Publications

Abstract

In 3 ERP experiments, we investigated how experienced L2 speakers process natural and correct syntactic input that deviates from their own, sometimes incorrect, syntactic representations. Our previous study (Lemhöfer, Schriefers, & Indefrey, 2014) had shown that L2 speakers do engage in native-like syntactic processing of gender agreement but base this processing on their own idiosyncratic (and sometimes incorrect) grammars. However, as in other standard ERP studies, but different from realistic L2 input, the materials in that study contained a large proportion of incorrect sentences. In the present study, German speakers of Dutch read exclusively objectively correct Dutch sentences that did or did not contain subjective determiner “errors” (e.g., de boot “the boat,” which conflicts with the intuition of many German speakers that the correct phrase should be het boot). During reading for comprehension (Experiment 1), no syntax-related ERP responses for subjectively incorrect compared to correct phrases were observed. The same was true even when participants explicitly attended to and learned from the determiners in the sentences (Experiment 2). Only when participants judged the correctness of determiners in each sentence (Experiment 3) did a clear P600 appear. These results suggest that the full and native-like use of subjective grammars, as reflected in the P600 to subjective violations, occurs only when speakers have reason to mistrust the grammaticality of the input, either because of the nature of the task (grammaticality judgments) or because of the salient presence of incorrect sentences.

Abstract

The current paper proposes a frame-based account to conceptual shifts in the countability do-main. We interpret shifts in noun countability as syntactically driven metonymy. Inserting a noun in an incongruent noun phrase, that is combining it with a determiner of the other countability class, gives rise to a re-interpretation of the noun referent. We assume lexical entries to be three-fold frame com-plexes connecting conceptual knowledge representations with language-specific form representations via a lemma level. Empirical data from a lexical decision experiment are presented, that support the as-sumption of such a lemma level connecting perceptual input of linguistic signs to conceptual knowledge.

Abstract

This chapter deals with the question of whether there is one syntactic system that is shared by language production and comprehension or whether there are two separate systems. It first discusses arguments in favor of one or the other option and then presents the current evidence on the brain structures involved in sentence processing. The results of meta-analyses of numerous neuroimaging studies suggest that there is one system consisting of functionally distinct cortical regions: the dorsal part of Broca’s area subserving compositional syntactic processing; the ventral part of Broca’s area subserving compositional semantic processing; and the left posterior temporal cortex (Wernicke’s area) subserving the retrieval of lexical syntactic and semantic information. Sentence production, the comprehension of simple and complex sentences, and the parsing of sentences containing grammatical violations differ with respect to the recruitment of these functional components.