Publications

Displaying 601 - 619 of 619
  • Weterman, M. A. J., Wilbrink, M. J. M., Janssen, I. M., Janssen, H. A. P., Berg, E. v. d., Fisher, S. E., Craig, I., & Geurts van Kessel, A. H. M. (1996). Molecular cloning of the papillary renal cell carcinoma-associated translocation (X;1)(p11;q21) breakpoint. Cytogenetic and genome research, 75(1), 2-6. doi:10.1159/000134444.

    Abstract

    A combination of Southern blot analysis on a panel of tumor-derived somatic cell hybrids and fluorescence in situ hybridization techniques was used to map YACs, cosmids and DNA markers from the Xp11.2 region relative to the X chromosome breakpoint of the renal cell carcinoma-associated t(X;1)(p11;q21). The position of the breakpoint could be determined as follows: Xcen-OATL2-DXS146-DXS255-SYP-t(X;1)-TFE 3-OATL1-Xpter. Fluorescence in situ hybridization experiments using TFE3-containing YACs and cosmids revealed split signals indicating that the corresponding DNA inserts span the breakpoint region. Subsequent Southern blot analysis showed that a 2.3-kb EcoRI fragment which is present in all TFE3 cosmids identified, hybridizes to aberrant restriction fragments in three independent t(X;1)-positive renal cell carcinoma DNAs. The breakpoints in these tumors are not the same, but map within a region of approximately 6.5 kb. Through preparative gel electrophoresis an (X;1) chimaeric 4.4-kb EcoRI fragment could be isolated which encompasses the breakpoint region present on der(X). Preliminary characterization of this fragment revealed the presence of a 150-bp region with a strong homology to the 5' end of the mouse TFE3 cDNA in the X-chromosome part, and a 48-bp segment in the chromosome 1-derived part identical to the 5' end of a known EST (accession number R93849). These observations suggest that a fusion gene is formed between the two corresponding genes in t(X;1)(p11;q21)-positive papillary renal cell carcinomas.
  • Widlok, T. (2004). Ethnography in language Documentation. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(3), 4-6.
  • Willems, R. M., Toni, I., Hagoort, P., & Casasanto, D. (2009). Body-specific motor imagery of hand actions: Neural evidence from right- and left-handers. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3: 39, pp. 39. doi:10.3389/neuro.09.039.2009.

    Abstract

    If motor imagery uses neural structures involved in action execution, then the neural correlates of imagining an action should differ between individuals who tend to execute the action differently. Here we report fMRI data showing that motor imagery is influenced by the way people habitually perform motor actions with their particular bodies; that is, motor imagery is ‘body-specific’ (Casasanto, 2009). During mental imagery for complex hand actions, activation of cortical areas involved in motor planning and execution was left-lateralized in right-handers but right-lateralized in left-handers. We conclude that motor imagery involves the generation of an action plan that is grounded in the participant’s motor habits, not just an abstract representation at the level of the action’s goal. People with different patterns of motor experience form correspondingly different neurocognitive representations of imagined actions.
  • Willems, R. M., & Hagoort, P. (2009). Broca's region: Battles are not won by ignoring half of the facts. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(3), 101. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.12.001.
  • Willems, R. M., Ozyurek, A., & Hagoort, P. (2009). Differential roles for left inferior frontal and superior temporal cortex in multimodal integration of action and language. Neuroimage, 47, 1992-2004. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.066.

    Abstract

    Several studies indicate that both posterior superior temporal sulcus/middle temporal gyrus (pSTS/MTG) and left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) are involved in integrating information from different modalities. Here we investigated the respective roles of these two areas in integration of action and language information. We exploited the fact that the semantic relationship between language and different forms of action (i.e. co-speech gestures and pantomimes) is radically different. Speech and co-speech gestures are always produced together, and gestures are not unambiguously understood without speech. On the contrary, pantomimes are not necessarily produced together with speech and can be easily understood without speech. We presented speech together with these two types of communicative hand actions in matching or mismatching combinations to manipulate semantic integration load. Left and right pSTS/MTG were only involved in semantic integration of speech and pantomimes. Left IFG on the other hand was involved in integration of speech and co-speech gestures as well as of speech and pantomimes. Effective connectivity analyses showed that depending upon the semantic relationship between language and action, LIFG modulates activation levels in left pSTS.

    This suggests that integration in pSTS/MTG involves the matching of two input streams for which there is a relatively stable common object representation, whereas integration in LIFG is better characterized as the on-line construction of a new and unified representation of the input streams. In conclusion, pSTS/MTG and LIFG are differentially involved in multimodal integration, crucially depending upon the semantic relationship between the input streams.

    Additional information

    Supplementary table S1
  • Willems, R. M., & Hagoort, P. (2009). Hand preference influences neural correlates of action observation. Brain Research, 1269, 90-104. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2009.02.057.

    Abstract

    It has been argued that we map observed actions onto our own motor system. Here we added to this issue by investigating whether hand preference influences the neural correlates of action observation of simple, essentially meaningless hand actions. Such an influence would argue for an intricate neural coupling between action production and action observation, which goes beyond effects of motor repertoire or explicit motor training, as has been suggested before. Indeed, parts of the human motor system exhibited a close coupling between action production and action observation. Ventral premotor and inferior and superior parietal cortices showed differential activation for left- and right-handers that was similar during action production as well as during action observation. This suggests that mapping observed actions onto the observer's own motor system is a core feature of action observation - at least for actions that do not have a clear goal or meaning. Basic differences in the way we act upon the world are not only reflected in neural correlates of action production, but can also influence the brain basis of action observation.
  • Wittenburg, P., Skiba, R., & Trilsbeek, P. (2004). Technology and Tools for Language Documentation. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(4), 3-4.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). Training Course in Lithuania. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(2), 6-6.
  • Wittenburg, P., Dirksmeyer, R., Brugman, H., & Klaas, G. (2004). Digital formats for images, audio and video. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(1), 3-6.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). International Expert Meeting on Access Management for Distributed Language Archives. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(3), 12-12.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). Final review of INTERA. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(4), 11-12.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). LinguaPax Forum on Language Diversity, Sustainability, and Peace. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(3), 13-13.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). LREC conference 2004. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(3), 12-13.
  • Wittenburg, P. (2004). News from the Archive of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Language Archive Newsletter, 1(4), 12-12.
  • Wood, N. (2009). Field recording for dummies. In A. Majid (Ed.), Field manual volume 12 (pp. V). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
  • Zeshan, U. (2004). Interrogative constructions in sign languages - Cross-linguistic perspectives. Language, 80(1), 7-39.

    Abstract

    This article reports on results from a broad crosslinguistic study based on data from thirty-five signed languages around the world. The study is the first of its kind, and the typological generalizations presented here cover the domain of interrogative structures as they appear across a wide range of geographically and genetically distinct signed languages. Manual and nonmanual ways of marking basic types of questions in signed languages are investigated. As a result, it becomes clear that the range of crosslinguistic variation is extensive for some subparameters, such as the structure of question-word paradigms, while other parameters, such as the use of nonmanual expressions in questions, show more similarities across signed languages. Finally, it is instructive to compare the findings from signed language typology to relevant data from spoken languages at a more abstract, crossmodality level.
  • Zeshan, U. (2004). Hand, head and face - negative constructions in sign languages. Linguistic Typology, 8(1), 1-58. doi:10.1515/lity.2004.003.

    Abstract

    This article presents a typology of negative constructions across a substantial number of sign languages from around the globe. After situating the topic within the wider context of linguistic typology, the main negation strategies found across sign languages are described. Nonmanual negation includes the use of head movements and facial expressions for negation and is of great importance in sign languages as well as particularly interesting from a typological point of view. As far as manual signs are concerned, independent negative particles represent the dominant strategy, but there are also instances of irregular negation in most sign languages. Irregular negatives may take the form of suppletion, cliticisation, affixing, or internal modification of a sign. The results of the study lead to interesting generalisations about similarities and differences between negatives in signed and spoken languages.
  • Zwitserlood, I. (2009). Het Corpus NGT. Levende Talen Magazine, 6, 44-45.

    Abstract

    The Corpus NGT
  • Zwitserlood, I. (2009). Het Corpus NGT en de dagelijkse lespraktijk (1). Levende Talen Magazine, 8, 40-41.

Share this page