neurophysiologic correlates, such as the N400 and the P600 in the ERPs. However, only a handful of studies have investigated the neural basis of the syntax-semantics interface, and even fewer experiments have dealt with the cases in which semantic composition can proceed independently of the syntax. Here we looked into one such casecomplement coercion-using ERPs. We compared sentences such as, "The journalist wrote the article" with "The journalist began the article." The second sentence seems to involve a silent semantic element, which is expressed in the first sentence by the head of the verb phrase (VP) "wrote the article." The second type of construction may therefore require the reader to infer or recover from memory a richer event sense of the VP "began the article," such as began writing the article, and to integrate that into a semantic representation of the sentence. This operation is referred to as "complement coercion." Consistently with earlier reading time, eye tracking, and MEG studies, we found traces of such additional computations in the ERPs: Coercion gives rise to a long-lasting negative shift, which differs at least in duration from a standard N400 effect. Issues regarding the nature of the computation involved are discussed in the light of a neurocognitive model of language processing and a formal semantic analysis of coercion. ■

“…The fluent f in (3) and (4) has to be unified with material from the preceding discourse context; for instance, a temporal adverb. Last Sunday can be analyzed as follows (Hamm, Kamp, & van Lambalgen, 2006). To begin with, the time line is partitioned in seven segments of equal length, corresponding to the days of the week: fSu , fMo , … , fSa .…”

Section: A Semantic Analysis Of Tense and Temporal Adverbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing Temporal Constraints: An ERP Study

2008

Language Learning

This article investigates how linguistic expressions of time-in particular, temporal adverbs and verb tense morphemes-are used to establish temporal reference at the level of brain physiology. First, a formal semantic analysis of tense and temporal adverbs is outlined. It is argued that computing temporal reference amounts to solving a constraint satisfaction problem. Next, the results of an event-related potential (ERP) study are presented, which suggest that violations of verb tense ("Last Sunday Vincent paints the window frames of his country house.") evoke larger left-anterior negativities (LANs) compared to sentences in which verb tense is correct. The semantic analysis is finally combined with a computational, unification-based model of parsing to provide a functional account of the ERP data.