Displaying 1 - 6 of 6
-
Coopmans, C. W., Mai, A., & Martin, A. E. (2024). “Not” in the brain and behavior. PLOS Biology, 22: e3002656. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002656.
-
Zhao, J., Martin, A. E., & Coopmans, C. W. (2024). Structural and sequential regularities modulate phrase-rate neural tracking. Scientific Reports, 14: 16603. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-67153-z.
Abstract
Electrophysiological brain activity has been shown to synchronize with the quasi-regular repetition of grammatical phrases in connected speech—so-called phrase-rate neural tracking. Current debate centers around whether this phenomenon is best explained in terms of the syntactic properties of phrases or in terms of syntax-external information, such as the sequential repetition of parts of speech. As these two factors were confounded in previous studies, much of the literature is compatible with both accounts. Here, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to determine if and when the brain is sensitive to both types of information. Twenty native speakers of Mandarin Chinese listened to isochronously presented streams of monosyllabic words, which contained either grammatical two-word phrases (e.g., catch fish, sell house) or non-grammatical word combinations (e.g., full lend, bread far). Within the grammatical conditions, we varied two structural factors: the position of the head of each phrase and the type of attachment. Within the non-grammatical conditions, we varied the consistency with which parts of speech were repeated. Tracking was quantified through evoked power and inter-trial phase coherence, both derived from the frequency-domain representation of EEG responses. As expected, neural tracking at the phrase rate was stronger in grammatical sequences than in non-grammatical sequences without syntactic structure. Moreover, it was modulated by both attachment type and head position, revealing the structure-sensitivity of phrase-rate tracking. We additionally found that the brain tracks the repetition of parts of speech in non-grammatical sequences. These data provide an integrative perspective on the current debate about neural tracking effects, revealing that the brain utilizes regularities computed over multiple levels of linguistic representation in guiding rhythmic computation.Additional information
full stimulus list, the raw EEG data, and the analysis scripts -
Coopmans, C. W. (2023). Triangles in the brain: The role of hierarchical structure in language use. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen.
Additional information
full text via Radboud Repository -
Coopmans, C. W., Struiksma, M. E., Coopmans, P. H. A., & Chen, A. (2023). Processing of grammatical agreement in the face of variation in lexical stress: A mismatch negativity study. Language and Speech, 66(1), 202-213. doi:10.1177/00238309221098116.
Abstract
Previous electroencephalography studies have yielded evidence for automatic processing of syntax and lexical stress. However, these studies looked at both effects in isolation, limiting their generalizability to everyday language comprehension. In the current study, we investigated automatic processing of grammatical agreement in the face of variation in lexical stress. Using an oddball paradigm, we measured the Mismatch Negativity (MMN) in Dutch-speaking participants while they listened to Dutch subject–verb sequences (linguistic context) or acoustically similar sequences in which the subject was replaced by filtered noise (nonlinguistic context). The verb forms differed in the inflectional suffix, rendering the subject–verb sequences grammatically correct or incorrect, and leading to a difference in the stress pattern of the verb forms. We found that the MMNs were modulated in both the linguistic and nonlinguistic condition, suggesting that the processing load induced by variation in lexical stress can hinder early automatic processing of grammatical agreement. However, as the morphological differences between the verb forms correlated with differences in number of syllables, an interpretation in terms of the prosodic structure of the sequences cannot be ruled out. Future research is needed to determine which of these factors (i.e., lexical stress, syllabic structure) most strongly modulate early syntactic processing.Additional information
supplementary material -
Coopmans, C. W., Mai, A., Slaats, S., Weissbart, H., & Martin, A. E. (2023). What oscillations can do for syntax depends on your theory of structure building. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 24, 723. doi:10.1038/s41583-023-00734-5.
-
Coopmans, C. W., Kaushik, K., & Martin, A. E. (2023). Hierarchical structure in language and action: A formal comparison. Psychological Review, 130(4), 935-952. doi:10.1037/rev0000429.
Abstract
Since the cognitive revolution, language and action have been compared as cognitive systems, with cross-domain convergent views recently gaining renewed interest in biology, neuroscience, and cognitive science. Language and action are both combinatorial systems whose mode of combination has been argued to be hierarchical, combining elements into constituents of increasingly larger size. This structural similarity has led to the suggestion that they rely on shared cognitive and neural resources. In this article, we compare the conceptual and formal properties of hierarchy in language and action using set theory. We show that the strong compositionality of language requires a particular formalism, a magma, to describe the algebraic structure corresponding to the set of hierarchical structures underlying sentences. When this formalism is applied to actions, it appears to be both too strong and too weak. To overcome these limitations, which are related to the weak compositionality and sequential nature of action structures, we formalize the algebraic structure corresponding to the set of actions as a trace monoid. We aim to capture the different system properties of language and action in terms of the distinction between hierarchical sets and hierarchical sequences and discuss the implications for the way both systems could be represented in the brain.
Share this page