These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Semantics does not need a processing license from syntax in reading Chinese.
    Author: Zhang Y, Yu J, Boland JE.
    Journal: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 May; 36(3):765-81. PubMed ID: 20438271.
    Abstract:
    Two event-related brain potential experiments were conducted to investigate whether there is a functional primacy of syntactic structure building over semantic processes during Chinese sentence reading. In both experiments, we found that semantic interpretation proceeded despite the impossibility of a well-formed syntactic analysis. In Experiment 1, we found an N400 difference between combined syntactic category and semantic violations and single syntactic violations. This finding is inconsistent with earlier German and French studies (e.g., Friederici, Gunter, Hahne, & Mauth, 2004; Friederici, Steinhauer, & Frisch, 1999; Hahne & Friederici, 2002) showing that semantic integration does not proceed for words of the wrong syntactic category. In Experiment 2, we used a design that was very similar to that used in earlier German and French studies, but semantic violations still evoked an N400, irrespective of a simultaneous syntactic category violation. We argue against processing models that do not allow for semantic integration of a word unless it can be grammatically attached to the developing phrase structure tree. Rather, language experience may modulate the mode of interplay between syntax and semantics.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]